“Amartya Sen comments on future PM” – some thoughts shared by Mr Arun Upadhyay

Britishers set up 2 institutes to destroy India & Russia. German disgruntled Marx & Engels were called to Cambridge to create Communist literature. Later on Russia & China also spread Communist literature to others but it failed within their own countries. It survives only in India because we accept anything foreign with reverence due to our slavish mentality. Other centre was Oxford where Boden Chair was set up in 1831 with specific declared purpose of forging Vedic literature to destroy Indian civilization. That too used hired Germans like Maxmuller, Roth, Weber.

Next subversive institute was London School of Economics, Winston Churchill opposed it in British Parliament on the ground that Britain had become Bankrupt after second world war. PM Clement Atlee explained that it will teach students of third world such economics that they will ruin the economies of their own countries and case flow of wealth to Britain. Indians and other third world countries persons like Amartya Sen are trained only to blame everything Indian. To give them credibility, they are awarded Nobel prize also.

Any subversive writer like Nirad Chaudhary, Taslima Nasreen or Fizo, Laldenga, Prabhakaran who destroy their countries are honoured in Britain. In past 15 years, only those persons could become PM’s in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh who were employees of world bank. Earlier East India Company servants were ruling. Plan of Atlee has succeeded through such economists in ruining economy of India, Pakistan and improving position of Britain where all black money of these countries is going.

There are 2 fundamental defects in British education of economics to Indians-

(1) Marxism does not bother about agriculture which is fundamental industry, called basic yajna in gita, chapter 3. It is concerned only with industries.

(2) Even in Industry, it is not concerned with its growth or constructive link with other industries. It is concerned only with rights of labour not to work, but to get full salary at cost of industry. If industry does not run, labour also will suffer.

(3) Even Political party like communist party or govt needs money to run country. Monopoly increases corruption. But Marxism does not recognize revenue as component of state.

(4) Marxism does not recognize need of a model code of conduct-it blames religion as opium for masses.

(5) So called nobel laureate and top economists among UK Indians do not know basic mathematics and unable to follow econometrics which is based on statistics. They spread political views only to denigrate any all institutes of India.

Britain does not follow itself the principles taught to others-

(1) Marxism was spread from Britain with Cambridge as centre. But it was never followed there. It was only to ruin Russia and India.

(2) Britain follows monarchy and tells that an Icon is necessary to unite country. For others British parliament is projected as mother of democracy and icon is abused as idol worship.

(3) Despite bankruptcy after World War 2, Britain did not request for foreign investment. But British educated economists work only for foreign investment.

(4) British leaders want all deposits from outside in Bank of England. But slaves taught there want all deposit in foreign banks and show austerity within own country.

(5) Britain takes pride of being nation of traders and pirates, but in India, all traders are viewed as thieves and black-marketeers and rules are made accordingly.

(6) History is always twisted to show white superiority. Any stick in Iraq is weapon of mass destruction. But atom bombs of UK/USA are flowers (actually called Daisy cutters by USA).

(7) Political funding is legal in US/UK, but is illegal in India by their followers. This clears way for mass corruption in society and administration and all extra money flows to foreign banks.

European policy of devaluation of other currencies is continuing since 1600 AD. Most Indians will not trust any logic by Indian person. They can read series of large Historic novels by James Clavel for period 1600-1945.
First of the 4 novels is Shogun for period 1600-1641. Europeans succeeded in dividing all communities, but Shogun Toranaga of Japan successfully countered the move by uniting all Shogunates. He abused Christian Missionaries as agents of European colonialism and termed them as Rice Christians. Same term was given in 19th century Orissa.
Converts were divided into 4 categories-Hen, Pen, Lady, Paddy. Hen Christians converted for eating meat, Pen Christians for education and govt jobs, Lady for marrying any body without bothering for caste, education etc. Paddy Christian is same as Rice Christians as translated by James Clavel-they converted for food after the population was driven to starvation.

Planned forced starvation death of 35 lakh persons in Orissa in 1865 was by Commissioner Ravenshaw who exported all rice in year of surplus production and caused largest genocide in world. The grateful anglicized Oriyas made an college in his name and called him father of Oriya culture and language as if great poets like Jagannatha Dasa did not know Oriya language. Now, that has been made Ravenshaw University since past 5 years. To cover up that genocide, fake history was created vy Vincent Smith in 1893 about murder of 10.5 lakh Kalinga army by Ashok. No king has ever maintained such huge army, largest was 6 lakhs by Aurangzeb. Baudha text Divyavadan tells that Ashoka killed 12,000 Kain monks being angry by idol of Buddha touching feet of Mahavira (as his guru which is admitted by Bauddha texts). Mass killings of innocent peaceful monks was termed as shunning of violence by adoption of Buddhism as if all Hindus are as murderous as Ravenshaw.

Novel series of James Clavel describes how Asian currencies were devalued, metal, cloth and other industries were ruined, population was starved to death, fed with Opium and exported as slaves in name of modernization. That is going on in name of Globalization by faithful servants of British in parties formed by the British.

List of temples converted into Mosques in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh

“Indian history for the last 50 years or so has been the preserve of historians who were Marxists by conviction and who had come to occupy positions of influence in India’s elite Universities. These historians have callously distorted past events and interpreted history to suit their political agenda. Their efforts were not an honest attempt at history writing but a warped exercise in social engineering. Nowhere is this as evident as in the case of the temple desecrations that occurred during the Muslim invasion of India. Opponents (even when evidence was forthcoming) were dubbed as fundamentalists and their views effectively suppressed.

John Keay, a British historian, in his recent book India had this to say about Mahmud of Ghazni’s destruction of the Somnath Temple: “But what rankled even more than the loot and the appalling death toll was the satisfaction that Mahmud took in destroying the great gilded lingam. After stripping it of its gold, he personally laid into it with his sword. The bits were then sent back to Ghazni and incorporated into the steps of its new Jami Masjid, there to be humiliatingly trampled and perpetually defiled by the feet of the Muslim faithful.”

Khuswant Singh in his book We Indians avers: “Mahmud of Ghazni was only the first of a long line of Muslim idol-breakers. His example was followed by Mongols, Turks and Persians. They killed and destroyed in the name of Islam. Not a single Buddhist, Jain or Hindu temple in northern India escaped their iconoclastic zeal. Some temples were converted to mosques; idols and figurines had their noses, breasts or limbs lopped off; paintings were charred beyond recognition.”Read more…




Hindu Temples converted to mosque in Karnataka

A Preliminary Survey of some of the Hindu temples that were converted to mosques and muslim monuments in Karnataka is given here. Many such muslim construction have used the materials of the Hindu temple after it was destroyed by the muslims. This shows the true nature of the religion Islam.
Some of the districts have been renamed or newly created. Some places which was under one district is now in another district. Those who read this can point out errors if any.

I. Bangalore District.
1. Dodda-Ballapur, Dargh of Muhiu’d-Dn Chisht of Ajodhan (d. 1700). Temple materials used.
2. Hoskot
(i) Dargh of Saball Shib. Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Qsim Shib. Converted temple.

II. Belgaum District.
1. Belgaum
(i) Masjid-i-Safa in the Fort (1519). Temple site.
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid (1585-86). Temple site.
(iii) Mazr of Badru’d-Dn Shh in the Fort (1351-52). Temple site.
2. Gokak, Masjid. Temple site.
3. Hukeri
(i) Mn Sahib-k-Dargh (1567-68). Temple site.
(ii) Kl Masjid (1584). Temple materials used.
4. Kudachi
(i) Dargh of Makhdm Shh Wal. Temple site.
(ii) Mazr of Shykh Muhammad Sirju’d-Dn Prdd. Temple site.
5. Madbhavi, Masjid. Å iva Temple materials used.
6. Raibag, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site,
7. Sampgaon, Masjid. Temple site.

III. Bellary District.
1. Bellary, Masjid built by Tp Sultn (1789-90). Temple site.
2. Hampi, Masjid and Idgh in the ruins of Vijayanagar. Temple materials used.
3. Hospet, Masjid in Bazar Street built by Tp Sultn (1795-96). Temple site.
4. Huvinhadgalli, Fort. Temple materials used.
5. Kanchagarabelgallu, Dargh of Husain Shh. Temple site.
6. Kudtani, Dargh. Durgevara Temple materials used.
7. Sandur, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
8. Siruguppa, Ld Khn Masjid (1674). Temple site.
9. Sultanpuram, Masjid on the rock. Temple site.

IV. Bidar District.
1. Bidar, Ancient Hindu city transformed into a Muslim capital. The following monuments stand on temple sites and/or temple materials have been used in their construction:
(i) Sol Khamb Masjid (1326-27).
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid of the Bahmans.
(iii) Mukhtr Khn-k-Masjid (1671).
(iv) Kl Masjid (1694).
(v) Masjid west of Kl Masjid (1697-98).
(vi) Farrah-Bgh Masjid, 3 km outside the city (1671).
(vii) Dargh of Hazrat Khallu’llh at Ashtr (1440).
(viii) Dargh of Shh Shamsu’d-Dn Muhammad Qdir known as Multn Pdshh.
(ix) Dargh of Shh Waliu’llh-al-Husain.
(x) Dargh of Shh Zainu’l-Dn Ganj Nishn.
(xi) Dargh and Masjid of Mahbb Subhn.
(xii) Mazr of Ahmad Shh Wal at Ashtr (1436).
(xiii) Mazr of Shh Abdul Azz (1484).
(xiv) Takht Mahal.
(xv) Gagan Mahal.
(xvi) Madrasa of Mahmd Gawn.
2. Chandpur, Masjid (1673-74). Temple site.
3. Chillergi, Jmi’ Masjid (1381). Temple site.
4. Kalyani, Capital of the Later Chlukyas. All their temples were either demolished or converted into mosques.
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1323). Temple site.
(ii) Masjid (1406). Temple site.
(iii) Masjid in Mahalla Shahpur (1586-87). Temple site.
(iv) Dargh of Maulna Yqb. Temple site.
(v) Dargh of Sayyid Pr Psh. Temple site.
(vi) Fort Walls and Towers. Temple materials used.
(vii) Nawb’s Bungalow. Temple materials used.
5. Kohir
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) Darghs of two Muslim saints. Temple sites.
6. Shahpur, Masjid (1586-87). Temple site.
7. Udbal, Jmi’ Masjid (1661-62). Temple site.

