Swamynarayan Sampradaya is the most fanatical organisation in upholding the inhuman chaturvarna system. Some facts pertaining to this organisation are brought to the attention of the people.
2. "I, for one, believe that if you give
people a thorough understanding of
what confronts them
and the basic causes that produce it,
they'll create their own program, and
when the people create a program,
you get action."
- Malcolm X
7. No Hindu identity demanded; Only Brahmin identity.
That too with an intention to hold out with pride.
8. • Art. 38 (1) of the Constitution of India says, “The
State shall strive to promote the welfare of the
people by securing and protecting as effectively as
it may a social order in which justice, social,
economic and political, shall inform all the
institutions of the national life.”
• Chaturvarna system should have no place in a civilised social order. Religious institutions
should get rid of it first. It is of paramount importance that the social order in the ‘Hindu’
religious set-up is not allowed to continue with its apartheidistic attitude but is made to
ensure justice for all in the social sphere, to start with.
9. A directive not addressed till date
•“….. the Hindu delegates of this
Congress call upon the leading Hindus
to settle all disputes between Brahmins
and Non-Brahmins, wherever they may
be existing, ….”.
-Resolution No. 2 of the Indian National Congress at its
35th Session held at Nagpur in December 1920.
10. • The existence of the division had been recognised
officially by the Congress.
• The existence of disputes had been recognised.
• Congress promised action to redress and carried the
Non Brahmins with it in its struggle for freedom.
• But no efforts have so far been made to end the policy
of apartheid practised by the Brahmins.
13. • As long as ‘Brahmins’ use that nomenclature and identify themselves as ‘Brahmins’
tracing the lineage of that word to Rig Veda, they will continue to remain aggressors in an
otherwise peaceful society. That they want to keep the Non-Brahmins also within the
same religious fold, is just a part of the process of that aggression. Hindu religion cannot
remain a religion of a homogenous people but would be an anomalous admixture of fox
and cats within a single cage, as long as the Brahmins want to remain ‘Brahmins’.
• There cannot be a real religion if it is supposed to consist of ‘superiors’ and ‘inferiors’
within it. There will never be any sense of justice in such a religion as the ‘cats’ would
continue not only to be cheated and exploited but also to be insulted and humiliated, ad
infinitum, as could be seen from the opinions entertained by the Tamilnadu Braamana
Sangam and instilled in the future generation.
• It is a different matter if the Brahmins continue to boast of their superiority, after going
back to their non-idolatrous original religion leaving the idolatrous religion of the Non-
Brahmins.
14. • “However, the scope of Jizya was extended by Firuz by charging
the same from the Brahmans who had formerly been exempted
from the tax. It is stated when Jizya was levied on the Brahmans,
the latter surrounded the palace and protested against the invasion
of their ancient privilege. They threatened to burn themselves alive
and call upon the Sultan the wrath of God. The reply of the Sultan
was that they could burn themselves as soon as they pleased and
the sooner the better. The result was that instead of burning
themselves, they sat without food at the gate of his palace. The
Sultan did not yield and ultimately it was arranged that the tax
leviable from the Brahmans should be levied from the lower castes
of the Hindus, in addition to the tax to which they were personally
liable”
• -( V. D. Mahajan – Page 204-History of Medieval India.1995.)
• The Brahmins did not protest this way when the Shudras were
made to pay Jisya. They looked after that their Brahmanical
interests were not in jeopardy, whoever the rulers.
15. Brahmins cared only for themselves in
history and not about the rest of the Hindus
• “Jizya was not levied on the Brahmanas. It was only during the
reign of Firuz Shah that Jizya was levied from the Brahmanas. There
was a lot of trouble and ultimately the rich Hindus of Delhi
undertook to pay for the Brahmanas. On a subsequent
representation, the Sultan reduced the tax on the richer Brahmanas to
10 Tankas of 50 Jitals each. The entire Hindu population was divided
into three grades for the purpose of Jizya. The first grade paid at the
rate of 48 Dirhams, the second 24 Dirhams and the third 12 Dirhams”
Page 329 –History of Medieval India- V.D. Mahajan-S.Chand & co. –Tenth
Edition.
• The Brahmins classify others as Hindus only to use them to serve the Brahmanical ends. There is
no sense of fraternity or brotherhood in this religion. Because, the Brahmins know that the other
three categories do not belong to their race but have to be subjugated.
16. • “Shivaji shot out a very strong letter to Aurangazed
objecting to the levy of Jizya, especially on Brahmins and
also on Jain monks,Yogis, Sanyasis, Bairagis.” (Page
165.ibid.)
• Other than Brahmins all the other four categories were
hermits. Shivaji was not used by the Brahmins to plead
for exemption to the other categories of Hindus.
17. 24.03.2019
•Mr. Subramaniam Samy in aninterview to the
Thanthi TV on 24.03.2019, said, “I am a Brahmin.
I cannot be chowkidar. I shall give ideas.
Chowkidar should do his work according to those
ideas / directions”
• (“நான் பிராமணன். நான் ச ௌகிதார் ஆக முடியாது. நான் கருத்து குடுப்பபன்.
அந்தக் கருத்துப் பிரகாரம் ச ௌகிதார் பேலை ச ய்யணும்” ).
19. Born in 1781 AD.
Leader 1802 AD.
Kalupur 1822 AD.
----------
Raja Rammohan
Roy 1772 AD
Atmiya Sabha - 1814
----
Nangeli episode 1803
AD
20. EIC government donated land
• The first temple he built, in the year 1822 AD at Kalupur in
Ahmedabad, was built on about 5,000 acres (20 x 20 Km) of
land donated by British government at the instance of Sir
Dunlop, a British officer.
