Every country’s primary education revolves around its history, languages, philosophies, art, culture and sciences. Ancient greece is characterised by greek philosophies and sciences, egypt with pyramids and the science behind it etc. It is only natural for any school of a country to be teaching the ancient language of that country along with the philosophies. Would it sound logical to a rational mind if, in his own family, someone else’s lineage and history is given more importance and taught to him than his own? Would it be hypocritical if his own history is given much more importance to him than someone else’s?
Similar is the case with India. Today, if one vouches for the promotion of Indian culture, sciences or dharma (righteousness, ethics and duty) as expounded by Veda, Gita and Upanishads, sanskrit language etc, as one of the primary subjects in schools, he would be quickly termed as “right-winged”, “communal”, “anti-secular”, “saffron minded”, “fascist” etc. When the intellectuals opine for the promotion of Indian sciences e.g Yoga, nyaya, Vaisheshika school of thoughts which are all based on Veda, the so called self-certified secularists describe it as a move to destroy the minorities. The muslim clerics would react angrily by asking for equal rights and to make the study of Quran mandatory in case the studies of Veda and Upanishads are made mandatory. The entire Quran depicts the life of Mohammed, how he fought and lived in ancient Arab. Would it be logical if the histories of all the nations in the world are made mandatory in the primary curriculum of Indian schools? Can the same clerics promote the mandatory study of Mahabharat and Ramayan in Arabian nations ruled by Sharia Law?
David Frawley writes, “When native Americans ask for a return of their sacred sites, the left in America supports them. When Hindus ask for a similar return of their sacred sites, the left in India opposes them and brands them as intolerant for their actions! When native peoples in America or Africa protest missionaries for interfering with their culture, they are supported by the left. Yet when Hindus express the same sentiments, they are attacked by the left. Even the Hindu demand for rewriting the history of India to better express the value of their indigenous traditions is the same as what native Africans and Americans are asking for. Yet the left opposes this Hindu effort, while supporting African and American efforts of a similar nature.”
While on one hand, the pseudo-secularists shout against the Indian philosophies with demeaning terms behind the smokescreen called ‘secularism’, on the other hand, they are totally apathetic to the animal killings (bakr-id) and reservation/quota happening in the name of religion. While many schools in Kashmir teach Quran without any mention of ancient Indian history including Ramanayan and Manahabharat, many missionary and christian schools, particularly in South India, only teach Bible. This goes without any mention in the media, let alone any opposition of it, or the ‘unbiased and secular scrutiny’ of the pseudo-secularists. One may ask what is the meaning of 50% reservation for muslims in institutions like Jamia Milia Islamia and Aligarh Muslim university in a “secular” country? Why is Bible, which denotes non-Indian content, being taught in south Indian schools without any parallel teaching of the Indian history and sciences? Does secularism in India mean to decry the existing culture, abuse it, give special preferences like reservation on the basis of religion and impose an intolerant alien tradition on the top of the rich Indian culture?
Surprisingly, the promotion and study of Veda, Upanishads and Gita which is considered as highly scientific by many renowned scientists of the world is tagged as ‘outdated’, ‘right-winged’,’anti-secular’ etc by these pseudo-secularists, leftists and various politicians involved in ‘minority or muslim’ appeasement.
India is seen as a land rich in culture, history, sciences etc. Any other nation in the world is proud of her history and culture and ensures promotion of it, while there is a discomfort amongst the Indians to similarly promote and be proud of their own heritage.
One can find the NCERT history books openly glorifying the invading mughals without any mention of the number of beautiful temples and statues they destroyed or the Indians they killed. The Indian temples and idols represents the deep creativity and imaginations of the ancient artists which cannot be found in the modern times. But these academic books, usually written by leftists, can be found expounding on mughal creations rather than the Indian treasure and the attention which it deserves both in terms of quality and quantity.
Moreover, there have been active attempts by the unscrupulous and biased missionaries and mercenaries to actively eliminate the education of sanskrit language from the schools. Sanskrit is not only the most scientific language as testified even by the modern scientists, but also a holistic framework to understand the creative and rational flow of the Vedic science, which philosophises in a metaphorical and cryptic way. The language not only makes one feel the essence of the vedic incantations but also makes the words alive and much more meaningful whose essence is lost often when translated into English. Just like one needs to understand hindi proverbs to understand their flow, tone and meaning, similarly one cannot completely understand the essence of the scriptures without even having basic understanding of sanskrit language.
