Native RULE Movement​

Caste , Varn , Panth based parties can fight for power and chair but can not fight for Nation against Videshi Brahmins

We have many Caste , Varn Panth centered political parties . BJP , Congress are no exception . In fact they are Brahminwadi and Pandtwadi parties centered for Videshi Brahmins . Brahmin is a Caste , Varn and Panth also and the Videshi Brahmin population is about 3 per cent now of Hindustan . They are a separate people having separate Brahmin Religion which accepts only supremacy of Brahmins and their for they have devised Varn system to place other than Brahmins in lower Varn than Brahmins . These lower Varn people are Native people , they are called Kshtriya , Vaishya , Shudra etc .

Videshi Brahmins knew reality of power politics . Their main aim is power and not Nation as they are not Native . Knowing this reality  they call their religion Brahmin Religion as Vedic, Sanatan with strong empathizes on Varn System and Hindu to take benefit of Hindu majority . They never call their Brahmin Dharm as Brahmin Dharm and political party as Brahmin political party . The used some time the words like  Arya , Ram Rajya, Hindu Mahasangh but finally they understood that they can not fool Hindu for long and changed their Party name as BJP and Congress .

These both parties are Brahmin centered yet they say they are for  Hindus , Secular etc but never call themselves caste based party like other Non Brahmin people call to their parties and make it caste centered . Mulayam 's SP , Mayavati's BSP , Lalu's RJD , Nitish - Sharad Yadva;s JDU , Sharad Pawar's NCP , RPI of Ambedkar , Athwale , Kawade etc etc and Shiv Rajya of Khedekar ,OBC -NT party of Kokare , Muslim parties of Ovaasi and others and Meshram's BMM and Mane's new party all such parties are caste centered , group of caste centered and there for they have limited task of winning polls , coming in power , shake hand and join hands with Brahminwadi forces for retaining power and allow more harm to native people under such salutation are constantly happening in this country during last 65 years . All are Naked in Political Hamam ready for political prostitution and sell out .

Is not Modi doing more harm to Native people interest than Brahmin themselves ? Are not Athwale , Paswan , Manzi sold out have not BSP , Nitish shared bed with Brahminwadis ? How such caste centered political parties can fight against Videshi Brahmins for Nation and Castless , Varnless society ?

There is only one party in India that can fight Videshi Brahmins to finish and that is Native People's Party . These is only one Movement that can lead whole nation and all Native people towards total change and that is Native Rule Movement . There is only one think tank of Native people which thinks purely for Native people and driving out Videshi Brahmins and that is Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch . There is only one Native Daulatrao Domaji Raut who says Videshi Brahmins Quit India , Hindu Vohi ,Jo Brahmin Nahi , Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo and that Videshi Brahmins are Terrorist and Brahmin Dharm is separate from Hindu Dharm . Yet he never claims he can only the movement , lead the party , think for native people and speak Satya Hindu Dharm , he says all 97 Non Brahmin Native people are one and have no caste , no varn , no panth , any Native can take his position even today and he can give his life to nation like Gandhiji any time and his whole life Dr Ambedkar for his Native people .

Nv. D.D.Raut, President ,
Native People's Party​

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo      

Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch :

Dead Lock of Caste and Varn :

Yes it is a Dead Lock of Varn and Caste system Videshi Brahmins put on Hindu society making them slaves for thousands of years .

Many people Saints , Dharmatmas , Mahatmas , Great Leaders and Thinkers spent their lives to solve this dead lock , unlock the Hindu society and clean the other religious societies which came in contact with infected Hindu society of this deadly rotten system . All efforts went without any final satisfaction and permanent solution to this problems .

Buddhism , Jainism , Silkism got them selves spoiled with Varnwadi , Jaatiwadi Brahmins soon they entered in these faiths which in fact arouse in protest and against Varn and Caste System .

Saints and some reformist advised inter caste varn marriages and meals , Some suggested opening of temples and other common used places like ponds etc to most affected people who are called Untouchables . Videshi Brahmins puried those places with Ganga water and Gomutra telling Hindus that even excreta of Cow an animal is holier than Hindus like Dalits , Shudras .

Acts and Laws have some limitations so far religion ills are concerned and nothing like divided Hindu Code bill in various acts and laws and even constitution aim and preamble , directives could not end Varn and Caste system from Hindus as all these efforts are for heart change of notorious Videshi Brahmins who are the originators of this ugly and barbarians system .

Native Rule Movement has come to conclusion that the key of this dead lock is only one and that is declaring Videshi Brahmin as Non Hindus as in fact Videshi Brahmin Dharm is separate from Native Hindu Dharm . By making this Brahmins are no more law providers to Hindus as they are alien and Videshis and of different religion which is not Hindu Dharm .

Nativist D.D.Raut , Vichark , Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch and President , Native People's Party and Pracharak of Satya Hindu Dharm Sabha has been putting up his this opinion for long . So far this was never told by any body in the past as many of the thinkers were reformist or running away from Hindu society by forming some small sect and religion .

We will not run away from our duty and responsibility to liberate our Native Nation and Native Hindu Dharm which is infected by Videshi Brahmin by wrong claim that they are Hindus too . We deny their claim right now , Brahmins are neither Hindus nor Hindustani .