• Large number of people in Gujarat, Saurashtra and Rajasthan
became his followers.
21. • He constructed nine temples himself.
• “He installed an image of himself in a temple and consecrated
it for worship” (Page 97 – The structure of Swaminarayan
theology – Raymond Brady Williams).
• In the year 1825, he established two seats for his sect and
appointed the sons of his own elder and younger brothers as
heads of those sects and directed that the line of succession
must be hereditary.
22. 2013
Arab donates land for Swaminarayan temple in UAE
• “Swaminarayan will soon get an abode in Abu Dhabi on land donated by an Arab Muslim.
•
The Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS) is planning to
set up a temple there after a team visited the United Arab Emirates capital last month.
•
Sources say a Muslim businessman has donated five acres of land adjoining a mosque to
BAPS for setting up the temple. The temple will have photographs of Swaminarayan due
to restrictions on idol worship. “
• Talks are on and we have not decided anything yet,” says a BAPS source.
•
The team visited Abu Dhabi on an invitation from Nazem Al Kudsi, chief executive officer
of Invest AD, an investment company.”
• TOI - 09.07.2013
23. TN renews lease of Vivekananda House at Marina
TOI - 30.01.2010
• Ending the uncertainty over the fate of Vivekananda House, a significant landmark in the city located
on the scenic Marina beachfront, the Tamil Nadu cabinet on Thursday approved the extension of the
lease agreement with the Ramakrishna Mutt. The lease has been extended for another 10 years.
• Interestingly, the DMK government, headed by chief minister M Karunanidhi, leased out in 1997 the
historical building, where Swami Vivekananda stayed for 10 days after his famous address to the
Parliament of Religions in the US in 1893.
• Again, it extended the lease for 10 years in 2000 after the expiry of the three-year agreement.
Following the reluctance of the Mutt authorities to vacate the building to house the Central Institute of
Classical Tamil, which was searching for a new home, there was much angst in Mutt circles as to
whether they would get another lease extension.
• The present lease is expiring next month. Delighted over the government's decision, Swami
Gautamananda, president of the Chennai mutt told TOI, "We are happy and very grateful to the chief
minister for his gesture. It is very encouraging." The building, also called the Ice House, was built in
1842 by Fredric Tudor, an American dealing in frozen ice blocks. He used to harvest ice from the lakes in
the US and store it in the house. When he incurred losses, he sold the building to BilligiriIyengar, an
advocate in 1880s.
24. Following requests from devotees, Swami Vivekananda sentSri Ramakrishnananda, one of the direct
disciples of Sri Ramakrishna, to start a branch of the Belur mutt. It washoused in Ice House. After
the death of Billigiri Iyengar, thebuilding was auctioned out in 1906. The mutt fell short by Rs1,000
to take the house under its possession. After passingthrough a few hands, the building was finally
taken over bythe government.
The Mutt has so far has spent nearly Rs 1 crore to renovate thebuilding since it acquired possession,
without altering the building's architecture. A cultural exhibition is open to thepublic on all days
here except Wednesday. Meditation and yoga classes are also held.
NEW LEASE OF LIFE FOR VIVEKANANDA HOUSE
Ramakrishna Math allowed to retain possession of historicbuilding* One of three structures built in
1840s in Chennai, Mumbaiand Kolkata by Fredric Tudor, an American dealing in frozenice blocks*
Popularly called Ice House, it was used by Tudor to store icefor supplies to the British* In 1897,
Swami Vivekananda stayed in the building which hadby then changed hands* Vivekananda was
touring India after his US tour for theParliament of Religions* TN govt leased out property to
Ramakrishna Math to markcentenary of Vivekananda's visit* Since then it has been used for cultural
exhibitions and meditation sessions.
25. Vivekananda House given on lease for 99
years
• In the 150th year of Swami Vivekananda’s birth anniversary, the Ramakrishna Mission in
Chennai has got a gift from the Jayalalithaa government. The state has extended the
lease on Vivekananda House on the Marina by 99 years. The government has also given a
hectare of land to the Cancer Institute in Adyar on lease for 30 years. The land is
between the institute campus and the Buckingham Canal.
• Vivekananda House, used as a cultural centre by the Mission, is where the reformer-saint
stayed in 1897 on his return after addressing the World Parliament of Religions in
Chicago. Formerly known as Castle Kernan, the Indo-Saracenic-styled bungalow was built
by an American ice trader, Frederic Tudor. It was given on lease to the Math in 1997 for 3
years and another ten years from 2000. The lease was again extended in 2010 for 10
years. The current lease ends in 2020 but Tuesday’s order has extended the lease from
2012 to 99 years, i.e. till 2111. The lease rent is 12,000 per annum.
• The government sent orders extending the lease to both organizations on Tuesday
though the decisions were said have been taken in a recent Cabinet meeting.
• _TOI – 10.10.2012
26. • Swaminarayan did not have any intention to bother himself about the evils of the Chaturvarna
system. On the other hand, he was so enthusiastic about the Chaturvarna system that he chose to
strengthen the varna balkanisation of the people by introducing newer methods not thought of by
Manu or Chanakya or Dalapati.
• He ordered that the people of different varnas must wear different necklaces and different
forehead-marks.
• He made it mandatory for his followers to adhere to Varnashrama dharma dutifully.
• Whenever the Sadhus of this sect go out from temple to visit villages, they “are permitted to eat
food from Brahmin houses. .. If food is prepared by Vaishyas, it must be prepared with milk rather
than water” (Page134- ibid.).
• His teachings promoted the policy of apartheidistic chaturvarna system with much more vigour.