V. Bijapur District.
1. Afzalpur, Mahal Masjid. Trikta Temple materials used.
2. Badami, Second Gateway of the Hill Fort. Vishnu Temple materials
3. Bekkunal, Dargh outside the village. Temple materials used.
4. Bijapur, Ancient Hindu city transformed into a Muslim capital. The
following monuments are built on temple sites and/or temple materials
have been used in their construction:
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1498-99).
(ii) Karmu’d-Dn-k-Masjid in the rk (1320-21).
(iii) ChhoT Masjid on way to Mangoli Gate.
(iv) Khwja Sambal-k-Masjid (1522-13).
(v) Makka Masjid.
(vi) AnD Masjid.
(vii) Zangr Masjid.
(viii) Bukhr Masjid (1536-37).
(ix) Dakhn Idgah (1538-39).
(x) Masjid and Rauza of Ibrhm II Adil Shh (1626).
(xi) Gol Gumbaz or the Rauza of Muhammad Adil Shh.
(xii) JoD-Gumbad.
(xiii) Nau-Gumbad.
(xiv) Dargh of Shh Ms Qdiri.
(xv) Gagan Mahal.
(xvi) Mihtar Mahal.
(xvii) Asar Mahal.
(xvii) Anand Mahal and Masjid (1495).
(xviii) St Manzil.
(xix) rk or citadel.
(xx) Mazr of Pr Ma’bar Khandyat.
(xxi) Mazr of Pr Jumn.
(xxii) Dargh of Shh Mrnji Shamsu’l-Haq Chisht on Shahpur Hill.
5. Hadginhali, Dargh. Temple materials used.
6. Horti, Masjid. Temple materials used.
7. Inglesvara, Muhiu’d-Dn Shib-k-Masjid. Munip Samdhi materials used.
8. Jirankalgi, Masjid. Temple materials used.
9. Kalleeri, Masjid near the village Chawdi. Keavadeva Temple materials used.
10. Mamdapur
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) Mazr of Kaml Shib. Temple site.
(iii) Mazr of Sadle Shib of Makka. Temple site.
11. Naltvad, Masjid (1315). Temple materials used.
12. Pirapur, Dargh. Temple site.
13. Salvadigi, Masjid. Temple materials used.
14. Sarur, Masjid. Temple materials used.
15. Segaon, Dargh. Temple site.
16. Takli, Masjid. Temple materials used.
17. Talikota
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Jain Temple materials used.
(ii) PNch Pr-k-Masjid and Ganji-i-Shahdn. Temple site.
18. Utagi, Masjid (1323). Temple site.

VI. Chickmanglur District.
Baba Budan, Mazr of Dd Hayt Mr Qalandar. Datttreya Temple site.

VII. Chitaldurg District.
Harihar, Masjid on top of Harhareshvara Temple.

VIII. Dharwad District.
1. Alnavar, Jmi’ Masjid. Jain Temple materials used.
2. Bankapur
(i) Masjid (1538-39). Temple site.
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid (1602-03). Temple site.
(iii) Graveyard with a Masjid. Temple site.
(iv) Dongar-k-Masjid. Temple site.
(v) Dargh of Shh Alu’d-Dn-Qdir. Temple site.
(vi) Fort (1590-91). Temple materials used,
3. Balur, Masjid. Temple materials used.
4. Dambal, Mazr of Shh Abdu’llh Wal. Temple materials used.
5. Dandapur, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple materials used.
6. Dharwad, Masjid on Mailarling Hill. Converted Jain Temple.
7. Hangal
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) Masjid in the Fort. Temple site.
8. Hubli, 17 Masjids built by Aurangzeb in 1675 and after Temple sites.
9. Hulgur
(i) Dargh of Sayyid Shh Qdir. Temple site.
(ii) Masjid near the above Dargh. Temple site.
10. Lakshmeshwar, Kl Masjid. Temple site.
11. Misrikot, Jmi’ Masjid (1585-86). Temple site.
12. Mogha, Jmi’ Masjid. dityadeva Temple materials used.
13. Ranebennur, Qal, Masjid (1742). Temple site.
14. Savanur
(i) Jmi’ Masjid reconstructed in 1847-48. Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Khairu’llh Shh Bdshh. Temple site.
(iii) Dargh and Masjid of Shh Kaml. Temple site.

IX. Gulbarga District.
1. Chincholi, Dargh. Temple site.
2. Dornhalli, Masjid. Temple site.
3. Firozabad
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1406). Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Shh Khalfatu’r-Rahmn Qdir (d. 1421). Temple site.
4. Gobur, Dargh. Ratnarya Jinlaya Temple materials used.
5. Gogi
(i) Araba’a Masjid (1338). Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Pr Chand, Husain (1454). Temple site.
(iii) Chill of Shh Habbu’llh (1535-36). Temple site.
6. Gulbarga, Ancient Hindu city converted into a Muslim capital and the following among other monuments built on temple sites and/or with temple materials:
(i) Kaln Masjid in Mahalla Mominpura (1373).
(ii) Masjid in Shah Bazar (1379).
(iii) Jmi’ Masjid in the Fort (1367).
(iv) Masjid-i-Langar in the Mazr of Hj Zaida.
(v) Masjid near the Farman Talab (1353-54).
(vi) Dargh of Sayyid Muhammad Husain Band, Nawz Ges Darz Chisht,disciple of Shykh Nasru’d-Dn Mahmd ChrAgh-i-Dihl.
(vii) Mazr of Shykh Muhammad Sirju’d-Dn Junaid.
(viii) Mazr of Hj Zaida of Maragh (1434)
(ix) Mazr of Sayyid Husainu’d-Dn Tigh-i-Barhna (naked sword).
(x) Fort Walls and Gates.
7. Gulsharam, Dargh and Masjid of Shh Jall Husain (1553). Temple site.
8. Malkhed, Dargh of Sayyid Ja’far Husain in the Fort. Temple site.
9. Sagar
(i) Dargh of Sf Sarmast Chisht, disciple of Nzmu’d-Dn Awlya of Delhi. Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Munawwar Bdshh. Temple site.
(iii) shur Khna Masjid (1390-91). Temple site.
(iv) Fort (1411-12). Temple materials used.
10. Seram, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple materials used.
11. Shah Bazar, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
12. Shahpur
(i) Dargh of Ms Qdir (1667-68). Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Muhammad Qdir (1627). Temple site.
(iii) Dargh of IbrAhIm Qdir. Temple site.
13. Yadgir
(i) Afthn Masjid (1573). Temple site.
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.

X. Kolar District.
1. Mulbagal, Dargh of Hyder Wal. Temple site.
2. Nandi, Masjid east of the village. Temple site.

XI. Mandya District.
1. Pandavapur, Masjid-i-Ala. Temple site.
2. Srirangapatnam, Jmi’ Masjid built by Tp Sultn (1787). Stands on the site of the janeya Temple.

XII. Mysore District.
Tonnur, Mazr said to be that of Sayyid Slr Mas’d (1358). Temple materials used.

XIII. North Kanara District.
1. Bhatkal, Jmi’ Masjid (1447-48). Temple site.
2. Haliyal, Masjid in the Fort. Temple materials used.

XIV. Raichur District.
1. Jaladurga, Dargh of Muhammad Sarwar. Temple site.
2. Kallur, Two Masjids. Temple sites.
3. Koppal
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) AraboMasjid. Temple site.
(iii) Dargh of Sailn Psh. Temple site.




The List of Hindu Temples converted to mosque in AP

A Preliminary Survey of some of the Hindu temples that were converted to mosques and muslim monuments in Andhra Pradesh is given here. Many such muslim construction have used the materials of the Hindu temple after it was destroyed by the muslims. This shows the true nature of the eligion Islam.
Some of the districts have been renamed or newly created. Some places which was under one district is now in another district. Those who read this can point out errors if any.

I. Adilabad District.
Mahur, Masjid in the Fort on the hill. Temple site.

II. Anantpur District.
1. Gooty, Gateway to the Hill Fort. Temple materials used.
2. Kadiri, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
3. Konakondla, Masjid in the bazar. Temple materials used.
4. Penukonda
(i) Fort. Temple materials used.
(ii) Masjid in the Fort. Converted Temple.
(iii) Sher Khn’s Masjid (1546).38 Converted Temple.
(iv) Dargh of Babayya. Converted ÃŽvara Temple.
(v) Jmi’ Masjid (1664-65). Temple site.
(xi) Dargh of Shh Fakbru’d-Dn (1293-94). Temple site.
5. Tadpatri
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1695-96). Temple site.
(ii) Idgh completed in 1725-26. Temple site.
6. Thummala, Masjid (1674-75). Temple site.

III. Cuddapah District
1. Cuddapah
(i) Bhp Shib-k-Masjid (1692). Temple site.
(ii) Idgh (1717-18). Temple site.
(iii) Bahdur Khn-k-Masjid (1722-23). Temple site.
(iv) Dargh of Shh Amnu’d-Dn Ges Darz (1736-37). Temple site.
2. Duvvuru, Masjid. Temple site.
3. Gandikot, Jmi’ Masjid (1690-91). Temple site.
4. Gangapuru, Masjid. Temple site.
5. Gundlakunta, Dastgr Dargh. Temple site.
6. Gurrumkonda, Fort and several other Muslim buildings. Temple materials used.
7. Jammalmaduguu, Jmi’ Masjid (1794-95). Temple site.
8. Jangalapalle, Dargh of Dastgr Swm. Converted Jangam temple.
9. Siddhavatam
(i) Qutb Shh Masjid (restored in 1808). Temple materials use.
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid (1701). Temple materials used.
(iii) Dargh of Bismillh Khn Qdir. Temple materials used.
(iv) Fort and Gateways. Temple materials used.
(v) Chowk-k-Masjid. Temple site.
10. Vutukuru
(i) Masjid at Naligoto. Temple site.
(ii) Masjid at Puttumiyyapeta. Temple site.
IV. East Godavari District.
Bikkavolu, Masjid. Temple materials used.

V. Guntur District.
1. Nizampatnam, Dargh of Shh Haidr (1609). Temple site
2. Vinukonda, Jmi’ Masjid (1640-41). Temple site.

VI. Hyderabad District.
1. Chikalgoda, Masjid (1610). Temple site.
2. Dargah, Dargh of Shh Wal (1601-02). Temple site.
3. Golconda
(i) Jmi’ Masjid on Bl Hissr. Temple site.
(ii) Trmat Masjid. Temple site.
4. Hyderabad
(i) Dargh of Shh Ms Qdir. Temple site.
(ii) Masjid on the Pirulkonda Hill (1690). Temple site.
(iii) Tol Masjid (1671). Temple materials used.
(iv) Dargh of Min Mishk (d. 1680). Temple site.
(v) Dargh of Mu’min Chup in Aliybd (1322-23). Temple site.
(vi) Hj Kaml-k-Masjid (1657). Temple site.
(vii) Begum Masjid (1593). Temple site.
(viii) Dargh of Islm Khn Naqshband. Temple site.
(ix) Dargh of Shh D’d (1369-70). Temple site.
(x) Jmi’ Masjid (1597). Temple site.
4. Maisaram, Masjid built by Aurangzeb from materials of 200 temples demolished after the fall of Golconda.
5. Secunderabad, Qadam RasUl. Temple site.
6. Sheikhpet
(i) Shaikh-k-Masjid (1633-34). Temple site.
(ii) SariwAl Masjid (1678-79). Temple tite.

VII. Karimnagar District.
1. Dharampuri, Masjid (1693). TrikTa Temple site.
2. Elangdal
(i) Mansr Khn-k-Masjid (1525). Temple site.
(ii) Alamgr Masjid (1696). Temple site.
3. Kalesyaram, lamgr Masjid. Temple site.
4. Sonipet, lamgr Masjid. Temple site.
5. Vemalvada, Mazr of a Muslim saint. Temple site.