We will dispatch Videshi Brahmins Lock , Stock , Barrel . This is the Dead Lock Key we call it Native Rule Movement .

My Dear Hindus and Native Citizens what you think ? Will you give us best wishes or not ? We are sure you will be with us as you will be with yourself !

Nv. Daulatrao Domaji Raut​
Vicharak , MBVM

Our Message to Nation :Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo

 

Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch :

Only half mads criticize Hindus without knowing that Brahmin Dharm is separate from Hindu Dharm .

We see many half mads criticizing Hindus without knowing that Hindu Dharm is separate from Brahmin Dharm . They have no courage to accept this and say this . They confuse Brahmin Dharm with Hindu Dharm.

Brahmins are not Hindus . They are not Hindustani . How their religion can be Hindu Religion ? Even every Brahmin says he follows Vedic Arya - Brahmin Dharm of Varn and Bhedbhav ,

Has any  Native Hindu Saint told us accept this Varn system ? Accept this Bhedbhav system ? No . On the contrary they have told us right from Shiv - Ram - Krishna ,  Mahaveer , Buddha , Kabir , Ravidas , Nanak , Namdev , Tukaram to Gadgebaba and Tukadoji Maharaj that the Brahmin Dharm is not Hindu Dharm ,

Then what is Native Hindu Dharm ? It was being followed since Sindhu Civilization period . There was no Varn and Caste system , Bhedbhav, Uchnich . Sindhu Civilization inscriptions show us our great lord and Guru surrounded Men- Women , Birds , Snakes and Animals like elephant , bull , and other animals but notrace of Vedic Brahmin Horse whose sacrifice they were giving in their Hom - Havan to which they called Ashwamedh  . Hindus do not have such systems no alcoholic drink like Somras drunken by Videshi Brahmins and sleeping of their wives with dead horse and pujaris . Hindu Dharm criticize all such inhuman rituals . Then how , Hindus can be called followers of Vedic Brahmin Dharm ?

Hindu Dharm was destroyed  by Brahmins while doing destruction , fire and killing when they forcefully entered our peaceful holy land Hindustan .They declared themselves as superior to Native Hindus like Hitler and named our solders , rulers as Kshatriya , our native traders as Vaishya and farmers , common men , labors , craftsmen as Shudras and those who resisted this system as Out Castes , Asprushya and Adiwashi ,Bhut , Rakshas etc to degrade them they put severe ban on then even on their entry in cities .

But Hindu Religion can never be wiped out from the mind of native people and their day to day social life . Majority Hindus never accepted Brahmins as their leaders and superiors and continued to live life with out calling Brahmin in any function and did their own religious function on their own following old Hindu system which Brahmins call as Puranic Rituals and not Vedic Rituals . Even they performed same Puranic Rituals at the time of bath of Rajarshi Shahu Maharaj . Shahu felt bad and insulted as on one hand these Brahmins were calling him part of Vedic Brahmin Dharm on the other hand trated him separate from Brahmin Dharm and as Native Hindu inferior to Brahmin .

Hindu Dharm is revealed by many Native Hindu Non Brahmins right from Shiv , Ram , Krishna , Mahaveer , Buddha , Nanak and Dharmatma codified the Satya Hindu Dharm in his holy Vaani called as Bijak . Now this is the only Code Book of Satya Hindu Dharm.

In some of the earlier Hindu Dharm revelers , Brahmins tried to mix Varn and Jaati system . Geeta is one of that example . Therefore only Bijak is now Hindu Dharm Code Book.

What Bijak says . Naari means Desire . Ram means which is Not Dead means Chetana which never ends and Karm which gives bad and good results doing that . Our Hindu Dharm is very simple , very easy to follow and understand , Even a chanting one stanza from  Bijak is sufficient for any occasion like birth ceremony , naming , wedding , daily pooja which can be performed by oneself without Videshi Brahmin Pandit - Pujari and only that pooja performed by self , sumiran by self can give you results and action or pooja on behalf by you done by Brahmin can give .

Let us follow our own Hindu Dharm and regain self respect , pride and peace once again to Hindu society and Hindustan .

Nv. Daulatrao Domaji Raut​

Vicharak , MBVM

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo    

Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch :

Videshi Brahmins claimed they are Aryan , Native people claim we are Hindus separate from Brahmin Arya .

Almost all Brahmins claim that they are Brahmin Aryan . Dayanand , Tilak , Sawarkar , Golwalkar and innumerable many Brahmins proudly said they are Videshi Aryan Brahmins . Many have written books in support of their Aryan origin and superiority over other Non Brahmin people .