28. The Shikshapatri
The compilation of the directions of Swaminaryan to his followers is called Shikshapatri and there are
212 Sanskrit verses in it prescribing the ‘do’s and ‘don’t s for them.
• Shiksha 21: “None shall ever speak or hear ill of deities, places of pilgrimage, Brahmins, chaste women,
Sadhus and the Vedas”.
• Shiksha 24: None shall give up Dharma of one's own varna and Ashram nor shall practice Dharma of
persons of other varnas and Ashramas or shall follow pseudo Dharma or Dharma dictated by one's
own whims.
• Shiksha 41: My disciples, who are twice-born (i.e. who belong to the first three classes, Brahmin,
Kshatriya and Vaishya) and who have been initiated as such (i.e. as disciples) by their Acharya, (who is a
descendant of the family of Shri Dharmadev) shall wear on their neck, double lined necklace prepared
from Tulsi beads and shall put on their forehead (and on bosom or chest, and two arm also) a vertical
mark (tilak).
• Shiksha 44: Persons, who are classed as higher Shudras (sat-shudra) and who are Bhaktas of Lord
Krishna and who do follow their Dharmas properly, shall wear necklace on their neck and put on marks
on their forehead etc. in the same way as twice born disciples do.
• Shiksha 45: All other Bhaktas (who are classed below sat-shudras) shall wear on their neck a double-
lined necklace prepared from sandal wood or other such wood and shall put on their forehead round
mark only but shall not put on vertical mark.
29. • Shiksha 90: The Vaishyas shall go in for agriculture, trade,
banking etc. and the Shudras shall take to service of
the above three varnas.
• Shiksha 103: Dharma means the path of good conduct as
enjoined by Smrutis and Shrutis.
• Shiksha 155: Those who are rich, shall perform non-violent
sacrifices like Vishnu-yag, and shall feed Brahmins and
Sadhus in place of pilgrimage and on auspicious days like
twelfth day of each half of a month and such other days:
• Shiksha 156: They shall also celebrate big festival in
temples of Lord Krishna and shall give various kind of alms
to deserving Brahmins.”
30. Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam
Swaminarayan Sanstha
(BAPS)
• It is a Hindu denomination within the Swaminarayan Sampradaya.
• It was formed by Yagnapurushdas on the principle that Swaminarayan was to
remain present on earth through a lineage of gurus dating all the way back
to Gunatitanand Swami – one of Swaminarayan's most prominent disciples.
• Based on the Akshar Purushottam doctrine (also known as Akshar-Purushottam
Darshan), followers of BAPS believe Swaminarayan manifests through a lineage
of Aksharbrahman Gurus, beginning with Gunatitanand Swami.
• As of 2019, BAPS has 44 shikharbaddha mandirs and more than
1,200 mandirs worldwide that facilitate practice of this doctrine by allowing
followers to offer devotion to the murtis of Swaminarayan, Gunatitanand Swami,
and their successors.
• BAPS mandirs also feature activities to foster culture and youth development.
31. Ganashyam Pande, another one in the long line of
hard-core Brahmanical apartheidists
• Religion is meant to refine the thoughts and actions of the people and
show them way for salvation.
• But Ganashyam Pande did not have any such noble ideas or ideals. He was
making money and more money through his network and went on the
spree of constructing temples in all the continents to make even more
money and to propagate the policy of apartheid.
• Today, there are more than a thousand temples all over the world for his
Swaminarayan sect, “with strong Gujarati roots”.
• The largest Hindu temple in the world, built in New Jersey, USA, belongs
to this sect and it has been built in an area of 162 acres.
32.
33. • Brahmin who crosses the sea should be excommunicated, their
Sastra.
• But that law can be violated and they can build temples everywhere
overseas and mint money for themselves.
• Other reforms are taboos, if they do not benefit Brahmins monetarily.
48. • In the year 1955, the Government of India enacted a law, the
Protection of Civil Rights Act, facilitating entry of the people of all
castes in any place of public worship which is open to other
persons professing the same religion or any section thereof.
• Sec. 3 (a) & (b) of the Act penalised the people who prevented
others from worshipping or offering prayers or performing any
religious service in any place of public worship.
• Consequently, in the year 1956, the Government of Maharashtra
promulgated the Bombay Hindu Places of Worship (Entry
Authorisations) Act, 1956 enabling the suppressed classes within
Hindu religion to enter the Hindu temples for worship.
• That had, especially the Section 3 of the Act, alarmed the
priestly class, including the Swaminarayan sect.
• The followers of this hardcore chaturvarna sect, called Satsanghis,
therefore, moved the court of law and challenged the Act fearing
that the suppressed people would make a claim for priesthood too,
if that Act was enforced.
49. • They contended that “the traditional conventional manner of
performing the actual worship of the idols would be invaded if
the broad words of S. 3 are construed to confer on non-
Satsangi Harijans a right to enter the innermost sanctuary of
the temples and seek to perform that part of worship which
even Satsangi Hindus are not permitted to do” (Emphasis
added).
• They projected their case as if it would be calamitous if all the
people in the Hindu fold asked for equal rights in temple-
related matters.
• They, therefore, went to the extent of segregating themselves
away from Hinduism. In order to ward off the possibility of the
suppressed people claiming priesthood in the temples of the
sect, the petitioners claimed that their Swaminarayan sect
did not form part of Hinduism, at all.
• Such was the hatred of these Chaturvarna promoters towards
the suppressed classes of Hindu religion. And, what did the
Apex Court say?
50. The Supreme Court rejected the plea of the Swaminarayan sect that that
sect was not part of Hinduism.