VIII. Krishna District.
1. Gudimetta, Masjid in the Fort, Temple materials used.
2. Guduru, Jmi’ Masjid (1497). Temple materials used.
3. Gundur, Jmi’ Masjid. Converted temple.
4. Kondapalli
(i) Masjid built in 1482 on the site of a temple after Muhammad Shh BahmanI had slaughtered the Brahmin priests on the advice of Mahmd Gawn, the great Bahman Prime Minister, who exhorted the sultan to become a Ghz by means of this pious performance.
(ii) Mazr of Shh Abdul Razzq. Temple site.
5. Kondavidu
(i) Masjid (1337). Temple materials used.
(ii) Dargh of Barandaula. Temple materials used.
(iii) Qadam Sharf of dam. Converted temple.
6. Machhlipatnam
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) Idgh. Temple site.
7. Nandigram, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
8. Pedana, Iama’il-k-Masjid. Temple site.
9. Rajkonda, Masjid (1484). Temple site.
10. Tengda, Masjid. Temple site.
11. Turkpalem, Dargh of Ghlib Shahd. Temple site.
12. Vadpaili, Masjid near NarsiMhaswmn Temple. Temple materials used.
13. Vijaywada, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.

IX. Kurnool District.
1. Adoni
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1668-69). Materials of several temples used.
(ii) Masjid on the Hill. Temple materials used.
(iii) Fort (1676-77). Temple materials used.
2. Cumbum
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1649). Temple site.
(ii) Gachinl Masjid (1729-30). Temple site.
3. Havli, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple materials used.
4. Karimuddula, Dargh. Akkadevi Temple materials used.
5. Kottakot, Jmi’ Masjid (1501). Temple site.
6. Kurnool
(i) Pr Shib-k-Gumbad (1637-38). Temple site.
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid (1667). Temple site.
(iii) Ll Masjid (1738-39). Temple site.
7. Pasupala, Kaln Masjid. Temple site.
8. Sanjanmala, Masjid. Temple sites.
9. Siddheswaram, Ashurkhna. Temple materials used.
10. Yadavalli, Mazr and Masjid. Temple sites.
11. Zuhrapur, Dargh of Qdir Shh Bukhr. Temple site.

X. Mahbubnagar District.
1. Alampur, Qal-k-Masjid. Temple materials used.
2. Jatprole, Dargh of Sayyid Shh Darwish. Temple materials used.
3. Kodangal
(i) Dargh of Hazrat Nizmu’d-DIn. Temple site.
(ii) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.
4. Kundurg, Jmi’ Masjid (1470-71). Temple site.
5. Pargi, Jmi’ Masjid (1460). Temple site.
6. Somasila, Dargh of Kamlu’d-Dn Baba (1642-43) Temple site.
XI. Medak District.
1. Andol, Old Masjid. Temple site.
2. Komatur, Old Masjid. Temple site.
3. Medak
(i) Masjid near Mubrak Mahal (1641). Vishnu Temple site.
(ii) Fort, Temple materials used.
4. Palat, Masjid. Temple site.
5. Patancheru
(i) Jmi’ Masjid. Temple materials used.
(ii) Dargh of Shykh Ibrhm known as Makhdmji (1583). Temple site.
(iii) Ashrufkhna. Temple site.
(iv) Fort (1698). Temple materials used.

XII. Nalgonda District.
1. Devarkonda
(i) Qutb Shh Masjid. Temple materials used.
(ii) Dargh of Sharfu’d-Din (1579). Temple site.
(iii) Dargh of Qdir Shh Wal (1591). Temple site.
2. Ghazinagar, Masjid (1576-77). Temple site.
3. Nalgonda
(i) Garh Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) Dargh of Shh Latf. Temple site.
(iii) Qutb Shh Masjid (Renovated in 1897). Temple site.
4. Pangal, lamgr Masjid. Temple site.

XIII. Nellore District.
1. Kandukuru, Four Masjids. Temple sites.
2. Nellore, Dargh named Dargmitt. Akkaslvara Temple materials used.
3. Podile, Dargh. Temple site.
4. Udayagiri
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1642-43). Temple materials used.
(ii) Chhot Masjid (1650-51). Temple materials used.
(iii) Fort. Temple materials used.

XIV. Nizambad District.
1. Balkonda
(i) Patthar-k-Masjid. Temple site.
(ii) Idgh. Temple site.
2. Bodhan
(i) Deval Masjid. Converted Jain temple.
(ii) Patthar-k-Masjid. Temple site.
(iii) lamgr Masjid (1654-55). Temple site.
3. Dudki, Ashrufkhna. Temple materials used.
4. Fathullapur, Mu’askar Masjid (1605-06). Temple site.

XV. Osmanabad District.
Ausa, Jmi’ Masjid (1680-81). Temple site.
XVI. Rangareddy District.
Maheshwar, Masjid (1687). Madanna Pandit’s Temple site.
XVII. Srikakulam District
1. Icchapuram, Several Masjids. Temple sites.
2. Kalingapatnam, DargAh of Sayyid Muhammad Madn Awliy (1619-20). Temple materials used.
3. Srikakulam
(i) Jmi’ Masjid (1641- 42). Temple site.

(ii) Dargh of Bande Shh Wal (1641- 42). Temple site.

(iii) Atharwl Masjid (1671-72). Temple site.
(iv) Dargh of Burhnu’d-Dn Awliy. Temple site.

XVIII. Vishakhapatnam District.
1. Jayanagaram, Dargh. Temple site.
2. Vishakhapatnam, Dargh of Shh Madn. Temple site.
XIX. Warangal District.
Zafargarh, Jmi’ Masjid. Temple site.

XX. West Godavari District.
1. Eluru
(i) Fort. Temple materials used.
(ii) Sawi Masjid. Converted temple.
(iii) Qzi’s House. Somevara Temple materials used.
2. Nidavolu, Masjid. Mahdeva Temple materials used.
3. Rajamundri, Jmi’ Masjid (1324). Converted VeNugoplaswmin Temple.

Modi offers what people want.


Modi offers a new Camelot

Pritish Nandy

20 June 2013, 07:50 PM IST

There’s no doubt Narendra Modi is a big deal. He may not be everyone’s hero. But for young, urban India, those who read Chetan Bhagat and watch Kai Po Che, his appeal has grown exponentially in recent months. Media pundits (the last to climb on to his bandwagon) think he could be the next PM. From a pariah in 2002, Modi is the star of 2013. And I don’t think his support base is hardcore Hindu fanatics, as the Congress wants us to believe. Rather, it comes from young, secular, well educated, successful young men and women. They don’t follow Modi because he espouses Gujarati asmita (which he does occasionally) or sells some exotic blend of Hindutva and nationalism (which he also does, but increasingly rarely) or because he’s rabidly anti-Muslim, anti-Pakistan or anti-anything. They follow him because he promises them a new India.

What this new India is no one quite knows. It’s a curious promise Modi has conjured up. Rajiv was the last Gandhi who sold us Camelot, much in the grand old tradition of the Kennedys. Modi, on the other hand, offers us a simpler version. Good roads, well built flyovers, electricity that does not fail, a modern, transactional society where corruption may exist but will not be half as corrosive and soul killing as it is today, and cities that can grow without falling apart. He doesn’t offer high pitched rhetoric on stuff everyone knows he can’t deliver on. He wants business to flourish, jobs to be created, dollars to come in, the rupee to stay strong. His vision may not be entirely inclusive. But then who offers inclusive politics in a country split by caste, religion, language, regionalism? What Modi offers is the dream of a new nation unburdened by history.

This suits our times. The young no longer care for history. Gandhi is a distant memory. Ayodhya, a bad dream. The young are not bothered about last week’s headlines, leave alone last year’s. Modi’s pogrom is a decade old. Even the Muslims have moved on since then and, like the rest of India, are thinking about jobs, careers, money and opportunities. If Modi can offer them that, integrate them into the larger Indian dream, they will be happy to forget the past and look ahead. The Congress offers them the lollypop of secularism but nothing else. And no one is enamoured of empty promises any more. The young want change. They want it quickly. Anyone who offers it to them is welcome, no questions asked.

It’s not political amnesia alone that defines them. What defines them also is the search for a new India. They have heard about it before, in election doublespeak. But once elections are over, the traditional dynamics of Indian politics come back into play. Caste based reservations. Pampering of khaps. Vote bank politics. Socialist rhetoric. Gender prejudice. And corruption, all pervasive corruption. The more things promise to change, the more they stay the same. Both Congress and the BJP have the same problem: They seek the comfort of numbers on the basis of the existing status quo. The young resent that. They know they have no role to play in such politics. Their only hope lies in change, and Modi for them represents the possibility of that change. Rahul doesn’t. (In fact, last week’s Cabinet reshuffle underscored that.)

Rahul doesn’t because he’s a Congressman, a Gandhi. Whereas Modi is not the BJP. He is a lone wolf. He may make all the right noises but he reports to no one, is accountable to none That’s why he takes the kind of decisions a party man may not, being forced to balance countervailing forces. Modi balances nothing. He allows rebellion to raise its head and then squashes it. The young see that as the capacity to act, to take a decision against all odds. That’s why Modi appeals to them. He’s everything they want to see in the new India. Quick decision making. Decisive policy changes that can achieve swift results. No looking back at the past. The burial of history, and a new Discovery of India. It’s ironic Nehru’s great grandson has abdicated that role. It’s equally ironic the BJP which saw glory in our Hindu heritage has now found itself a leader unabashedly campaigning to be the next PM on the plank of a new, modern, unapologetic identity that seeks to capture the future.

Will he succeed? I have no clue. The algorithms of electoral politics are fickle. But many people believe (and no, they are not all BJP flunkies) that he could. Traditional arithmetics don’t give him the numbers. But then, a wave just might.

Islam will not change, Muslims will, says Taslima Nasreen.


Islam will not change, Muslims will.


Taslima Nasreen

Some ex-Muslims believe Islam is resistant to change. They think there are a few reasons why the Islamic tradition is more resistant to change and the creation of a secular liberal breathing space for adherents than many other religious traditions appear to be.

The reasons are:

(1)…. Islam has historically had an expansionist and political dimension.
It was formulated at a time of war and is completely embroiled in the Arab imperialistic ambitions of the time.
While there is war and brutality in the Old Testament, there is no call for global war – the conflicts are quite local. In effect Islam became a kind of meta-tribalism when it was formulated.

Also, orthodox Islam explicitly sees no distinction between the sacred and the secular: social spheres have to be patterned according to sacred dictates.

Contrast this with Christianity, in which Jesus reportedly tells his followers to render unto Caesar his due, and unto God his due.

(2)… Islam sees its core text, the Quran, as being, more or less, God incarnate.
What Jesus is to Christianity, the Quran is to Islam.

Jesus is the logos in Christianity, the flesh-made-Word, whereas in Islam, it is the Quran that is the logos, the Word-made-flesh.

This is problematic because it means that Muslims have a hard time accepting that parts of the Quran are highly situated in very specific temporal contexts. Add to this the idea that Islam believes it is the final religion and the Quran is therefore the final text for all time and all places, and you can see that the seeds of literalism are sown right into the orthodox, classical tradition itself.

By contrast the idea of an eternally infallible text is not found in Christianity (the Bible is considered inspired, but still the work of human minds) or in the Indian / Asian religions.

(3)… Islam has somehow gotten saddled with this arrogant claim of Muhammad being not only the final prophet, but also the best human being to have ever existed in human history.

This is in contrast to the prophets of Israel in the Old Testament, who are seen as being basically human beings dealing with the challenges of life and existence as best as they could.

My impression of Muhammad as a man is that he seems to have started off as a humble and honest merchant, but the second half of his life shows that some major transformation took place: he behaved no differently from an average Arab warlord of that era (not that I am judging it by modern-day ethical standards — just observing), and it looks like the military conquests, multiple wives and influx of concubines and slaves just went to his head.