Mahatma Phule and his followers like Jedhe - Jawalkar , Gandhi , Shahu , Ambedkar claimed Native people are Hindus and separate from Videshi Arya Brahmins . Phule very clearly states all Non Brahmins including Kshatriya, Vaishya are Native Hindus and separate from Videshi Brahmins . So also Phule said Native People's religion is Hindu Dharm based on Satya or in other words Satya Hindu Dharm which have no Varn and Caste system of Videshi Brahmin Dharm

Mahatma Phule's thinking is briefed as follows :

Phule used the Aryan theory to his own advantage: the fact that upper castes leaders
traced their origin from Aryan conquerors could be used to argue that they descended from
foreigners and that their culture, including the caste system was alien to India’s original
people. Phule, therefore, portrayed the Aryans as invaders who had settled in India at a rather
late period to subjugate the first inhabitants of India and destroyed their civilisation. For him,
the low castes were the descendants of these people. In this reinterpretation of the past, the
invaders are identified as Brahmins whereas the indigenous groups are described as
descending from the original ruling class, the Kshatriyas. In Phule’s ideology, this category
does not refer to the second varna but to includes ‘all original Indians, from Kunbi-Marathas
through Mahars’
42
. The king of these original Kshatriyas, Bali, was described by Phule as
reigning over a rich and prosperous country made of "milk and honey"

We Native Rule Movement , Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch , Satya Hindu Dharm Sabha and Native People's Party follow Dharmatma Kabir and Mahatma Phule and proudly say that we are Native people . Our Hindu Dharm is separate from Videshi Brahmin Dharm .

Jedhe - Jawalkar who were Gandhiji's close associates in Maharashtra insisted for Non Brahmin Movement with the blessing from Gandhiji .

Nv. D.D.Raut ,
Vicharak , MBVM

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo

Native People's Party :

When ever Native Hindus demand some benefits as Hindu caste why Videshi Brahmins get desperate and angry ?

Hindus namely Kshtriyas , Vaishyas , Patels , Maraathas , Nairs , Jaats , Dhangar etc when they ask some benefits as Hindus why Brahmins are getting unhappy and angry is not know .

It may be because Brahmins are not Hindus and Hindusthani .

Videshi Brahmins are basically following Vedic Brahmin Dharm which they have codified in Sanskrit language . This language speaking people strength is 1400 people now . They were recorded about 45000 but dwindled to 1400 now . It means real Videshi Brahmins are about 1 crore and even they do not speak this language regularly except during Brahmin rituals and ceremony . Brahmins have shifted their language now to other languages and do not bother for Sanskrit any more at the same time they want to spend thousands of crores rupees from government funds which are public money of Hindus for fancy of Brahmin language Sanskrit . Hindus keep quite on this wasteful expenditure but when Hindus ask some benefits as Hindus like reservation Videshi Brahmins get angry and unhappy .

The Supreme Court has given verdict that reservation can not be more than 51 per cent but they are not telling how small section  3 per cent Videshi Brahmins can have benefit of 49 per cent open category ? It means the verdict of SC is faulty . Why Majority Native people , Hindus should accept that ?

Study of Native Hindus and Videshi Brahmins were carried out many times . It can be noted from Hutton study that Videshi Brahmins and Native were separated and effect of Sanskritinization was also studied . It reveals that Videshi Brahmins are basically very small population who speak Sankrit and that position remain still as it is as Non Brahmins do not speak Sanskrit and bother for that . In fact Sankrit is not oriental language but admixture of languages formed very very late and lost quickly importance as it was never accepted by Native Hindus as their language .

Hutton, the Census Commissioner for the 1931 Census, enlisted the services of Dr. B.
S. Guha, who subsequently took over as the first Director of the Anthropological Survey
of India. The latter carried out a survey in the entire sub-continent on the basis of
anthropometric and somatoscopic observations. Guha measured in all 3,771 persons
belonging to 51 racial strains and took measurements on 18 different characteristics,
besides recording a number of somatoscopic observations on skin, eye and hair colours
for isolating the racial types. The survey covered the aboriginal population as well as
the so-called lowest castes to throw light on (a) the racial types present among the
tribals and the lower classes of Indian population and (b) the extent to which inter-
mixture might have occurred between (I) the Brahmin and upper stratum of the rest of
the population and (ii) between the latter and the aboriginal population.

Brahmins are a dying community now have lost fertility and suffering from numerous diseases like diabetics , heart attacks due to obesity obtained due to Fokat eating etc habits .Even the 3 per cent Videshi Brahmins are not pure and one but they follow Varn and Caste system within Brahmin themselves . It is understood that Mishra , Vajpai etc are looked down upon as lower Brahmins and GSB , Bhumihar as non Brahmins and Parshuram followers as second rated Brahmins as his mother was Non Brahmin .

But when it comes to opposing even these upper - lower Brahmins come together for opposing Hindu Non Brahmins . Why it is so ?

Nv. D.D.Raut , President , NPP

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo 

literature and myth

Was the Ramayana actually set in and around today’s Afghanistan?

An examination of a book by physicist Rajesh Kochhar debunks the notion that the events of the epic took place in modern-day India.

Dhiman Dasgupta  · Apr 26, 2015 · 08:45 am

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

296.6K

Total Views

History is said to be the original discipline in the faculties today known as humanities. This is owing to the fact that every discipline in knowledge discourse has a history – even abstract disciplines like mathematics or astronomy – and every piece of history has a geophysical contextuality.

Ever since Herodotus (484 BC - 425 BC, Greek-occupied Turkey) started the discipline, he recorded events during the reign of four Persian kings and chronicled life and society in their times. These were times of conflict between Greece and Persia and had a geographical contextuality.