• It upheld the Act of 1956 by which the Government of Maharashtra
extended the right of entry into the temples of Swaminarayan sect also.
• The Apex court went further and attempted at defining ‘Hindu religion’.
• The Court said that “it can be safely described as a way of life based on
certain basic concepts to which we have already referred. Tilak faced this
complex and difficult problem of defining or at least describing adequately
Hindu religion and he evolved a working formula which may be regarded
as fairly adequate and satisfactory. Said Tilak : "Acceptance of the
Vedas with reverence; recognition of the fact that the means or ways
to salvation are diverse and realisation of the truth that the number of
gods to be worshipped is large, that indeed is the distinguishing feature of
Hindu religion . This definition brings out succinctly the broad distinctive
features of Hindu religion. ……" (Emphasis added).
51. • “Mr. Desai contends that in the temples, in suit, even the Satsangi Hindus are not
permitted to enter the innermost sacred part of the temple where the idols are
installed. It is only the Poojaris who are authorised to enter the said sacred
portion of the temples and do the actual worship of the idols by touching the
idols for the purpose of giving a bath to the idols, dressing the idols, offering
garlands to the idols and doing all other ceremonial rites prescribed by the
Swaminarayan tradition and convention; and his grievance is that the words used
in s. 3 are so wide that even this part of actual worship of the idols which is
reserved for the Poojaris and specially authorised class of worshippers, may be
claimed by respondent No. 1 and his followers; and in so far as such a claim
appears to be justified by s. 3 of the Act, it contravenes the provisions of Art. 26
(b) of the Constitution.”
• “Art. 26 (b) provides that subject to public order, morality and health, every
religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right to manage its
own affairs in matters of religion, and so, the contention is that the traditional
conventional manner of performing the actual worship of the idols would be
invaded if the broad words of s. 3 are construed to confer on non-Satsangi
Harijans a right to enter the innermost sanctuary of the temples and seek to
perform that part of worship which even Satsangi Hindus are not permitted to
do.”
52. • “In our opinion, this contention is misconceived. In the first place
it is significant that no such plea was made or could have been
made in the plaint, because s. 3 of the former Act which was
initially challenged by the appellants had expressly defined
"worship" as including a right to attend a temple for the purpose
of darshan of a deity or deities in or within the precincts thereof,
and the cause of action set out by the appellants in their plaint
was that they apprehended that respondent No. 1 and his
followers would enter the temple and seek to obtain darshan of
the deity installed in it. Therefore, it would not be legitimate for
the appellants to raise this new contention for the first time when
they find that the words used in s. 3 of the Act are somewhat
wider than the words used in the corresponding section of the
former Act.”
53. • “Besides, on the merits, we do not think that by enacting s. 3, the
Bombay Legislature intended to invade the traditional and
conventional manner in which the act of actual worship of the deity is
allowed to be performed only by the authorised Poojaris of the
temple and by no other devotee entering the temple for darshan. In
many Hindu temples, the act of actual worship is entrusted to the
authorised Poojaris and all the devotees are allowed to enter the
temple up to a limit beyond which entry is barred to them, the
innermost portion of the temple being reserved only for the
authorised Poojaris of the temple. If that is so, then all that s. 3
purports to do is to give the Harijans the same right to enter the
temple for 'darshan' of the deity as can be claimed by the other
Hindus.”
54. • “It would be noticed that the right to enter the temple, to
worship in the temple, to pray in it or to perform any
religious service therein which has been conferred by s. 3,
is specifically qualified by the clause that the said right
will be enjoyed in the like manner and to the like extent
as any other Hindu of whatsoever section or class may
do. The main object of the section is to establish
complete social equality between all sections of the
Hindus in the matter of worship specified by s. 3; and so,
the apprehension on which Mr. Desai's argument is based
must be held to be misconceived. We are, therefore,
satisfied that there is no substance in the contention that
s. 3 of the Act is ultra vires”.
55. The Bench of the SC
• Gajendragadkar, P.B. (Cj),
• Wanchoo,
• K.N. Hidayatullah,
• M. Ramaswami,
• V.Satyanarayanaraju, P.
56. • There was nobody to tell the Apex Court that it was the Brahmins
who invaded and encroached upon the rights of the Non-
Brahmins to officiate as priests in the temples of the idolatrous
latter, and not otherwise, as was presumed.
• The suppressed Non-Brahmins ask only for retrieval of their
traditional rights to priesthood which were snatched away by the
Brahmins later. Consequently, such judgments, based on certain
questionable words and phrases slyly inserted into Art. 26 by a
caucus that had a specific interest in perpetuating Chaturvarna
system, allow the concept of Social equality assured in the
preamble of the Constitution to be quietly undermined.
57. • The aversion of Brahmins towards the suppressed
classes in Hinduism was born out of the
chaturvarna system shown to have its origin in Rig
Veda.
• It was because of this oppressive system built upon
the hatred of the Aryans towards the Non-Aryans,
leading thinkers like Mahavir, Buddha, Vallalaar
and others derided, opposed and exposed the
hollowness of the Vedas.
• But, the Apex Court had, once again, chosen to
give exalted place to those Vedas which perpetuate
apartheid in the Hindu religion.
58. Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo Vs.
Shri Prabhakar Kashinath Kunte (11.12.1995)
• In this case, the Apex court went to the extent of quoting Tilak in
various judgments, starting from the aforesaid Swaminarayan sect
case, to describe Hindu religion and stressed on the element of
“acceptance of the Vedas with reverence”.
• The Apex Court said, “In his celebrated treatise, Gitarahasya B.G. Tilak
has given the following broad description of Hindu Religion:
Acceptance of the Vedas with reverence…...”