Many people have pointed out the differences between the conciliatory Meccan and more aggressive Medinan suras of the Quran.

(4) Unlike Hinduism or Buddhism or other Eastern religions, it can be reduced to a single man and a single scripture.
The same is true for Christianity as well of course, and Judaism to a lesser extent. This kind of reductionism encourages a religion to be a more closed system and discourages diversity and pluralism.

(5) The traditional Sunni orthodoxy is anti-innovation to the core, and all new ideas are considered as the devil’s handiwork and to be approached as cautiously as possible.
This has caused Islam to stagnate remarkably and has prevented its growth or evolution in any meaningful way. Here even Christianity and Judaism are different from Islam and have shown some fairly strong progressive and innovative movements through the ages (most recently, witness the rise of Emergent Christianity under which even evangelicals are taking a post-modern turn, and Process Theology inspired by Alfred North Whitehead, a contemporary of Bertrand Russell).

(6) Every orthodoxy needs a heterodoxy to keep it from stagnating too much, and every heterodoxy needs an orthodoxy to keep it from becoming reckless.

This is true not just for religion but also for science and for virtually every human endeavor.

Whether we are conservative or liberal, the future terrifies us even as it beckons us, and it is just natural to want to regress to the comforts of what is stable and known no matter how stale it has become.

But the Sunni Islamic tradition has exaggerated this fear of the unknown to such monumental proportions that it has squashed freedom of expression and thus every single heterodox movement. The only “heterodoxy” that has survived is the Shi’ites, and they only differ with the Sunnis on doctrinal issues that don’t have much of a bearing as far as social realities go.

(7) Islam is, to my mind, the only religion in the world with developed orthodox doctrines on how to treat unbelievers and apostates, and convinced of its universalizing mission which can even be implemented by coercion.
In other words identity politics are built right into the orthodox Islamic tradition. This makes the radical politicization of Islam even more problematic and endangers all those who dare to question the received wisdom.

Christianity is also a universalizing, prosyletizing religion, but its imperialistic ambitions (a) were not really based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth who was nonviolent (see also the comment above about rendering unto Caesar his due and rendering unto God his); and (b) have largely been surrendered in today’s context.

( 8 ) There is hardly a female voice to be found in Islam.

Christianity still has the figure of the Virgin Mary and even Mary Magdalene in the non-canonical Gospels, as well as numerous female Christian saints. Christ definitely had a feminine side and used to take female disciples, which was revolutionary for his era. Some of the Hindu scriptures are partially authored by women, and likewise for Buddhism. Both Hinduism and Buddhism have Tantric schools that elevate women to the status of goddesses and also certain very spiritual schools of thought according to which experience is supposed to trump intellectual dogmas which has allowed them to evolve.

Some of the reasons are good but nothing can prevent religion or religious people from changing, reforming and evolving. I am more interested in modern humans than ancient religions.

Muslim rulers have been using Islam for their own interests, they keep people in ignorance, women in slavery, and allow the persecution of the people of different faiths. They do not allow criticism of Islam.

You suppress critical thinking means you suppress the ability to think clearly and rationally, to engage in reflective and independent thinking. If criticism of Islam is allowed in the Muslim countries, I believe many Muslims will become agnostic or atheists, or become secular and will ask for secular state, secular laws and secular education.

It is not true that Islam can not be changed, Islamic laws have been slightly or considerably reformed in many different Islamic countries. But this is not enough. Revolution is always better than reformation. It doesn’t matter how much you sugarcoat myths, myths will never be facts.

Ignorance about true Islam is one of the main reasons for most Muslims to resist changes in Islam. Changes happened in most of the Western countries because free thinkers were allowed to criticize churches, priests, and Christianity.
Educated and enlightened people in the Christian societies abolished religious rules, separated state and religion before other religious communities did.

We now see more non-religious people are in the Western Christian countries than in the Muslim countries. Muslim men and women whoever leave Islam or criticize Islam still get killed, harassed, tortured, exiled. But I do not think Muslims will take much time to be secular and liberal if Muslim rulers instead of talking action against the people who criticize Islam, take action against the religionists who violate other’s human rights and the right to freedom of expression.
Christians were not less violent than Muslims. If Christians can change themselves, Muslims can. They are all humans.

There is no need to make ancient religions evolve to modern religions. Religion will always have conflicts with rationality and science. Religious scriptures and religious laws are not compatible with the modern concepts of human rights, women’s rights and the laws that are based on equality. All religious scriptures are out of place, out of time. Religion alone is powerless. People have enormous power to make a religion survive for centuries, or to go extinct.

I am hopeful that someday Muslims will make Islam die out. Zeus, Poseidon, Hermes, Athena, Apollo, Neptune, Jupiter, Odin, Thor and thousands of gods died, Allah will die too.

National Security is compromised by Ishrat case – article by Narain Kataria.



The recent charge sheet filed in Ishrat Jehan encounter in 2004 by CBI against 7 patriotic Hindu police officers is not only politically motivated and mala fide in its intent but also outrageous and reprehensible in its content. It could embolden terror outfits like Al Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Tayiba, The Taliban, Indian Mujahideen; and boost the morale of several other Pakistani terrorist groups waiting for an opportunity to kill and murder innocent Indian citizens.

In this case, we should understand in unambiguous terms that it is not purely the question of law and order. We are fighting a war unleashed by Pakistan and anti-Indian and fifth columnists planted by our enemies in the Indian State. It should be dealt with the full force of the State. Any weakening under the guise of human rights will give fillip to the anti-India forces waiting in the wings to tear apart Indian State.

Sonia Gandhi and her Congress is mortally afraid of Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. They are worried that if he becomes the next Prime Minister of India, Sonia Family would be put either in Tihar Jail for plundering billions of dollars from poor Indians, encouraging missionaries to convert gullible and poor Hindus by force, fraud and allurement to Christianity and indirectly supporting Islamic terrorism. Another option for the Family will be to flee from India.

We believe that CBI charge sheet is a part of the sinister conspiracy hatched between Sonia Gandhi and her political adviser Ahmad Patel. The aim of this charge sheet is to tarnish Narendr Modi’s image, destroy his credibility, nail him, fix him, disqualify him from fighting elections in 2014 even at the cost of national security.

In order to implement their mean, mendacious and atrocious design, Ahmed Patel and Sonia Gandhi have already posted several Muslims and Christians in most sensitive positions to reduce Hindus to second class citizens in their own country as mentioned in my blog:

“Salman Khurshid, Foreign Minister of India;
E. Ahmad, India’s Minister for External Affairs;
Syed Akbarddin, the spokesman for the Ministry of External Affairs;
Chief of Intelligence Bureau, Syed Asif Ibrahim;
Chief Justice of India, Altmas Kabir;
Attorney General of India, Goolam E. Vahanvati;
Vice President of India Mohammed Hameed Ansari;
Health Minister Gulam Nabi Aza;,
Union Minister Farooq Abdullah, K. Rahman Khan,
Sonia Gandhi’s political Advisor Ahmad Patel all are Muslims.
Former Chief Election Commissioner of India, S.Y. Qureshi was also a Muslim.

Sonia Gandhi, her son Rahul Gandhi, Defense Minister A.K. Anthony, Air Chief Marshall Norman Anil Kumar Browne all are Christians.”

The Governor of Jharkhand Syed Ahmed and the Governor of Uttrakhand Dr. Aziz Qureshi, are both Muslims.
There are unconfirmed rumors that several Congress Ministers and leaders like Ambika Soni, Manish Tiwari, Anand Sharma, Jagan Reddy (not with Sonia any more), Ajit Jogi, masquerading under Hindu names are also converts to Islam or Christianity.

Several Muslims officials have been posted in very sensitive posts in CBI. For example the CBI’s Director of Prosecution Abdul Aziz was re-employed through a proposal moved by the Department of Personnel Training (DoPT) after his retirement in July when his status was equivalent to that of a Joint Secretary. CBI’s Special Director Salim Ali was specifically appointed to lead the investigation with an eye to fix Narendra Modi and and degrade, demonize and demoralize other Hindu officials of IB.

In this connection, it would be worthwhile to note that in appointing Sayed Asif Ibrahim as Chief of Intelligence Bureau, the government had overlooked three officers (Hindus?) one year senior to him in the Indian Police Service. ( http://www.rediff.com/news/special/asif-ibrahim-as-ib-chief-reading-between-the-lines/20121126.htm)

It would not be out of place to mention here that Sonia Gandhi has composed a National Advisory Council (NAC). Most of its members are far left guys, leftists, communists, Muslims and Christians. They have come up with a bill “Prevention of Communal and Targetted Violence Bill”. The aim of this Bill is also to gag the voice of Hindus in their own country and terrorize them into submission.

The appointment of Najeeb Jung, last week, a Muslim Vice Chancellor President of Jamia Millia Islamis, as the Lt. Governor of Delhi has sent shock waves all over the Hindu world. Hindus look at it as a horrendous scheme to promote Islam in India.

Here are some examples of harassment of patriotic Hindu Police officials. In the past six months the CBI enquiry spearheaded by Muslim CBI officials has methodically victimized the Hindu police officers, beginning with the arrest and incarceration of G.L. Singhal. On June 4, 2013 suspended IPS officer D. G. Vanzara was arrested by the CBI, from Sabarmati Central Jail in Ahmedabad, after he was transferred a day ago from a Mumbai Jail, where he was lodged as he is an accused in Sohrabuddin Shaikh encounter killing case of 2005. Arrest warrants are pending for Gujarat Additional DGP (Crime) P.P. Pandey, who is in hiding, though he has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court to get the FIR cancelled. On May 2013, IB Special Director Rajendra Kumar summoned for interrogation.

There are several proofs (which CBI has chosen to ignore) that Ishrat Jehan was a Lashkar-e-Taiba suicide bomber. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had apparently informed the Intelligence Bureau (IB) that Ishrat Jehan was a Lashkar-e-Taiba suicide bomber.

Ishrat Jehan and Javed did a reconnaissance mission in Ahmedabad on May 13-14 and stayed at Hotel Shivganga, in Ahmedabad as a married couple after which they returned back to Uttar Pradesh. The staff at the Mezban Hotel in Lucknow claim that Sheikh and Ishrat, using the pseudonyms Abdul Rahim and Ishrat Ayesha, shared room 204 on four days in May 2004. Mohammad Wasi, a resident of Ibrahimpur in Faizabad, says the visitors tried to buy weapons from local mafioso Javed Khan. Javed and Ishrat returned to Ahmedabad on May 24, 2004 and performed a reconnaissance mission in Ahmedabad. From Ahmedabad, Ishrat went to Nasik and Javed went to pay his family a visit to Kerala. (http://dnasyndication.com/dna/article/DNAHM43933 )

Ishrat Jahan was a part of hit squad (Amjad Ali Rana alias Babbar alias Salim, Zeeshan Johar, and Javed Gulam Sheikh) to kill L.K. Advani and Narendra Modi. This proves her guilt by association.

In February 2013, Intelligence Bureau Chief, Asif Ibrahim , though a Muslim, for a change wrote a strongly worded letter to CBI where he backed up the IB’s claim that Ishrat was an LeT operative. Indeed, Ibrahim was so convinced about the case he had, that when CBI did not desist even after his letter, he escalated the matter to Home Ministry and even PMO level.