Herodotus also speaks of “India”, where he saw the Himalayan marmot bathing in gold dust. Much later, deconstructing his text led to the conclusion that the great father of historical praxis must have passed through the North West Frontier province and reached the base of Hindu Kush.

This posed a question, which Herodotus did not ask himself: if he had indeed travelled to “India”, which “India” was this? For that matter, if he was “Greek”, which “Greece” did he live in? Similarly. if Ram of the epic poem Ramayana was an “Indian”, where was this “India” situated?

The so-called Ram Setu

A ship that wishes to sail from the Arabian Sea to the Bay of Bengal has to pass through the Indian Ocean to the south of Sri Lanka. The voyage would have been 30 hours shorter if it could have travelled along the Gulf Of Mannar, which separates India and Sri Lanka, but this isn’t possible. For there are thousands of small submerged rocks beneath its surface, stretching like a bridge across 47 km between the two countries. As a result, the sea is between one and 30 metre deep here, which isn’t favourable for sailing.

The British government of colonised India as well the government of independent India had often planned to dredge the channel to make it suitable for sailing; but the plans have remained elusive for various reasons. At present, for instance, Hindutva followers believe that this is the bridge built by an army of monkeys, as described in the Ramayana, which Ram and Lakshaman crossed to conquer Sri Lanka.

Their demand is that, far from dredging, let the Archaeological Survey of India declare this bridge a national monument. Not that the colonisers were any less fundamentalist. In 1804 a certain British cartographer named the structure Adam’s Bridge – according to him this was the bridge described in the Bible which Adam crossed to scale a mountain peak, where he meditated for 1,000 years while standing on one leg.

Even before this, we have seen Marco Polo describe the structure as a bridge, as did Al-Biruni in the book he wrote in 1030 CE. In other words, it has long been held that this row of rocks beneath the surface of the water is a bridge.

Not exactly a bridge

According to geologists this structure is actually a limestone shoal, the outcome of natural processes. Between 300 and 30 million years ago, a portion of the Indian subcontinent is believed to have broken off because of continental drift to form the island of Sri Lanka. The debris that this fragment of land left behind at birth in the water as it drifted away led to the creation of this so-called bridge.

It may have jutted out of the water at some point in history, in which case it might have been used as a bridge. But there is considerable doubt whether the users belonged to the age of the Ramayana. This is because the inhabitants of Sri Lanka went directly from the Stone Age to the Iron Age; the use of copper was not very prevalent here. On the other hand, the Ramayana is a tale from an advanced Copper Age – an epic in verse from a period two or three thousand years before the Iron Age.

Where was Ramayana set?

Let us drop the preamble and get to the point now. If the Lanka mentioned in the Ramayana was not the Sri Lanka of today, where was it located? Where did Ram belong, for that matter? Wherever he may have lived, he was certainly not an inhabitant of what is the Ganges valley today, or of “Ramjanmabhoomi” Ayodhya. For, civilised man did not live in the forest-infested Ganges valley before the Iron Age, since there were no axes with which to clear the vegetation before iron was discovered. There were no swords either, which proves that the Ramayana, unlike the Mahabaharata, is not an epic of the Ganges valley. It makes no mention of swords – the bow and arrow are the primary weapons in it.

The primary objective of this essay is to point to the geographical location of the Ramayana. It is not the writer who has arrived at the answer, nor an Indologist like Max Mueller or even a historian or archaeologist. The person in question is Rajesh Kochhar, a physicist with an inclination for history, who has broken through the traditional techniques of history in his work The Vedic People – Their History and Geography.

How the Ramayana is different from the Mahabharata

The primary difficulty of discussing the ancient history of India lies in the necessity of first demolishing several well-established inaccuracies, such as the Aryan Invasion Theory, for instance. Spun by white men and broadcast by colonial historians, this old wives’ tale is still taught in schools and colleges, with half of any written work – measured in terms of paper, ink and effort - being expended on it. We shall not entertain it. We will only examine whatever can be determined through the social and geographical pointers available in the Ramayana.

There are two other fundamental differences between the Ramayana and the Mahabharata – in the rivers and in the divine pantheon. In the Mahabharata the Ganga and the Yamuna are almost ubiquitous, but they’re completely missing from the Ramayana. In the Mahabharata we see the powerful presence of the Hindu trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwar – but they’re absent from the Ramayana. We do not find these two rivers and these three gods together in the Rig Veda.

However, the rivers and gods that are to be found in the Rig Veda are also to be found in the Ramayana – the rivers Saraswati and Sarayu, and the original trinity of Agni, Varun and Pavan. From this it is easy to surmise that the Ramayana is a Rig Vedic epic. Which period was this? It would not be correct to estimate this using our current calendar: it would probably not be possible either. An approximation can be made from the sequence of events.