• The Bench: Jagdish Saran Verma (J)
59. Q: Are we to revere the Vedas?
• Ambedkar
• Vallalaar
60. • The theory of Tilak mandating reverence to Vedas is held aloft by the Apex court.
• Mahavir and Buddha were severely critical of Vedas. They broke away from the Vedic clutches
to redeem the Non-Brahmins suffering from the Brahmanical oppression in the name of Vedas.
• “Mahavir was so much obsessed with the orthodoxy and exploitative nature of
Brahminical cult that, in his desperation, he refused to acknowledge even the authority of Vedas
as Holy Scripture as made out by its high priests, the Brahmins” - (Page 242 - History of Ancient
India - J.L. Mehta & Sarita Mehta-Lotus Press, New Delhi.).
• Buddha said, “Vedas were a waterless desert, a pathless jungle and perdition”- as
found recorded in Digha Nkaaya & Tevijja Sutta (para 248). Buddha had also said in Brahma jaala
Sutta that Vedas were ‘a low art’- (Page 17- Brahmanas in Ancient India , A study in the role of
the Brahman class from c.200 BC to c.500AD. - Govind Prasad Upadyay).
• Raamalinga Adihal has declared that Vedas were meant to cheat the people.(Ref: “வேதாந்தம் என்று
ே ீ
ணாகப் வேசுகின்றீர்). Ambedkar has said, “Vedas are a worthless set of books. There is no reason
either to call them sacred or infallible.
• The Brahmins have invested it with sanctity and infallibility only because, by a later
interpolation of what is called Purusha-Sukta, the Vedas have made them the Lords of the Earth”.
Quoting Ambedkar thus, Ram Punyani adds, “Today the Hindutva is claiming to be form of cultural
nationalism. In its construction of culture, (the) Vedas, Acharyas and Ram have a central place.
Vedas’ importance is unquestionable for Hindutva, as it upholds inequality of caste and gender
at a deeper level” (Page 247 - Contours of Hindu Rashtra –Ram Puniyani).
61. • The High Court of Madras had, while delivering a full bench verdict on 29.04.1887 in Govindayyar
Vs. Doraisamy (Page 6 – Vol XI – Madras series) in the matter of adoption, discussed whether
Datta Homam was an imperative part of adoption in South India.
• The Bench consisted of the Chief Justice Sir Arthur J. H. Collins, Kt., Justice Kernan, Justice
Muttusamy Ayyar, Justice Brandt and Justice Parker.
• The full bench arrived at the decision that the performance of Datta Homam was imperative in the
case of agotra adoption among the Brahmins while it was not an imperative for any kind of
adoption among the Sudras, although some among them were imitating the higher varna people.
• To fortify its stand, the Court recorded as under: “In support of the course of decisions, there is
also the fact that Sudras are incompetent to recite Vedic texts and that such texts are prescribed
for the performance of Datta Homam” (Emphasis supplied).
• The Sudras had been declared as “incompetent” people to recite Vedic texts, as per the
Brahmanical tradition and this fact has been reiterated in 1887 by the High Court of Madras. Yet,
the verdicts of the judiciary after a century demand that a Hindu (including the Sudras) must
accept the Vedas with reverence.
• Should the Sudras necessarily revere those Vedas which insult them directly? Can there be a judicial
diktat on it to force the Sudras to respect those Vedas which humiliate them? Do these Sudras not
have any human rights on their own, at all?
62. • It was Tilak who wrote the ‘treatise’ called as ‘Geetha rahasya’ that was published in 1915
AD. It is there where he has given the “broad description of Hindu Religion” as excerpted
and accepted by the Apex Court in Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo Vs. Shri Prabhakar
Kashinath Kunte (11.12.1995).
• Tilak says, “Acceptance of the Vedas with reverence; recognition of the
fact that the means or ways of salvation or diverse; and realisation of the truth
that the number of gods to be worshipped is large, that indeed is the
distinguishing feature of Hindu religion".
• The issue is whether the Vedas must be accepted with reverence.
• The fact is that there is nothing for the Non-Brahmins to revere the Vedas, which
actually, demean them. There is no need for them to revere the Vedas
just because they have been classified, in law, as Hindus. Besides, the
word ‘religion’ had been used by Tilak not as the composite religion of the people
who are now attempted to be called as Hindus. “Mahratta, Feb 14 1886, p.6:
• Until Tilak came in Contact with the Bharat Dharma Mahamandala established by
the Maharaja of Darbhanga in 1892, the word religion in the writings of Kesari
and Mahratta denoted vamashrama dharma or jati dharma. Hinduism meant
performing one's own caste duties” (Page 173 – Shodhganga Op. cit.)
66. • It was only the famous and correct judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in N. Adithayan Vs. The Travancore Devaswom
Board (03.10.2002) which breathed fresh air into the issue and
paved way for a civilized society in India.
• It is that judgment which must be made the law of the land and
not the later iniquitous one in W.P (C) 355, 383 and 384 of
2006 delivered on 16.12.2015, which helps the Brahmins
perpetuate apartheid in priesthood.
• Iniquitous ‘custom’ or ‘usage’ that recognizes the inhuman
Chaturvarna classification invented by the Brahmins cannot be
made imperative in appointment of priests.
68. A shocker from Jaipur
Justice Mahesh Chandra Sharma, judge of the High Court of Rajasthan, recommended
declaring cow as the national animal, and cited benefits of cow urine and cow dung. He also
said, “Peacock does not have sex and the peahen gets pregnant drinking the tears of the
peacock”, while disposing of a PIL, W.P. 15585 of 2010 on 31.05.2017, regarding a
government-managed cow shelter in Hingonia near Jaipur.