The Gujarat High Court-appointed SIT – additional DG of Central Industrial Security Force R R Verma, additional DG Mohan Jha and inspector general Satish Verma – agree: the four, who were killed in the encounter, had links with terrorist outfits.

In the backdrop what has been stated above, it is clear that Sonia and Ahmed Patel are hell bent on tarnishing Narendra Modi’s image at any cost. In order to win Muslim votes, they would even go to any extent to compromise national security.

Sonia and Ahmed Patel are misusing CBI to achieve their anti-India agenda. It is a paradox that many Hindus are supporting them for their personal aggrandizement. It is a matter of great regret and shame that seeds of suspicion are being sown between two nationally important intelligence agencies by the Congress Party. This is tantamount to treason and could endanger Indian security system.

It is a matter of great concern that on one hand China and Pakistan are hobnobbing to encircle India from outside, and on the other hand Sonia and Ahmed Patel in collaboration with anti-national forces are weakening and destroying India and Hindus from within.

Narain Kataria


Indian American Intellectuals Forum
Email: Katarian@aol.com
Blogspot: Narainkataria.blogspot.com
Tel: (718) 478-5735/(718) 271-0453

Why I shall support Modi in 2014? – by Avay Shukla


I have been getting more and more worried over the last year or so at the direction( or lack of it) in which our country is headed. It is like a runaway plane falling from the skies and we are plummeting past one alarming indicator after another– inflation, economic slowdown, falling rupee, complete break-down of law and order, ever emboldened Naxalites, total internalisation of corruption, an administration that answers to no one, complete lack of governance, cronyism on a scale never seen before, a brazen lack of accountability, public intimidation of constitutional authorities, a judicial system that has all but collapsed,environmental disasters that no one knows how to cope with, complete paraplegia of decision-making at all levels in government,appeasement of ”minorities” and other sections that is reaching ridiculous and dangerous levels, dynastic politics at the Centre and the states reminiscent of the Mughal era…….

I could go on and on but after some time the mind becomes numb and registers only one emotion——-IT IS TIME FOR A CHANGE.

Another five years of this and we would be well on our way to becoming a failed state and joining the ranks of Pakistan, Haiti and Somalia.

The general elections of 2014 offers us one last chance to redeem ourselves. I have been on this mortal coil for 62 years and have never voted for the BJP but have, after much thought, decided to support MODI in 2014. This is considered a heresy in most neo-liberal circles in India today but we have to go beyond mere labelling and stereo typing to understand my decision.

But before I go on to Mr. Modi himself, let us review the context in which this decision has been taken. The state of the country is self evident in para one above.

The next question then is: What are the alternatives or choices that we as voters have?

The Congress will only perpetuate the present mess-even more worrying and dangerous is the fact that, were the Congress to return to power, it would consider it had a renewed mandate to carry on as before.

In any case, who in the country would lead the Congress- a reluctant dynast, or an ageing economist who has discovered his true skills lie in politics, or a backroom puppeteer? Or, God forbid, all three? (Seriously, this is a possibility- after all not one of these three want to shoulder sole accountability, and they may reason that if a dual power centre can ensure two terms, a triple may be good for even more!) No, to my mind the Congress is not an option.

Who else, then?

Well, if we scrape the bottom of the barrel assiduously we will come up with Mamta Banerjee [ TMC], Mulayam Yadav [SP], Nitish Kumar [JDU], Naveen Patnaik [BJD], Jayalalitha [AIADMK], Sharad Pawar [NCP] and Mayawati (BSP). There is no need to discuss their achievements or ideologies at a national level (incidentally, not even one of them has a remotely national outlook or ideology since they cannot see beyond pandering shamelessly to the vote banks in their respective states) because they are state (not even regional) leaders and none of them can hope to be Prime Minister on the strength of their own parties.

They all realise this, of course, hence the idea which periodically emerges like a skin rash, of a Third or Federal Front. This didn’t work even when a Third Front could agree on a leader (as in the case of I.K. Gujral or Deve Gowda). How on earth will it work when every one of the state leaders mentioned above feels that he or she has been reincarnated precisely to become the Prime Minister of India?

The negotiations for choosing a PM (if the Front comes up with the numbers, that is) will resemble one of those WWF fights where about six hunks are put into the ring to beat the daylights out of each other till one of them is left standing to claim the crown. I cannot see all of them agreeing on even one policy issue, whether it is reservations, industrial stimulus,foreign policy, disinvestment, environmental protection, centre-state relations etc.

If they come to power at the Center, the paraplegia of today will become quadriplegia tomorrow.

Fortunately, in any case, they can never muster the 274 seats required-it will be difficult for them to reach even hundred even if they do very well in their states.

So a Third Front is a non-starter, and voting for any of these parties will only help the Congress by dividing the anti-congress vote. [You will have noticed that I have not mentioned Mr. Karat of the CPM. That’s because he’s become like a flat bottle of Coca-Cola- earlier he was all fizz and no substance: now even the fizz has gone].

That leaves only the BJP, with its historical baggage of the RSS, Hindutva, Ramjanmbhoomi (by the way, this baggage also includes five years of exemplary governance under Vajpayee from 1999 to 2004) -perhaps enough baggage to dissuade me from voting for the party. Except that this time the BJP has an add-on: Narender Modi.

And that, to my mind, adds value to the party and makes the crucial difference.

Modi has been reviled ad-nauseam by the “secular” parties and sections of the elite media for many years for the 2002 riots in Gujarat, by the former not because of any love for the Muslims (as I hope to show later) but simply in order to appropriate the Muslim vote, and by the latter because they have to keep whipping somebody in order to get their TRPs – in India only extremes succeed. Modi has been tried and condemned by them not on the basis of facts but by an opportunistic mixture of innuendo, presumption, speculation, half-truths, hear say. Look at the facts.

There was a horrendous orgy of killing of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002 where about 2000 of them were massacred. Some of Modi’s ministers and many BJP / VHP workers were involved: quite a few of them have also been convicted, the trials of many still go on.

The Supreme Court set up at least three SITs and is itself monitoring the investigations. Many PILs have been filed in the SC and the High Court accusing Modi of master-minding these massacres. In not a single case has either the Supreme Court, the High Court or the SITs found any evidence of Modi’s personal complicity.

Yes, they have held that he could have controlled the situation better- but nothing beyond that inspite of ten years of frenetic drum beating and sustained vilification.

Now look at the other set of facts. Under Modi’s current watch, perhaps for the first time in India, people have been actually convicted for communal rioting and murder- more than 200 convictions, with about 130 of them sentenced to life imprisonment.

All the communal massacres in India since Independence have not resulted in even one tenth of these convictions.

Modi’s government has to be given some credit for this: yes, the investigations were carried out by the SIT and not by Modi’s police; yet Modi could, if he was so inclined, have interfered covertly in the whole process by asking his officials not to cooperate, by intimidating witnesses, influencing judges, conveying hints to prosecutors- something which, as we all know too well, governments of all political hues in India have mastered.

Modi could have done what the Congress has done so successfully in Delhi in three other high-profile cases being monitored by the Supreme Court- the Commonwealth Games Scam, the 2G case, and Coalgate ( not to mention also the Sikh massacres of 1984): have these cases made any headway? has wrong-doing been proved in a single instance? has anyone been convicted?

No, Sir, these investigations will drag on and on till they are lost in the mists of time.

Supreme Court monitoring cannot ensure justice unless the govt. of the day allows its agencies to function- it is to Modi’s credit that he did so allow them.

Compare this with the manner in which the police in Delhi have been emasculated to protect some senior Congress leaders in the 1984 Sikh carnage- everyone in Delhi knows, even after 27 long years, that their hands are dipped in blood, but the evidence will never reach the courts; the recent acquittal of Sajjan Kumar only confirms this.

The biggest stigmata on Modi is the charge that he is “communal” and not “secular”.

All (non-NDA) political parties never tire of tom-tomming this from the roof-tops and consider this their trump card to ensure that he will never achieve his Grand-slam at the centre. But after eleven years this is beginning to wear thin and people are beginning to question the assumptions behind this charge and even the definition of what constitutes “communal” and “secular.”

Nirad Choudhry had long ago given his opinion that India is the continent of Circe where humans are turned into beasts-it is also the graveyard of the Oxford Dictionary where the meanings of words are turned on their heads to suit political exigencies! So “communal” today means a Hindu who is not ashamed of saying he is a Hindu, and ” secular” means a Hindu who panders to other religions in order to get their votes at the next elections!

By this inverse definition Modi is considered communal- notwithstanding that not a single Hindu- Muslim riot has taken place in Gujarat under his watch since 2002, notwithstanding that the BJP got 17% of the Muslim vote in the Assembly elections in the state earlier this year, notwithstanding that the party won five of the eight seats which had a dominant Muslim voter base, notwithstanding that the average Muslim in Gujarat is much better off economically than his counterpart in Assam, UP or Bihar (headed by ” secular” parties).

Compare this with the record of the Samajwadi party in UP where more than a hundred communal riots have taken place in less than two years, with the Congress in Assam where hundreds of Muslims were butchered last year and at least three hundred thousand of them are still languishing in relief camps with no hope of ever returning to their villages, with the Congress ruled Maharashtra where hundreds of Muslims were killed with the active help of the police after the Bombay blasts. (Needless to say there do not appear to have been any convictions in any of these pogromes). And MODI is communal?

I am a Hindu but I stopped going into any temple twenty years ago because I was sickened by the rapacious behaviour of their pundits.

I am no longer a practicing Hindu in a public, ritualistic sense and frankly I don’t know how many of the religious beliefs I retain, but I still consider myself a Hindu because Hinduism is more than just a religion- it is a culture, a civilisation, a way of life.

But in the Kafkaesque India of today if you were to proclaim that you are a Hindu (even though you have equal respect and regard for all other religions) you would be branded “communal”- this is what political discourse has been reduced to by our politicians.

And being “secular” no longer means treating all religions equally: it means splintering society into a myriad “minorities” (another perversion of the Oxford Dictionary) and then pandering to such of them as suit you in your naked pursuit of power.

In the process India has been converted into a complex jigsaw of minorities, castes, tribes, classes, sections and what have you.

The British could have learnt plenty from us about Divide and Rule!

But more and more right thinking people are beginning to question this recipe for disaster, and I am one of them.

India is 80% Hindu- why should one then have to be apologetic about proclaiming that one is a Hindu ? We have been ruled and exploited and vandalised for eight hundred years by Muslims and for another two hundred years by Christians, and yet we have accorded these two religions a special status as “minorities” with privileges that the Hindus don’t have.

Has any other country in the world ever displayed such a spirit of accommodation and egalitarianism?

Is there a more secular civilisation in the world?

And yet, a Hindu who says he is a Hindu is considered communal!

Does a Hindu have to prove his secular credentials time and again by greater levels (or depths) of appeasement of other religions simply so that they can continue to be vote bank fodder for political parties?

Modi has had the courage to raise these questions and is therefore being reviled by those political parties whose apple carts he is threatening to upset. But people are beginning to pay attention. Modi is not considered secular because he is proud to be a Hindu and refuses to give doles or concessions to any religious group (including Hindus, but that is conveniently glossed over) beyond what is provided in the constitution and the laws of the land. He believes this weakens the social fabric of the country and that even handed development is the best guarantee for equitable prosperity for all. He is not considered secular (and instead is branded as communal) because he says publicly that he is proud to be a Hindu. And has he done anything blatantly or provocatively pro-Hindu in the last ten years?