The somras clue

Vedic nomads travelled from the Eastern Europe to Bactria (present day Afghanistan). From here they went to Persia (today’s Iran). During their migration to Persia there was probably a battle for power amongst the gods, which led to the birth of the Avestan religion. As a result, Indra, the king of gods, became an inferior figure in the Avesta, while Yama, the god of death, turned into the finest of the gods. Worshipping Agni is a prominent practice within the Parsi community, but Hindus do not worship this ancient god. This indicates that the Rig Vedic age predated Persia. Kochhar has provided clues to whether this was the Afghan branch of the Vedic journey.

The first such clue that Kochhar alludes to is the Vedic drink somras. It was so important in ancient Vedic life that an entire mandala or chapter of the Rig Veda has been devoted to it. The importance of soma is evident in the Avestan Zend scripture – it is referred to as haoma in Persia. It is seen that the closer the Vedic nomads get to the Indian peninsula, the more they seek continuously new alternatives to the soma plant; that was how important somras was.

But the original soma plant was to be found only in what is modern day Afghanistan and Persia or Iran. In 1951 the German historian Karl Friedrich Geldner proved that the ephedra plant was what was described as soma in the Rig Veda. Ephedrin or somras is not alcohol – this intoxicant is an alkaloid. Kochhar’s investigations led to the discovery of four varieties of ephedra, found in Afghanistan, Iran, the northern Himalayas, and the Hindu Kush.

What we learn from summer solstice

There are 49 cosmic hymns in the Rig and the Yajur Vedas whose meanings have not been explained. But one particular hymn from Vedanga Jyotish informs us that the longest day of the year, or summer solstice, comprised 18 periods of daylight and 12 of night. Day and night are of equal length on the Equator; in the higher latitudes, summer days are longer than nights.

The latitude at which the proportion of daylight and darkness is 3:2 is 34 degrees North. It is worth noting that the cities to be found around this latitude today are Herat and Kabul in Afghanistan. In other words, the place and time of the composition of the Vedanga Jyotish is the same as that of Vedic Afghanistan and Iran. This second piece of evidence offered by Rajesh Kochhar further strengthens the perception of the location and time of the Rig Veda.

In search of the rivers

Kochhar has deconstructed the Rig Veda in search of the Saraswati and the Sarayu, the two rivers also mentioned in the Ramayana. Here too our current history has come in the way.

There is a tiny river named the Sarayu in Uttar Pradesh, which flows into the Ghaghara, which in turn merges with the Ganga. Many people consider the rainwater-fed Saraswati in the Aravallis, flowing along the Ghaggar (not to be confused with the Ghaghara) basin the mythical Saraswati. On viewing the scans of North-Western India made by the Russian Landsat satellite between 1972 and ’79, it is natural to assume that the Ghaggar was a wide river. It flows into the Rann of Kutch.

The scan reveals the basin of a dried up older river, which is up to 8 km broad in some places. It was this that led to the hasty conclusion of this basin’s belonging to the original Saraswati.

From Neil Roberts’s The Holocene it is clear that the basin of this river widened to the north of the Rann of Kutch because of the accelerated movement of a glacier during the previous Ice Age. But deconstructing the Rig Veda doesn’t suggest any of this. The Saraswati has been referred to as non-perennial towards the end of the Veda. The original stream of the Ghaggar enters India from present-day Pakistan, drying up in the Thar desert. Kochhar believes this is the non-perennial Saraswati.

However, the Saraswati of the Rig Veda is extremely powerful, grinding rocks with sheer force. Its roar subsumes all other sounds. And the Sarayu of the Rig Veda is immensely wide and deep, the mother river. None of these descriptions matches the actual rivers in present-day India with those names.

Hymn No. 5 | 53 | 9 of the Rig Veda says, “May the Rasa, Krumu, Anitabh, Kuva or Sindhu not be able to stop you; let the deep Sarayu not be an obstacle.” The order of the rivers clearly moves from east to west. So the Sarayu undoubtedly flows to the west of the Indus.

Kochhar believes it is the 650-km river known as the Hari-Rud in Afghanistan, whose source is in the Hindu Kush mountains. It flows past the city of Herat and then for 100 km along the Iran-Afghanistan border before disappearing in the Karakom desert of Central Asia.

In the Avesta we find the Saraswati as the Harahaiti – the similarity in sound is noticeable – which enters Iran along the combined basin of the river Arghandar on the Afghan-Iran border and the river Helmand. According to Kochhar, it is this Helmand that is the Vedic Saraswati river.

The source of the Helmand is in the Koh-i-Baba mountain range. Flowing for 1,300 miles through the heart of Afghanistan, the Vedic Saraswati joins the Vedic Drijadbati or Arghandar. The Avesta identifies this wide river as the Hetumanta (or, in varations, as Setumanta). In Iran the Saraswati is named the Harahaiti, which flows into the inland lake Hamun-e-Sabari in the Saistan area of northern Iran.

The conclusion

The political map of the ancient world, of the Copper Age, provides an extraordinary realisation. The kingdoms of the two main political powers – the Persians and the Greeks – all lie between and around the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. None of these is a coastal civilisation, however.

This raises a question. What did ancient man refer to as a sea? The Mediterranean Sea, the Red Sea, and the Campian Sea are all saltwater lakes, and not seas in the way we understand them today. This make us wonder: perhaps the Lanka of the Ramayana was an island in the Hamun-e-Sabri.