In his judgment running into 139 pages, he has directed the State Government of Rajasthan
to take action to declare cow as the national animal, giving various justifications for that
status. He has also observed that "Nepal is a Hindu nation (Nepal aek Hinduwadhi rashtra hai)
and has declared the cow as its national animal”. It is not known how this fact pertaining to
Nepal became a Relevant Fact to arrive at his unwarranted decision that cow should be
declared as National Animal in India. India is not a Hindu nation. That was a promise given in
the Forties. It was because of that promise various segments of the people of India chose, in
the pre-1947 period, to remain within India post-1947 too.
Mr. Justice Mahesh Chandra
Sharma
69. Muthusamy iyer
As of now, not much has changed in the judiciary since the first Indian judge, Sir Muthusamy
Iyer, judge of the High Court of Madras used that status to deliver a
judgment, in 1887 AD, dividing even the people who renounced the
temporal comforts of the world, and differentiating them from one
another by applying his chaturvarna formula. He said that “If an
ascetic or a hermit is a Brahmin, he is called a Yati or Sanyasi;
if a Sudra, he is called a paradesi" (Giyana Sambandha Pandara
Sannadhi v. Kandasami Tambiran - 1887) (Chief Justice. Sir Arthur J. H.
Collins and Justice Muthusamy Ayyar) (P - 385 Madras Series Vol .X).
when the etymology of those words was neither a Fact in Issue not a
Relevant Fact to decide the concerned Facts in that case. Surely, the insulted suppressed
classes cannot be commanded to feel pleased with such verdicts. At the time of his
appointment, in 1877, the newspaper Madrasee (after its amalgamation with the newspaper
Native Public Opinion), criticized the appointment of Sir T. Muthusamy Iyer for his chaturvarna
orientation. Its prophecy came true with the delivery of the aforesaid/previously mentioned
judgment.
In India Chaturvarna system is not a religious issue. The tenacious hold of the Brahmins over
this obnoxious social order is only because that order remains a system of advantage for them
giving them exclusive identity to exclude the others in the same religious fold and, thereby,
to control the thoughts and actions of the others so excluded, besides appropriating for
themselves the public resources of the nation in various fields of political and economic
spheres. As long as this social order is not dismantled, by commencing that dismantlement
from priesthood, India will remain an uncivilized society as the land of slaves at the disposal
of Brahmins.
70. ஜர்னைல் சிங் ேழக்கு
முதலாவதாக, நாகராஜ் வழக்கில் விதிக்கப்பட்ட நிபந்தனையாை புள்ளிவிவரங்கள் ததாகுத்து
ஒவ்தவாருமுனையும் இடஒதுக்கீட்னட நியாயப்படுத்தவவண்டிய வதனவனய இத்தீர்ப்பு
புைந்தள்ளியிருக்கிைது. அந்த நிபந்தனை தெல்லாது (invalid) என்று இத்தீர்ப்பு தொல்லியிருக்கிைது.
இது பிற்படுத்தப்பட்வடார் மற்றும் அட்டவனை வகுப்பு மக்கள் இருவருனடய இடஒதுக்கீட்டிலும்
இருந்த ஒரு தபாதுவாை சிக்கனல அகற்றியுள்ளது.
5/26/2021
71. GREEN FLAG TO CREAMY LAYER AMONG SC /ST
ஆனால், 1997 முதல் பிற்படுத்தப்பட்ட வகுப்பினருக்கு அறிமுகப்படுத்தப்பட்டு அதன்மூலம்
அவர்களுக்கான இடஒதுக்கீட்டட ஒன்றுமமயில்லாமல் ஆக்க அதிகார வர்க்கத்திற்கு வசதியாக உள்ள
இந்த மமல்தட்டுக்சகாள்டகடய (Creamy Layer concept), அட்டவடைப் பிரிவு மக்களுக்கும்
நடடமுடைப்படுத்துவது சட்டபூர்வமானதுதான் என்று இத்தீர்ப்பின் 15 மற்றும் 16 வது பத்திகள்
பச்டசக்சகாடி காட்டியுள்ளன.
( The whole object of reservation is to see that backward classes of citizens move forward
so that they may march hand in hand with other citizens of India on an equal basis……
We do not agree with Balakrishnan, C.J.’s statement in Ashoka Kumar Thakur (supra)
that the creamy layer principle is merely a principle of identification and not a principle
of equality - பத்தி 15 & 16).
ஆனால், அவ்வாறு க்ரீமி மலயர் முடைடய அட்டவடைப் பிரிவு மக்களுக்கு விரிவு சசய்யும் முடிடவ
மத்திய அரசின் விருப்பத்திற்கு உச்சநீதிமன்ைம் விட்டுவிட்டது.
5/26/2021
72. உச்சநீதிமன்ைம் கண்டுபிடித்த மமல்தட்டுக்மகாட்பாடு (creamy layer policy)
முதன்முதலாக பிற்படுத்தப்பட்ட வகுப்பினருக்கு மட்டுமம நடடமுடைப்
படுத்தப்பட்டது. அரசின் உயர்பதவிகளில் பிற்படுத்தப்பட்மடார் மிகவும் குடைவாகமவ
இருக்கும் இன்டைய காலகட்டத்தில், அதாவது creamy layer மக்கமள அரசின்
உயர்பதவிகளில் தங்களுக்குரிய பங்டக அடடய முடியாதிருக்கும் சூழ்நிடலயில்,
அம்மக்களுக்கு இடஒதுக்கீடு வழங்க மறுப்பது, சற்றும் நியாயமில்லாதது.