There is not a single instance of this and yet he is vilified as communal and anti-minorities by the same party that presided over more than two hundred anti-Muslim riots in the seventies and eighties in Gujarat, that massacred 6000 Sikhs in 1984, that lit the fuse in Ayodhya by installing an icon of Ram in the mosque there, that failed to take any action when the Babri masjid was being razed to the ground! Modi has carefully distanced himself from any public support of Hindutva, has kept the VHP and the Bajrang Dal on a tight leash in Gujarat ever since he came to power there, and has even incurred the wrath of the RSS for not toeing the line on their purely religious agenda. It takes time, and some mistakes, to attain maturity; the Modi of today is not the Modi of 2002: then he was still in the pracharak mould of the RSS, inexperienced in the exercise of power, lacking administrative experience. He has now developed into a politician with a vision, an administrator who has delivered to his people and caught the fancy of the entire corporate world in India and abroad. Rahul Gandhi has been around in politics for almost the same length of time but has still not progressed beyond his epiphanic perception that India is a bee-hive.

Pause a while to honestly compare Modi’s qualities with his peers in the political firmament. His integrity is impeccable, both personal and vicarious. Even Mr. Manish Tewari has not been able to charge him on this score, and that’s saying something! I am not aware of a single major scam unearthed during his term( compare this with the Congress either in Maharashtra or at the Centre: the Congress has more skeletons in its cupboard than a graveyard does).

Modi has no family to promote or to insure against inflation for the next hundred years (compare this with any other party leader, all of whom have given an entirely new meaning to the term “joint family”- brothers, uncles, wives, sons, sons-in-law, nephews-all happily and jointly looting the nation’s resources).

Modi has a vision and a road map for the future and he has demonstrated in Gujarat that he can implement his vision.

No other major leader of the parties that are vilifying him comes even close to comparing with him in this respect- Manmohan Singh once had a vision but his unique concept of “coalition dharma” has ensured that he now cannot see, or hear, or talk; Rahul Gandhi cannot see beyond bee-hives and boats that rise with the tide, Sharad Pawar cannot see the woods for the sugar-cane stalks, Mulayam Singh has been fixated on the Prime Minister’s chair for so long that he has now started hallucinating; Nitish Kumar’s vision is a peculiar bi-focal which enables him to see only Muslims and OBCs; Navin Patnaik, being erudite and sophisticated must be having a vision but he has not deigned to share it with anyone yet; Mayawati cannot see beyond statues of herself and of elephants; and as for Mamta Banerjee, she is colour blind-she can only see red. Modi’s track record as an administrator inspires confidence in his ability to play a role at the national level.

He sets specific goals, provides the resources and then gives his bureaucrats a free hand to operate.

He has ensured water availability to towns and to greater number of farmers, Gujarat now has 24X7 power and has even offered to sell power to other states.

Modi has realised long before his peers that future growth can only come from the manufacturing sector since the past stimulus provided by the service sector is now bottoming out, and has prepared his state to attract capital: perennial roadblocks which have bedevilled other states- land acquisition, labour issues, law and order, lack of decision making, cronyism- have all been sorted out. It is no surprise then that Gujarat has been receiving the second highest amount of investment funds after Maharashtra.

His opponents, looking for anything to denigrate his achievements, cavil that Gujarat has always been a progressive state and no credit goes to Modi for all this. True, Gujarat (and Gujaratis) have always been entrepreneurial and progressive, but any economist can tell them that the higher you are on the performance scale, the more difficult it is to make incremental gains- and these gains Modi has been making year after year.

Gujarat has consistently been among the top five states in just about all economic, social and human development indicators, and far above the national figures.

Here are some figures I picked up in the Hindustan Times of June 12, 2013:

[a] Infant Mortality Rate
2005 2010
Gujarat 54 44
Haryana 60 48
Orissa 75 60
INDIA 58 47

[b] Access to Safe Drinking Water( in %)
2002 2011
Gujarat 84.1 90.3
Maharashtra 79.8 83.4
Andhra 80.1 90.5
INDIA 77.9 85.5

[c] Poverty Reduction ( in %)
2004-5 2009-10
Gujarat 31.6 23
Karnataka 33.3 23.6
MP 48.6 36.7
Orissa 57.2 37
INDIA 37.2 29.8

[d] Annual GDP increase( in %) from 2005-6 to 2012-13
Gujarat 10.3
Uttarakhand 12.36
MP 8.82
Maharashtra 9.97
Delhi 11.39

Modi is no paragon of virtue. He is arrogant, does not allow a second rung of leadership to emerge, brooks no opposition, is impatient and authoritative, is not a consensus builder. But then we are not seeking to canonise a saint but looking for a political leader who can get this country out of the morass that its present stock of politicians has got us into. We are looking for someone who can be decisive rather than justify inaction under the garb of seeking an elusive “consensus”. We are looking for someone who has the courage to have a vision and the skills to translate it into reality. We are looking for someone who will work for the country and not for his ” joint family”.

We are looking for someone who can restore our identities as INDIANS and not merely as Brahmins or Scheduled castes or Muslims or Backward castes.

We are looking for someone who will not pander to religions and be truly secular.

And we are looking for someone who will not be ashamed to say that he is a Hindu in the land that gave birth to the most tolerant and enlightened religion this world has seen.

Modi may fail- in fact, there are good chances that he will. But he at least promises change, whereas the others promise only more of the same. He offers us Hope. Shouldn’t he be given a chance?

** Avay Shukla retired from the Indian Administrative Service in December 2010. He is a keen environmentalist and loves the mountains- he has made them his home.

வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் தந்த பாடம் – தமிழ்செல்வன்



கிறிஸ்தவ ஆக்கிரமிப்பு உள்ள கன்னியாகுமரி மாவட்டத்தில், இரண்டு ஹிந்து கோவில்களுக்கு அருகில், வேண்டுமென்றே ஒரு சர்ச்சை கட்ட நினைத்து, அதுவும் சட்டத்திற்கு விரோதமாக, அதை சாதித்தும் காட்டிய ஒரு கும்பலை எதிர்த்து வெற்றி பெறுவது என்பது சாதாரணமான காரியம் அல்ல. அதை சாதித்துக் காட்டியுள்ளனர் வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் ஹிந்துக்கள். அவர்களுக்கு வழிகாட்டியாக இருந்தவர் நாகர்கோவில் வழக்கறிஞர் திரு.பாலகிருஷ்ணன் அவர்கள்.

வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் ஹிந்துக்கள் 25 ஆண்டுகள் தொடர்ந்துபோராடி, ஹிந்துக்கள் ஒற்றுமையுடன் செயல்படும் ஒரு இடத்தில், அன்னிய சக்திகள் எவ்வளவு அரசியல் பலமும் பணபலமும் கொண்டிருந்தாலும், தோற்றுத்தான் போகும் என்று செயலில் காட்டிவிட்டனர்.

மொத்த பரப்பளவு: 1672 சதுர கிலோ மீட்டர்; மொத்த ஜனத்தொகை: 16, 76,034; ஹிந்துக்கள்: 8,59,307; கிறிஸ்தவர்கள்: 7,45,406; இது 2001-ல் எடுக்கப்பட்ட எண்ணிக்கை. தற்போது கத்தோலிக்க கிறிஸ்தவர்கள் 6 லக்ஷமும் பிராடஸ்டண்ட் கிறிஸ்தவர்கள் 2 லக்ஷமும் மற்ற கிறிஸ்தவ பிரிவினர் கொஞ்சமும் இருப்பதாகத் தெரிகின்றது. கத்தோலிக்கப் பிரிவில் மட்டும் 200 வட்டாரங்களும் 200 பங்குகளும் 10,000 அன்பியங்களும் இயங்குகின்றன. சி.எஸ்.ஐ (C.S.I) சர்ச்சுகள் மட்டுமே 1500க்கும் அதிகமாக இருக்கின்றன. அதாவது மொத்த பரப்பளவே 1672 சதுர கிலோமீட்டர்தான். இந்தச் சிறிய நிலப்பரப்பில்தான் எத்தனை சர்ச்சுகள்!

ஆம். கன்னியாகுமரி மாவட்டத்தைப் பற்றித்தான் சொல்கிறேன். ஹிந்துக்கள் இங்கே சிறுபான்மையினராக ஆகிவிட்டார்கள். இருக்கின்ற சர்ச்சுகள் போதாது என்பது போல் பெந்தகோஸ்தே சர்ச்சுகள் வேறு காளான்களென முளைக்கின்றன. அவை போதாதென்று சால்வேஷன் ஆர்மி என்கிற அமைப்பு வேறு. இன்னும் கன்னாபின்னாவென்று ஏகப்பட்ட அமைப்புகள், என்.ஜி.ஓ.க்கள். இவர்களுக்கு நிலத்தை வாங்கிப்போட்டு சர்ச்சு கட்டுவதும் மதமாற்றத்தில் ஈடுபடுவதும் குடிசைத்தொழில்.

இப்பேர்பட்ட கிறிஸ்தவ ஆக்கிரமிப்பு உள்ள மாவட்டத்தில், இரண்டு ஹிந்து கோவில்களுக்கு அருகில், வேண்டுமென்றே ஒரு சர்ச்சை கட்ட நினைத்து, அதுவும் சட்டத்திற்கு விரோதமாக, அதை சாதித்தும் காட்டிய ஒரு கும்பலை எதிர்த்து வெற்றி பெறுவது என்பது சாதாரணமான காரியம் அல்ல. அதை சாதித்துக் காட்டியுள்ளனர் வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் ஹிந்துக்கள். அவர்களுக்கு வழிகாட்டியாக இருந்தவர் நாகர்கோவில் வழக்கறிஞர் திரு.பாலகிருஷ்ணன் அவர்கள்.

வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் ஹிந்துக்களின் போராட்டம் இன்று நேற்று நடந்ததல்ல. 25 ஆண்டுகள் தொடர்ந்து போராடியிருக்கிறார்கள். கிடைத்த வெற்றியும் நாகர்கோவில் நீதிமன்ற அளவில்தான். கிறிஸ்தவர் பக்கம் உயர்நீதிமன்றத்திற்கும், அதில் தோற்றால் உச்சநீதிமன்றத்திற்கும் கண்டிப்பாக வழக்கை எடுத்துச் செல்வர். அதற்கான அரசியல் பலமும் பணபலமும் அவர்களிடம் ஏராளமாக இருக்கின்றது.

வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் வழக்கு
வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் கிராமத்தில் மொத்தம் 300 பேர் கொண்ட 70 ஹிந்து குடும்பங்களும், 50 பேர் கொண்ட 21 கிறிஸ்தவ குடும்பங்களும் இருக்கின்றன. கிராமத்தில் ஒரு பிள்ளையார் கோவிலும் ஒரு முத்தாரம்மன் கோவிலும் உள்ளன. ஊரிலிருந்து ஒரு கிலோமீட்டர் தூரத்திற்குள் ஒரு சர்ச்சும் உள்ளது. இது போதாதென்று இந்த இரு கோவில்களுக்கும் அருகே ஒரு சர்ச்சைக் கட்ட முயன்று, தங்களுடைய அரசியல் பலம், பணபலம் அனைத்தையும் பயன்படுத்தி வெற்றியும் அடைந்தனர் கிறிஸ்தவர்கள்.