The one thing that’s obvious: wherever it was that Ram and Lakshman went from Afghanistan, it could not have been to present-day Sri Lanka, for that would have meant crossing the Indian peninsula. And since Ravana, the lord of Lanka, was also partial to somras, it is unlikely that he went very far from the land of soma after abducting Sita.

Although it is not possible to prove archaeologically, there is considerable reason to assume that the lineage of Dasarath (and of Ram), the Ikshvakus, were from western Afghanistan. For the Puranas say that King Kubalasa slayed a demon on the shore of the Sabari. Vishwamitra received his second birth where the Saraswati met the sea. And Valmiki discovered Sita on the shore of the Sarayu. Which is why there is little room for doubt that today’s Hamun-e-Sabri is the sea mentioned in the Ramayana, one of the islands in which was the kingdom ruled by Ravana, lord of the rakshases.

The focus of attention for those studying the lost history of India is the contentious issue raised by Hindutva historians, who have repeatedly asserted that western historians have been unable to identify the roots of ancient India. We find these assertions in the writings of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, as well as in  those of certain lesser known right-wing historians. It is surprising how easily conclusions unsupported by the array of Vedic texts can be arrived at because of mindless adherence to a popular brand of politics.

The rock formation between India and Sri Lanka could well be preserved, but not as Ram Setu or Adam’s Bridge. Let it be protected as a geological feature. For no matter how far one looks, no relationship is evident between this Lanka and the Lanka of the Ramayana.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in

Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch
Brahmin and Brahminism as defined by their originator Videshi Brahmins . They proposed , we disposed as the things stand :
Who are Brahmin ?
Brahmins are Videshi invaders . They invaded Hindustan and destroyed Native Hindustani Sindhu Civilizations , killing several lakhs of Native people . They say Brahmins are born from the mouth of Brahma their adi Purusha as per their Brahmin Dharm Granth Rigveda hymn of Purusha Sukta .
Brahmin is a Varn in Vedic Brahmin Dharm , and also Jaat or Caste of people who are members of it Members are sub divided into numerous communities of Brahmins known as Gotras . Brahmins are singular Varn and Jat and all other Non Brahmins are Native subordinate in various degrees . No Native Hindu who are called by Brahmins as Kshtriya , Vaishya , Shudra or Untouchable is equal in status with Videshi Brahmin .
What is Brahminism or Brahminwad ?
Videshi Brahmins say they are Lords of all Non Brahmins , Shudra etc desertion of life for the sake of a Brahmin causes the ultimate bliss of outcasts , Shudras ---.A Shudra should serve the Brahmins for the sake of heaven or for the sake of both Heaven and Livelihood ---. Mostly to serve the Brahmins is declared to be the most excellent occupation of Shudras , for he does anything other than this is profits to him nothing . His means of life should be arranged by Brahmins in accordance with what is fitting . The leaving of food should be given to him and old clothes so too the rotten part of the grain and so too the old furniture . An accumulation of wealth should not be made by Shudra even if he is able, for Shudra getting possession of wealth merely injures the Brahmins .
So it is clear fro above clarification that both Brahmin and Brahminism or Brahminwad are inseparable . No Brahmin on earth deny this .
Now the question is what made Non Brahmins to say Brahmins and Brahminism or Brahminwad are separate ? We see some Non Brahmin saying that Brahmins and Brahminsm are separate and they say Brahminism is condemnable not Varn or Jat Brahmin . It means they agree that there is Brahmin Varn born from mouth of rapist Brahmha and also they agree to chaturvarn , untochability , bhedbahv etc etc. Now they can not go to Brahmins house for Buttermilk and hide the Bowl they want to collect from Brahmin houses , people , their society , organizations and political parties . They go to the extent of making show that they are progressive , humanist etc etc.
Their other argument in favor of supporting or not criticizing Brahmin is that there are some good Brahmins . Their definition of Good Brahmin is wonderful and they never disclose that what is mean by Good Brahmin ? Their goodness is connected to their own interest and not not of whole society , Nation and Native people .
They say some of the good Brahmins were with Gandhiji and Ambedkar . We say Gandhiji and Dr Ambedkar were good enough to keep them with them and nothing had gone wrong had they not kept Brahmin company . In fact Nation would have gained tremendously had these so called Brahmins not been with these great leaders . We have No Brahmins , in our organizations and we find it is perfectly OK as we need not to wash dirty wounds and clothes of dirty Brahmins . The greatest and holiest duty of any citizen is to protect their house , land , family and country . These Brahamin lover Non Brahmiins do not want to perform that duty at the same time want all benefits on the toil of those Native people who perform these holy duty . We call such Non Brahmin , Videshi Brahmin lovers Jaichands . And only Jaichands can say Brahmin and Brahminism or Brahminwad are separate . We are not Jaichands , so we say Brahmin and Brahminwad are inseparable and both condemnable, fit for wiping out and finished .
Nv. D.D.Raut ,
Vicharak , MBVM
Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in explanation of his

RESIGNATION

The House I am sure knows, unofficially if not officially, that I have ceased to be a Member of the Cabinet. I tendered my resignation on Thursday the 27th September to the Prime Minister and asked him to relieve me immediately. The Prime Minister was good enough to accept the same on the very next day. If I have continued to be a Minister after Friday the 28th, it is because the Prime Minister had requested me to continue till the end of the Session—a request to which I was, in obedience to constitutional convention, bound to assent.