க்ரீமி மலயர் மகாட்பாடு கூடாது என்றும், இதற்கானச் சான்றிதழ்
வழங்குவதுசதாடர்பாக DOPT சசய்யும் தவைான மவடலகடளக் கண்டித்தும்
பிற்படுத்தப்பட்மடார் மபாராட்டம் நடத்திக்சகாண்டிருக்கும் மவடளயில்,
தாழ்த்தப்பட்ட மக்களுக்கும் மசர்த்து இக்மகாட்பாட்டட விரிவு சசய்வது என்பது
அநியாயம்தாமன. அடதத்தான் இந்தத் தீர்ப்பு சசய்திருக்கிைது.
5/26/2021
73. COMING OUT OF UNTOUCHABILITY OR BACKWARDNESS
& CREAMY LAYER
அட்டவடைப்பிரிவு மக்களில் மமல்தட்டுப்பிரிவினர் (belonging to the creamy layer)
தீண்டாடமயிலிருந்து சவளிமய வந்துவிட்டார்கள் என்று இத்தீர்ப்பில் எடுத்துக்சகாள்ளப்பட்டுள்ளது.
இப்படிப்பட்ட ஒரு கருத்து உண்டமக்கு மாைானது. இப்படிப்பட்ட உண்டமக்குப் புைம்பான ஒரு Judicial
Notice தான் முன்னர் சசான்ன 15 மற்றும் 16 பத்திகளில் நியாயப்படுத்தப்பட்ட மமல்தட்டுக்சகாள்டகடய
அட்டவடைப்பிரிவினர் மீதும் திணிப்பதற்குக் காரைமாகிைது.
(“It is only those persons within that group or sub-group, who have come out of
untouchability or backwardness by virtue of belonging to the creamy layer, who are
excluded from the benefit of reservation. Even these persons who are contained within the
group or sub-group in the Presidential Lists continue to be within those Lists. It is only when
it comes to the application of the reservation principle under Articles 14 and 16 that the
creamy layer within that sub-group is not given the benefit of such reservation”).
5/26/2021
74. ART 15 (5) KEEPS SCS AND STS UNDER THE PRESUMPTION OF BACKWARDNESS WITHOUT
THE NEED FOR ANY TEST AT ALL ON SOCIAL OR EDUCATIONAL CRITERIA. BUT THAT IS
NULLIFIED BY THIS JARNAIL SINGH CASE JUDGMENT OF 2018
(5) Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1)
of article 19 shall prevent the State from making any
special provision, by law, for the advancement of any
socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or
for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far
as such special provisions relate to their admission to
educational institutions including private educational
institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other
than the minority educational institutions referred to in
clause (1) of article 30.
5/26/2021
75. TEMPLE PRIESTHOOD AND UNTOUCHABILITY
உண்டமயில், பிராமைரல்லாமதார் அடனவருமம இன்று வடர தீண்டாடமக்
சகாடுடமக்கு ஆட்படுத்தப்பட்டுக் சகாண்டுதான் இருக்கின்ைனர்.
இத்தீண்டாடமயில் கரு இருக்குமிடம், மகாயிற் கருவடைதான்.
மதத்திலிருந்துதான், மகாயிற்கருவடையிலிருந்துதான், தீண்டாடமமய
உருவாக்கப்பட்டது. இன்று வடர மகாயிற்கருவடை சதாடங்கி பல
நிடலகளிலும் தீண்டாடம இருப்பது பற்றி வாதாடிகள் யாரும் உச்சநீதி
மன்ைத்திற்குச் சசால்லவில்டல. எனமவதான், இவ்வாைான கருத்து இந்த
26.09.2018 தீர்ப்பிற்குள் புகுந்துள்ளது
5/26/2021
76. இந்த வழக்டக விசாரித்த ஐந்து மபர் சகாண்ட அமர்வில், அட்டவடைப் பிரிவினடரயும்
இதர பிற்படுத்தப்பட்ட பிரிவினடரயும் மசர்ந்த நீதிபதிகள் யாரும் இல்டல என்பது நாம்
கவடலயுடன் கவனிக்கமவண்டியதாக இருக்கிைது.
இருந்திருந்தால், க்ரீமி மலயருக்கு மமல் உள்ள அட்டவடைப்பிரிவு மக்கள்,
தீண்டாடமயிலிருந்து சவளிவந்து விட்டார்கள் என்ை உண்டமக்கு மாைான கருத்து தவறு
என்று அவமர பிை நீதிபதிகளுக்கு உண்டமடய எடுத்துச் சசால்ல வாய்ப்பிருந்திருக்கும்.
மமலும், இன்டைய இந்தியக் குடியரசுத் தடலவர் பூரி செகன்னாதர் மகாயிலில்
18.03.2018 அன்று பூசாரிகளால் எவ்வாறு நடத்தப்பட்டார் என்பதிலிருந்மத பதவிகளால்
மட்டும் ஒடுக்கப்பட்ட மக்கடள நாம் உய்வித்துவிட முடியாது என்படத அடனவரும்
சதரிந்துசகாள்ள முடியும்.
5/26/2021
77. DISPROPORTIONATE REPRESENTATION AT THE SUPREME COURT: A
PERSPECTIVE ON CASTE AND RELIGION OF JUDGES
COLUMN BY NAMIT SAXENA – BAR AND BENCH.COM
23.05.2021
While a lot of ink has recently been flown on gender biases when it comes to
appointing top judges, there is also a disproportionate representation on the
lines of caste and religion.