மண்டைக்காடு கலவரத்திற்குப் பிறகு அமைக்கப்பட்ட நீதிபதி வேணுகோபால் விசாரணை ஆணையத்தின் அறிக்கையில் உள்ள பரிந்துரைப்படி, ஒரு வழிபாட்டு தலத்திலிருந்து 1 கிலோமீட்டருக்குள் மற்றொரு மதத்தினரின் வழிபாட்டுத் தலம் அமைக்கப்படக் கூடாது. மேலும், ஒரு வழிபாட்டுத்தலம் அமைக்க மாவட்ட ஆட்சியரின் அனுமதியும் முன்பே பெறவேண்டும். ஆனால் இந்த இரண்டு விதிகளையும் மீறி, வெறும் பஞ்சாயத்தாரின் அனுமதியை மட்டும் பெற்றுக்கொண்டு கிறிஸ்தவர்கள் இரண்டு கோவில்களுக்கும் அருகே, சுமார் 214 மீட்டர் தொலைவில், சர்ச்சைக் கட்டி முடித்தனர்.

இதை எதிர்த்து 25 ஆண்டுகள் தொடர்ந்து போராடிய ஹிந்துக்களின் நியாயமான வழக்கைப் பரிசீலித்து, நாகர்கோவில் நீதிமன்றம் (Sub-Court) சர்ச்சு சட்டவிரோதமாகக் கட்டப்பட்டது என்றும் அதை நீக்க வேண்டும் என்றும் தீர்ப்பளித்துள்ளது.

கிறிஸ்தவ ஆக்கிரமிப்பின் வரலாறு
வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் பிரச்சனையை ஒரு தனிப்பட்ட வழக்காக மட்டும் பார்க்கக்கூடாது. அதன் பின்னணியில் இருக்கும் கிறிஸ்தவ சர்ச்சின் நோக்கங்களையும், அந்நோக்கங்களை நிறைவேற்றுவதற்கான அவர்களுடைய செயல்பாடுகளையும் ஆராய்ந்து பார்த்தால், கன்னியாகுமரியில் கிறிஸ்தவ ஆக்கிரமிப்பின் வரலாறு நம் முகத்தில் அறையும்.

1960-களில் இந்தியப் பெருங்கடலில் கன்யாகுமரி கடற்கரையருகே சுவாமி விவேகானந்தர் தவமிருந்த பாறையின் மீது அவருக்கு ஒரு நினைவு மண்டபம் எழுப்ப ஹிந்துக்கள் திட்டமிட்டு செயல்படத் தொடங்கினர். அப்போது (1963) அதைப் பொறுக்கமாட்டாத சர்ச்சு நிறுவனம் கடலோர கிறிஸ்தவ மீனவர்களைத் தூண்டிவிட்டு அப்பாறையில் ஒரு சிலுவையை நட்டுவைத்து ஹிந்துக்களின் திட்டத்தை முறியடிக்க நினைத்தது. ஆனால் ஆர்.எஸ்.எஸ். தலைவர் உயர்திரு ஏக்நாத் ரானடே அவர்களின் தீவிர முயற்சியால் சுவாமி விவேகான்ந்தருக்கு நினைவு மண்டபம் வெற்றிகரமாக எழும்பியது.

ஆயினும் கிறிஸ்தவர்கள் பிரச்சனைகள் கொடுத்துக்கொண்டே இருந்தனர். சுவாமிஜியின் நினைவு மண்டபத்திற்குச் செல்ல விவேகனந்தா கேந்திரா நடத்தி வந்த படகுச் சேவையை கிறிஸ்தவ மீனவர் 1975-ல் தடுத்து நிறுத்தினர். அப்போது அவர்களை கட்டுப்படுத்துவதற்குப் பதிலாக, தமிழக அரசு படகுச் சேவையை தான் கையகப்படுத்திக்கொண்டது.

திராவிட முன்னேற்றக்கழக அரசு ஹிந்துக்களுக்கு ஆதரவாக இல்லை என்பதைப் புரிந்துகொண்ட கிறிஸ்தவ நிறுவனங்கள் கன்னியாகுமரி மாவட்டத்தில் தங்கள் ஆக்கிரமிப்பு வேலைகளைக் கட்டவிழ்த்துவிட்டனர். ஹிந்துக் கோவில்களைத் தாக்குவதும், ஹிந்து திருவிழாக்களை நடத்தவிடாமல் செய்வதும் தொடர்கதையாகிப் போயின.

மண்டைக்காடு கலவரம்
பிப்ரவரி 28 1982-ல் மண்டைக்காடு பகவதி அம்மன் கோவிலின் மாசி திருவிழா விழாவின்போது அதை நடத்தவிடாமல் தடுத்தனர் கிறிஸ்தவர்கள். பக்கத்தில் உள்ள சகாய மாதா சர்ச்சில் கூம்பு ஒலிபெருக்கிகளில் கிறிஸ்தவ பாடல்களை பெரிதாக அலற வைத்தனர். கோவில் திருவிழாக்களுக்கு வந்திருந்த ஹிந்துப் பெண்களின் மீது பாலியல் பலாத்காரம் செய்தனர். அதைத் தொடர்ந்து மாவட்டம் முழுவதும் மதத் துவேஷம் தீயெனப் பற்றிக்கொண்டது. மண்டைக்காடு கலவரம் வெடித்து இரண்டு இடங்களில் காவல்துறையினர் துப்பாக்கிச் சூடு நடத்தினர்.

அதனைத் தொடர்ந்து, தமிழக அரசு நீதியரசர் பி.வேணுகோபால் அவர்கள் தலைமையில் ஒரு விசாரணை ஆணையத்தை நியமித்தது. ஆணையமும் தன்னுடைய அறிக்கையை அரசுக்கு சமிர்ப்பிக்க, அரசு செப்டம்பர் 21, 1985 அன்று அதை ஏற்றுக்கொண்டது. பின்னர், வேணுகோபால் ஆணையத்தின் பரிந்துரைகள் செயல்படுத்தப்படும் என்று தமிழக அரசு 9.4.1986 அன்று அரசாணை (எண்: 916) வெளியிட்டது. அந்த ஆணையத்தின் பரிந்துரைகளில் மிகவும் முக்கியமான க்ஷரத்து என்னவென்றால், கனியாகுமரி மாவட்டத்தில் உடனடியாக மதமாற்றத் தடைச் சட்டம் கொண்டுவர வேண்டும் என்பதுதான். ஆனால் தொடர்ந்து ஆட்சியில் இருந்த திராவிடக் கட்சிகள் வேணுகோபால் ஆணையத்தின் பரிதுரைகளையும், அரசாணையையும் உடைப்பில் போட்டுவிட்டன.

அராஜக ஆக்கிரமிப்புகள்
திராவிட அரசுகள் கண்களை மூடிக்கொண்டதால் கிறிஸ்தவ நிறுவன்ங்களின் அராஜகச் செயல்கள் கட்டவிழ்த்து விடப்பட்டன.

1986-ல் சுங்கங்கடை பொன்மலை சாஸ்தா (Golden Mount of Lord Aiyappa) எனும் தலத்தை முழுமையாகக் கையகப்படுத்திய கத்தோலிக்க பாதிரி, அந்தத் தலத்தை புனித சேவியர் மலையாக (Mount St.Xavier) மாற்றினார்.
காளிமலையின் (Mt.Kaali) ஒரு பக்கத்தை ஆக்கிரமித்து அதில் சிலுவையை நட்டு, குருசுமலை (Mt.Cross) என்று பெயர் மாற்றினர்.
திருவிதாங்கோடு பெரிய நாயகி அம்மன் கோவில் “பெரியநாயகி கன்னி மேரி சர்ச்” என்று மாற்றப்பட்டது.
எட்டமடை அங்காளீஸ்வரி கோவிலின் சுறுச்சுவரை இடித்துத் தரைமட்டமாக்கி அந்த நிலப்பரப்பை எட்டமடை ரோமன் கத்தோலிக்க சர்ச்சு ஆக்கிரமித்தது.
மாவட்டம் முழுவதையும் ஆக்கிரமித்த கிறிஸ்தவ நிறுவனங்கள், ஆக்கிரமிப்பின் உச்சக்கட்டமாக, ஒரு கட்டத்தில், ஹிந்துக்களின் கண்கண்ட தெய்வமான பார்வதி தேவி அவதரித்த கன்னியாகுமரியை “கன்னிமேரி” மாவட்டம் என்று பெயர் மாற்ற வேண்டும் என்ற கோரிக்கையை வைத்தனர். ஆயினும் ஹிந்துக்கள் பொங்கிஎழுந்ததையடுத்து அந்தக் கோரிக்கை தற்சமயம் நிறுத்தி வைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.

வடக்கு பகவதிபுர வழக்கின் வரலாறு
கன்னியாகுமரி மாவட்டத்தில் நடந்த கிறிஸ்தவ ஆக்கிரமிப்புகளின் வரலாற்றைப் பார்த்தோம். இப்போது வடக்கு பகவதிபுர பிரச்சனையில் ஆரம்பித்திலிருந்து நடந்தவற்றை வரிசைக் கிரமத்தில் பார்த்தால், கிறிஸ்தவர்களின் பணபலமும், அரசியல் பலமும் நமக்கு நன்கு விளங்கும்.

1988 – வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் கிராமத்தில் பிள்ளையார் கோவிலுக்கும் முத்தாரம்மன் கோவிலுக்கும் அருகே 13 செண்ட் நிலத்தை சி.எஸ்.ஐ. டையோஸீஸ் (C.S.I. Diocese) வாங்கியது.

05.01.1989 – அந்த 13 செண்ட் நிலத்தில் சர்ச்சு கட்ட வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் பஞ்சாயத்து அனுமதி அளித்தது. உடனடியாக ஹிந்துக்கள் ஆட்சேபம் தெரிவித்தனர். சர்ச்சு கட்டுவதை நிறுத்துமாறு பஞ்சாயத்தாரிடம் கோரிக்கை வைத்தனர்.

27.04.1989 – சர்ச்சு கட்டுவதை நிறுத்தச் சொல்லி பஞ்சாயத்து ஆணையிட்டது.

6.05.1989 – ஹிந்துக்கள் சர்ச்சு கட்டப்படுவதைத் தடுத்து நிறுத்துமாறு மாவட்ட ஆட்சியரிடம் மனு அளித்தனர்.

15.05.1989 – பஞ்சாயத்து மீண்டும் சர்ச்சு கட்ட அனுமதி அளித்தது.

இடையே ஹிந்துக்கள் தரப்பினர் கீழ் கோர்ட்டில் வழக்கு பதிவு செய்தனர். நகர்கோவில் முன்ஸீஃப் கோர்ட்டில் நடத்தப்பட்ட பஞ்சாயத்து சட்டவிதி வழக்கின் (case No OS 543/1989) தீர்ப்பை சுட்டிக்காட்டி, ஒரு மதம் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட கட்டிடத்தைக் கட்ட பஞ்சாயத்து அனுமதி மட்டும் போதாது, மாவட்ட ஆட்சிமன்றத்தின் அனுமதியும் வேண்டும் என்று தங்கள் மனுவில் குறிப்பிட்டிருந்தனர் ஹிந்துக்கள்.