Our Rules of Procedure permit a Minister who has resigned his office, to make a personal statement in explanation of his resignation, Many members of Cabinet have resigned during my tenure of office. There has been however no uniform practice in the matter of Ministers who have resigned making a statement. Some have gone without making a statement and others have gone after making a statement. For a few days I was hesitant what course to follow. After taking all circumstances into consideration I came to the conclusion that the making of a statement was not merely necessary, but it was a duty which a member who has resigned owes to the House.

The House has no opportunity to know how the Cabinet works from within, whether there is harmony or whether there is a conflict, for the simple reason that there is a joint responsibility under which a member who is in a minority is not entitled to disclose his differences. Consequently the House continues to think that there is no conflict among members of Cabinet even when as a matter of fact a conflict exists. It is, therefore, a duty of a retiring Minister to make a statement informing the House why he wants to go and why he is not able to continue to take further joint responsibility.

Secondly, if a Minister goes without making a statement, people may suspect that there is something wrong with the conduct of the Minister, either in his public capacity or in his private capacity. No Minister should, I think, leave room for such suspicion and the only safe way out is a statement.

Thirdly we have our newspapers. They have their age-old bias in favour of some and against others. Their judgements are seldom based on merits. Wherever they find an empty space, they are prone to fill the vacuum by supplying grounds for resignation which are not the real grounds but which put those whom they favour in a better light and those not in their favour in a bad light. Some such thing I see has happened even in my case.

It is for these reasons that I decided to make a statement before going out.

It is now 4 years, I month and 26 days since I was called by the Prime Minister to accept the office of Law Minister in his Cabinet. The offer came as a great surprise to me. I was in the opposite camp and had already been condemned as unworthy of association when the interim Government was formed in August 1946. I was left to speculate as to what could have happened to bring about this change in the attitude of the Prime Minister. I had my doubts. I did not know how I could carry on with those who had never been my friends. I had doubts as to whether I could, as a Law Member, maintain the standard of legal knowledge and acumen which had been maintained by those who had preceded me as Law Ministers of the Government of India. But I kept my doubts at rest and accepted the offer of the Prime Minister on the ground that I should not deny my co-operation when it was asked for in the building up of our nation. The quality of my performance as a Member of the Cabinet and as Law Minister, I must leave it to others to judge.

I will now refer to matters which have led me to sever my connection with my colleagues. The urge to go has been growing from long past due to variety of reasons.

I will first refer to matters purely of a personal character and which are the least of the grounds which have led me to tender my resignation. As a result of my being a member of the Viceroy's Executive Council, I knew the Law Ministry to be administratively of no importance. It gave no opportunity for shaping the policy of the Government of India. We used to call it an empty soap box only good for old lawyers to play with. When the Prime Minister made me the offer, I told him that besides being a lawyer by my education and experience, I was competent to run any administrative Department and that in the old Viceroy's Executive Council I held two administrative portfolios, that of Labour and C.P.W.D., where a great deal of planning projects were dealt with by me and would like to have some administrative portfolio. The Prime Minister agreed and said he would give me in addition to Law the Planning Department which, he said, he was intending to create. Unfortunately the Planning Department came very late in the day and when it did come I was left out. During my time, there have been many transfers of portfolios from one Minister to another. I thought I might be considered for any one of them. But I have always been left out of consideration. Many Ministers have been given two or three portfolios so that they have been overburdened. Others like me have been wanting more work. I have not even been considered for holding a portfolio temporarily when a Minister in charge has gone abroad for a few days. It is difficult to understand what is the principle underlying the distribution of Government work among Ministers which the Prime Minister follows. Is it capacity? Is it trust? Is it friendship? Is it pliability? I was not even appointed to be a member of main Committees of the Cabinet such as the Foreign Affairs Committee or the Defence Committee. When the Economic Affairs Committee was formed, I expected, in view of the fact that I was primarily a student of Economics and Finance, to be appointed to this Committee. But I was left out. I was appointed to it by the Cabinet, when the Prime Minister had gone to England. But when he returned, in one of his many essays in the reconstruction of the Cabinet, he left me out. In a subsequent reconstruction my name was added to the Committee, but that was as a result of my protest.

The Prime Minister, I am sure, will agree that I have never complained to him in this connection. I have never been a party to the game of power politics inside the Cabinet or the game of snatching portfolios which goes on when there is a vacancy. I believe in service, service in the post which the Prime Minister, who as the head of the Cabinet, thought fit to assign to me. It would have, however, been quite unhuman for me not to have felt that a wrong was being done to me.