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/disproportionate-representation-supreme-court-caste-and-religion-of-
judges?fbclid=IwAR1xhe4ydMZHTWMSCtNm5gYOuMyZOzaUoVV52S-JHk5j8Ny8z2Fwqfic0Sg
e
5/26/2021
79. Indira Gandhi was advised to reduce the representation of Sikhs in the armed forces.
• Even an illiterate man would say that only the most competent persons must be in the
war-front to face and fight against the enemy. Naturally, in India, the Sikhs who have
groomed themselves up to be a martial race have entered the Security Force and formed
10% of the force whereas they constituted only 4% of the population. But, the former
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had issued orders in the year 1983 itself for curtailing the
enrolment of Sikhs in the Security Force , euphemistically, to the extent of the population
of Punjab. So many nice words typical of doublespeak were used by her and the central
bureaucracy for this purpose. Consequently, it fomented the already simmering Sikh
discontent, mark you, in the year 1983. For, the Sikhs could not be fooled. They passed
resolutions on many a forum condemning the racial nature of the order issued by her.
What is more, Beant Singh, the Chief Minister of Punjab belonging to the same Congress
Party had said that the restoration of the status-quo-ante was the most important
demand to bring healing touch to the much-ravaged State. Thus, in the army, it is race,
which is given primary importance and not merit.
80.
81. Item No. 2 of the Rajiv-Longowal accord of
24.07.1985
Army recruitment: Merit will
remain the sole criteria for
selection in the Indian Army.
All the citizens have the
right to enroll in the Army.
(Earlier, on 14 March 1974, the defence
minister Jagjivan Ram had announced that
the recruitment from Punjab, Haryana and
Himachal Pradesh would be reduced as they
were heavily and disproportionately
represented in the Army. Page – 127 -
Modern History of Punjab: A Look Back
Into Ancient Peaceful Punjab Focusing
Confrontation and Failures Leading to
Present Punjab Problem and a Deep ...
Informatics, and Librarianship
.- J.C. Aggarwal and S.P.Aggarwal – 1992.
82.
83.
84. “… the Sikhs have secured more
than their proportionate share
of representation in other arms
and services like artillery,
engineers and armoured corps”.
- Quote from the statement of the Defence Ministry
85. Now, the reasons for her action.
• The Government had concluded and is still holding the opinion that racial identity, (or lingual
or religious identity) matters much in recruiting persons for the ‘executive’ wing of the
government. {Army is also falling within the category of ‘executive’.
•
2. The Government thinks (or, still better, knows) that the persons, who are occupying
positions of power in the Executive wing, would always keep their sectarian interests in mind
and act accordingly to further their sectarian interests.
•
3. The Government, therefore decided, that it must at least cut them to size, if not to eliminate
them from services altogether.
•
4. The Government, therefore, decided to ignore the formula of merit and decided to go by the
ratio in population.
87. Now, the questions.
•
1. Pen is mightier than sword, they say. If soldiers in the army who are entrusted with very limited powers
in the hierarchy can misuse their position and power to serve their sectarian interests, would not the top-
level pen-pushing officers in the top-levels of Group A and B posts misuse their positions and power to suit
their sectarian interests?
•
2. Is it not therefore essential for the government to regulate, in the interest of the welfare of all the people of
the country, the ratio of persons in the Group A and B posts according to their ratio in the entire
population?
•
3. Can there be two different yardsticks for the gun-wielding army and pen-wielding top-level Group A and B
service, which literally commands the legislature on the sly?
•
4. Is not there more scope for subverting the rules by those pen-wielding bureaucrats to change the
direction and fate of the entire nation to suit their own sectarian interests?
88. • “He who possesses the power of making and interpreting
the laws by which another person is bound to act, is by
necessary consequence, the master of that person's
actions. Possessing the legislative and judicative powers,
the Brahmens were also masters of the executive power, to
any extent whatsoever to which they wished to enjoy it.
Nor did this influence over the executive power
content them. They further secured to themselves a direct
and not contemptible share of its immediate functions. On
all occasions, the King was bound to employ
Brahmens as his counsellors and ministers; and, of
course, to be governed by their judgment"
- Page 131 - The History of British India - Vol. I - James Mill - 1817)
89. • The over-representation of Sikhs in the army is perceived to be
against the interest of the nation. The same analogy applies more to
all categories in all the posts in higher bureaucracy and higher
judiciary too.
90. Exploitation of the oppressed classes by the
Swamynarayan groups in the USA.
91. As Hindu group built world-class temple in N.J., a group of
Indian workers alleges they were exploited
• They were allegedly recruited as cheap labor to help build a temple.
• Members of the lowest-rung of India’s caste system, known as Dalits,
were brought to New Jersey to help build a magnificent Hindu temple
in Robbinsville, working behind the scenes to perform what they
allege to be grueling and often dangerous work.
• “What is ironic here is that those who are forbidden to enter into the
Hindu Temples in India for the reason of impurity and pollution are
brought into the U.S. with religious visa to build a temple,” said Ben
Chinnappan, president and executive director of Dalit Solidarity, a
U.S.-based organization advocating for Dalit rights.
92. Swaminarayan Temple raid shows US has to
reckon with caste discrimination imported from
India
• U.S. authorities recently raided a large and well-known Hindu temple
in New Jersey that they said had exploited Dalit workers from the
“lowest” bracket of India’s caste system. The men had been
categorized as “lay religious workers” for immigration purposes but
were instead employed in back-breaking labor for $1/hour. Civil-rights
groups are now demanding that the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission “recognize the intertwined nature of caste and race” and
apply civil rights laws designed to end race-based discrimination to
caste-based discrimination as well.