19.10.1989 – பிரச்சனைக்குரிய இடத்திற்கு அருகிலேயே மேலும் 2 செண்ட் நிலத்தை வாங்கிய சி.எஸ்.ஐ. சர்ச்சின் பிஷப், சர்ச்சைத் தொடர்ந்து கட்டுகிறார். நீதிமன்றத்தில் நிலுவையில் இருக்கும் வழக்கில் அந்த பிஷப்பையும் குற்றம் சாட்டப்பட்டவராகச் சேர்த்துவிடுகின்றனர் ஹிந்து தரப்பினர்.

17.02.1990 – ஹிந்துக்கள் மாவட்ட ஆட்சியரிடம் மேலும் ஒரு புகார் மனுவை அளித்தனர்

மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் அனுமதியின்றி சர்ச்சு கட்டப்படுவதாக மற்றொரு வழக்கு (Case No OS 561/91) நாகர்கோவில் முன்ஸீஃப் கோர்ட்டில் பதிவு செய்யப்படுகிறது.

1991 – ஹிந்துக்களின் கார்த்திகை மாத பஜனை ஊர்வலத்தில் கிறிஸ்தவர்கள் கற்களை வீசி ஊர்வலத்தைக் கலைக்க முயன்றனர்.

1994 – அந்தக் கிராமத்தில் இருக்கும் பொன்னையா என்கிற அரசு ஊழியரை, அவர் ஹிந்துக்களுக்கு ஆதரவு தெரிவித்தார் என்பதற்காக, சதீஷ் குமார், குருபாதம் என்கிற இரண்டு கிறிஸ்தவர்கள் கடுமையாக தாக்கினர். பின்னர் அவர்கள் இருவரும் நீதிமன்றத்தினால் தண்டிக்கப்பட்டனர்.

20.03.1998 – நீதிமன்றம், சர்ச்சு சட்டவிரோதமாகக் கட்டப்பட்டது என்று கூறி அதை நீக்குமாறு ஆணையிட்டது.

1999 – சர்ச்சுக்கு எந்தவிதமான எதிர்ப்பும் இல்லை என்று ஆர்.டி.ஓ (R.D.O) சான்று பகர்ந்து பரிந்துரை செய்கிறார். ஹிந்துக்கள் அந்த பரிந்துரைக்கு கடுமையாக ஆட்சேபமும் எதிர்ப்பும் தெரிவிக்கின்றனர்.

11.10.1999 – ஒரு அமைதிக் கூட்டத்தை ஏற்பாடு செய்த ஆர்.டி.ஓ, சர்ச்சு கட்டுவதை எதிர்க்கக்கூடாது என்றும் அப்படி மீறி எதிர்த்தால் ஹிந்துக்கள் மீது பொய் வழக்கு போட்டுவிடுவேன் என்றும் மிரட்டினார். மிரட்டலுக்கு பயப்படாமல் ஹிந்துக்கள் மேலும் தங்கள் எதிர்ப்பை காட்டினர்.

11.04.2000 – ஆர்.டி.ஓ மிண்டும் ஒரு அமைதிப் பேச்சுவார்த்தைக்கு அழைத்தார். ஆர்.டி.ஓ. பாரபட்சமாக நடந்துகொள்வதால் அபடி ஒரு பேச்சுவார்த்தைக் கூட்டம் தேவையில்லை என்றும், நீதிமன்றமும் சர்ச்சு சட்ட விரோதமாகக் கட்டப்பட்டது என்று கூறிவிட்டதாலும், ஹிந்துக்கள் அவர் அழைப்பை மறுத்துவிடுகின்றனர்.

16.05.2000 – ஆர்.டி.ஓ மீண்டும் பேச்சு வார்த்தைக்கு அழைக்கின்றார். ஹிந்துக்கள் மீண்டும் மறுத்துவிடுகின்றனர்.

02.06.2000 – சர்ச்சுக்கு எதிர்ப்பு இல்லை என்றும், சட்ட ஒழுங்கு பிரச்சனை வர வாய்ப்பில்லை என்றும் கூறி, நீதிமன்ற ஆணையை மீறி, சர்ச்சு கட்ட அனுமதி வழங்குகிறார் மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் ரமேஷ் சந்திர மீனா. மேலும் 1982-ல் அங்கே ஏற்கனவே ஒரு சர்ச்சு இருந்ததாகவும், அந்த விவரத்தை நீதிமன்றம் நிராகரித்துவிட்டதாகவும் ஒரு பொய்யை கூறுகிறார் மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் ரமேஷ் சந்திர மீனா.

09.06.2000 – மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் அளித்த ஆணையின் நகலை பஞ்சாயத்தாரிடம் ஹிந்து தரப்பினர் கேட்ட போது, பஞ்சாயத்து தர மறுத்துவிட்டது.

17.06.2000 – சர்ச்சு கட்ட அளித்த அனுமதி ஆணையை ரத்து செய்யுமாறு மாவட்ட ஆட்சியருக்கு ஹிந்து தரப்பினர் நோட்டீஸ் அனுப்புகின்றனர். ஆனால் அதற்கு மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் பதில் தரவில்லை.

2002 – நாகர்கோவில் முன்ஸீஃப் கோர்ட்டில் ஹிந்து தரப்பினர், மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் அனுமதியை ரத்துசெய்து சர்ச்சை நீக்கவேண்டும் என்று, தமிழக அரசு, மாவட்ட ஆட்சியர் ரமேஷ் சந்திர மீனா (நேரில் வரச்சொல்லி), பஞ்சாயத்து, சி.எஸ்.ஐ. பிஷப் ஆகியோருக்கு எதிராக வழக்கு (OS 212/ 2002) தொடர்கின்றனர்.

2011 – நீண்ட நாட்கள் இழுத்தடிக்கப்பட்டு, நீதிக்கும் நியாயத்திற்கும் எதிராக எந்தவிதமான தர்க்க நியாயமும் இல்லாமல், வழக்கு தள்ளுபடி செய்யப்படுகின்றது. வழக்கை தள்ளுபடி செய்த நீதிபதி முருகையா முன்னாள் சபாநாயகர் ஆவுடையப்பனிடம் ஜூனியராக இருந்தவர் என்பது குறிப்பிடத் தக்கது.

ஹிந்து தரப்பினர் நாகர்கோவில் சப்கோர்ட்டில் மேல்முறையீடு செய்தனர்.

17.06.2013 – 1982-ல் ஏற்கனவே ஒரு சர்ச்சு இருந்தது என்ற கிறிஸ்தவர் தரப்பின் உரிமை கோரிக்கையை நிராகரித்த சப் கோர்ட், கட்டப்பட்ட சர்ச்சு சட்டத்திற்கு விரோதமானது என்றும் அதை அப்புறப்படுத்த வேண்டும் என்றும் தீர்ப்பு வழங்கியது.

கிறிஸ்தவத் தரப்பினர் உயர் நீதிமன்றத்திற்குக் கண்டிப்பாக மேல் முறையீடு செய்வர். அங்கு தோற்றாலும் உச்ச நீதிமன்றத்திற்கும் செல்வர். அவர்களிடம் அதற்கான அனைத்து வசதிகளும் உண்டு. ஆனால் வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் கிராம மக்களுக்கு வெளியுதவி கண்டிப்பாகத் தேவை. திறமையான வழக்கறிஞர்களின் உதவியும் தேவை. நிதியுதவியும் தேவை. தமிழகத்தில் உள்ள ஹிந்து இயக்கத்தினர் இந்தக் கிராம மக்களுக்கு உதவக் கடமை பட்டுள்ளனர். தமிழகத்தில் எந்த மூலையில் ஹிந்துக்களுக்குப் பிரச்சனை வந்தாலும், அவர்களுக்கு ஆதரவாக்க் குரல் கொடுக்கவும், உதவி செய்யவும் சகோதர ஹிந்துக்களும் ஹிந்து இயக்கங்களும் இருக்கிறார்கள் என்று தெரிந்தாலே அன்னிய சக்திகள் தங்கள் வாலைச் சுருட்டிக் கொண்டு இருக்கும்.

ஒன்றுபட்டால் உண்டு வாழ்வு
ஹிந்துக்கள் தரப்பில் முன்னின்று வழக்கு தொடுத்தவர்கள், திரு.தங்கப்பன் நாடார், முத்தாரம்மன் கோவிலின் தலைவர் திரு.எஸ்.தங்கராஜ், திரு.எஸ்.செந்தில்வேல் மற்றும் திரு.ஜேக்கப் பாக்கியராஜ் ஆகியோர்.

இவர்களுக்கு வழிகாட்டியாகவும் வழக்குரைஞராகவும் 25 ஆண்டுகள் தொடர்ந்து பணியாற்றியவர் திரு.ஆர்.பாலகிருஷ்ணன். இவர் ஏற்கனவே கன்யாகுமரி மாவட்டத்தில் வழுதலம்பள்ளம் என்னும் ஊரில் இதே போல் சட்டவிரோதமாகக் கட்டப்பட்ட சர்ச்சை எதிர்த்த அந்த ஊர்மக்களின் சார்பாக, உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் வரை சென்று அதை இடிக்க வெற்றிகரமாக ஆணை வாங்கியவர். இவர் வேத விஞ்ஞான ஆராய்ச்சி மையத்தின் நிறுவனர்-இயக்குனர் திரு.பால கௌதமனின் தந்தையார் என்பது குறிப்பிடத் தக்கது.

இந்த நெடிய போராட்டத்தில் வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் ஹிந்துக்களுக்கு கடைசி வரை ஆதரவாகத் தோளோடு தோள் நின்று போராட உதவியவர்கள் பாஜக தலைவர் திரு.பொன் ராதாகிருஷ்ணன் அவர்களும் ஹிந்து முன்ன்ணிஇயக்கத்தினரும்.

இவர்கள் அனைவரும் நிரூபித்த ஒரே விஷயம் “ஒன்றுபட்டால் உண்டு வாழ்வு” என்பதாகும். ஹிந்துக்கள் ஒற்றுமையுடன் செயல்படும் ஒரு இடத்தில், அன்னிய சக்திகள் எவ்வளவு அரசியல் பலமும் பணபலமும் கொண்டிருந்தாலும், தோற்றுத்தான் போகும் என்று செயலில் காட்டிவிட்டனர்.

தமிழகத்தின் மற்ற பகுதிகளில் வாழும் ஹிந்துக்கள் வடக்கு பகவதிபுரம் கிராம மக்களிடமிருந்து இந்த எளிய பாடத்தைக் கற்று உணர வேண்டும். தங்களுக்குள் ஜாதி வேற்றுமைகளைக் களைந்து, அனைவரும் ஹிந்துக்கள், நம்மிடையே ஏற்ற தாழ்வுகள் எதுவும் இல்லை என்பதை உணர்ந்து, ஒற்றுமையை நிலைநாட்டினால், அன்னிய சக்திகளும் அவர்களுக்கு துணைபோகும் அரசியல் கட்சியினரும் செயலிழந்து தோற்று ஓடுவார்கள் என்பது நிச்சயம்.

கூடி வாழ்ந்தால் கோடி நன்மை!


Aggressive baptising destroying social harmony – L Victoria Gowri , Advocate