Overall, this brainwashing and the consequent damage to the ancient civilization happens very slowly and systematically. It involves
– Deliberately mistranslating the Indian scriptures and then pointing to the mistranslations and render and inferiority complex amongst the Indians about their own heritage.
– Calling anybody who points out the correct translations and promotes the true Indian heritage as ‘ignorant’,’illiterate’,’right-winged’, ‘saffron-minded’
– Terming anyone who opines for inclusion of Indian scriptures in mandatory studies in schools as ‘anti-secular’, ‘fascist’ and ‘anti-minority’
– While at the same time, calling the ones who promotes Quran and Bible as ‘secular’ and ‘liberal’
– Using the Indian media and rewrite the history by glorifying the oppressors and the invaders
– Glorifying the symbologies related to the western religions while at the same time demean the Indian sciences and philosophies calling it gibberish, uncivilised and barbaric.
Such slow poisoning not only distorts the truth about the Indian culture but also conditions the Indians with a feeling of inferiority complex and lack of pride for their own heritage. They start perceiving the philosophies of the west as superior and their own Indian ones as ignorant and outdated. They take for granted that any concept established by a foreign author is better than the Indian ones. Today, on the social networking sites, if one quotes authors like Paulo Coehlo, Shakespeare etc, then people assume he is modern and well read. But, if he quotes Veda and Upanishads, many think that he is ‘religious’ and ‘unscientific’. Can science be called religious? Does Vedic cannon differentiate between hindus and non-hindus, “us and them”? Does it denounce questioning? Does it ask people to convert others to a ‘religion’? Calling Vedic science and Upanishads as a part of a religion is like calling homeopathy, accupuncture, principles related to modern science also as a part of some religion. Do these scriptures preach to kill the people based on religions? The only difference remains that ancient sciences of the Chinese have not been tagged yet under some umbrella term denoting a religion, whereas the Indian sciences have not only been tagged but the Indians themselves have been divided with many ‘isms’ like Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism. Fortunately, intellectuals like Swami Dayanand Saraswati, RamaKrishna, Aurobindo, Vivekananda etc were saved of having a religion in their name, the tags which would have further divided the Indian society and recursively, by the dirty politics subsequently.
O you who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends of each other. And whoever amongst you takes them for friends he is indeed one of them. Surely Allåh guides not the unjust people. (Quran 5.51)
“The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger [i.e., Muhammad], and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter. ( Quran 5.33)”
Fight those who believe not in Allåh, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which Allåh and His Messenger have forbidden, nor follow the Religion of Truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgement of superiority and they are in a state of s subjection (9.29)
The Indian law gives death penalty in the rarest of the rare cases. In Indian scriptures, the divine from which everything else has manifested animate or inanimate is called by various names and so are the manifestations. Sun is called as Surya, Ravi, Bhaskar, Aditya etc. Lord Krishna, who is known as an avatar, is called by various names like Kanha, Jagannath, Hari, Gopal, Jagmoham, Shyam, Govind etc. Can the western religions call Jesus or Allah by any other name?
“La Iaha Ill Allah Muhammudur Rasool Aallah”, God according to Islam is Allah and there is no other name except Allah.
Thus, we get a borrowed conception which pronounces “attachment” to a name, let alone questioning the name or the ‘book’ that gave that name.
The Indian society has always been pluralistic where the supreme truth (BG 9.22-32, 7.21-25, Mandoukya Upanishad verse 7) is nameless, featureless and yet called by various names and revered by various arts e.g paintings, idols where every aspect of that painting or idol symbolises a concept or that ultimate truth.
Copyright and Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this blog/article are the author's own and not of this website. The author is solely responsible for the contents of this blog/article. This website does not represent or endorse the accuracy, completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal, advice, quotes from other reference materials or any other information in the blog/article. The same disclaimer applies to all the comments on this blog/article. Our visitors are free to forward this page URL (web address) to others in emails or put the links on individual facebook, twitter webpages strictly for non-commercial use. But the entire article should not be published/republished on other sites without the prior permission from us.