I will now refer to another matter that had made me dissatisfied with the Government. It relates to the treatment accorded to the Backward Classes and the Scheduled Castes. I was very sorry that the Constitution did not embody any safeguards for the Backward Classes. It was left to be done by the Executive Government on the basis of the recommendations of a Commission to be appointed by the President. More than a year has elapsed since we passed the Constitution. But the Government has not even thought of appointing the Commission. The year 1946 during which I was out of office, was a year of great anxiety to me and to the leading members of the Scheduled Castes. The British had resided from the commitments they had made in the matter of constitutional safeguards for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Castes had no knowing as to what the Constituent Assembly would do in that behalf. In this period of anxiety I had prepared a report^*[f14] on the condition of the Scheduled Castes for submission to the United Nations. But I did not submit it. I felt that it would be better to wait until the Constituent Assembly and the future Parliament was given a chance to deal with the matter. The provisions made in the Constitution for safeguarding the position of the Scheduled Castes were not to my satisfaction. However, I accepted them for what they were worth, hoping that the Government will show some determination to make them effective. What is the position of the Scheduled Castes today? So far as I see, it is the same as before. The same old tyranny, the same old oppression, the same old discrimination which existed before, exists now, and perhaps in a worst form. I can refer to hundreds of cases where people from the Scheduled Castes round about Delhi and adjoining places have come to me with their tales of woes against the Caste Hindus and against the Police who have refused to register their complaints and render them any help. I have been wondering whether there is any other parallel in the world to the condition of the Scheduled Castes in India. I cannot find any. And yet why is no relief granted to the Scheduled Castes? Compare the concern the Government shows over safeguarding the Muslims. The Prime Minister's whole time and attention is devoted for the protection of the Muslims. I yield to none, not even to the Prime Minister, in my desire to give the Muslims of India the utmost protection wherever and whenever they stand in need of it. But what I want to know is, are the Muslims the only people who need protection? Are the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Indian Christians not in need of protection? What concern has he shown for these communities? So far as I know, none and yet these are the communities which need far more care and attention than the Muslims.

I could not contain within myself the indignation I have felt over the neglect of the Scheduled Castes by the Government and on one occasion I gave vent to my feelings at a public meeting of the Scheduled Castes. A question was asked, from the Hon'ble the Home Minister, whether my charge that the Scheduled Castes had not benefited by the rule which guaranteed to them 12 1/2, per cent representation was true. In answer to the question the Hon'ble the Home Minister was pleased to say that my charge was baseless. Subsequently for some reason—it may be for satisfying the qualms of his conscience—he, I am informed, sent round a circular to the various Departments of the Government of India asking them to report how many Scheduled Caste candidates had been recently recruited in Government service. I am informed that most Departments said in reply ' NIL ' or nearly nil. If my information is correct, I need make no commentary on the answer given by the Hon'ble the Home Minister.

From my early childhood I have dedicated myself to the upliftment of the Scheduled Castes among whom I was born. It is not that there were no temptations in my way. If I had considered my own interests, I could have been anything I wanted to be and if I had joined the Congress I would have reached to the highest place in that organisation. But as I said, I had dedicated myself to the upliftment of the Scheduled Castes and I have followed the adage which says that it is better to be narrow-minded if you wish to be enthusiastic about a cause which you wish to accomplish. You can therefore, well imagine what pain it has caused me to see that the cause of the Scheduled Castes has been relegated to the limbo of nothing.

The third matter which has given me cause, not merely for dissatisfaction but for actual anxiety and even worry, is the foreign policy of the country. Any one, who has followed the course of our foreign policy and along with it the attitude of other countries towards India, could not fail to realise the sudden change that has taken place in their attitude towards us. On 15th of August 1947 when we began our life as an independent country, there was no country which wished us ill. Every country in the world was our friend. Today, after four years, all our friends have deserted us. We have no friends left. We have alienated ourselves. We are pursuing a lonely furrow with no one even to second our resolutions in the U.N.O. When I think of our foreign policy, I am reminded of what Bismark and Bernard Shaw have said. Bismark has said that " politics is not a game of realising the ideal. Politics is the game of the possible. " Bernard Shaw not very long ago said that good ideals are good but one must not forget that it is often dangerous to be too good. Our foreign policy is in complete opposition to these words of wisdom uttered by two of the world's greatest men.

How dangerous it has been to us this policy of doing the impossible and of being too good is illustrated by the great drain on our resources made by our military expenditure, by the difficulty of getting food for our starving millions and by difficulty of getting aid for the industrialisation of our country.

Out of 350 crores of rupees of revenue we raise annually, we spend about Rs. 180 crores of rupees on the Army. It is a colossal expenditure which has hardly any parallel. This colossal expenditure is the direct result of our foreign policy. We have to foot the whole of our Bill for our defence ourselves because we have no friends on which we can depend for help in any emergency that may arise. I have been wondering whether this is the right sort of foreign policy.

Our quarrel with Pakistan is a part of our foreign policy about which I feel deeply dissatisfied. There are two grounds which have disturbed our relations with Pakistan—one is Kashmir and the other is the condition of our people in East Bengal. I felt that we should be more deeply concerned with East Bengal where the condition of our people seems from all the newspapers intolerable than with Kashmir. Notwithstanding this we have been staking our all on the Kashmir issue. Even then I feel that we have been fighting on an unreal issue. The issue on which we are fighting most of the time is, who is in the right and who is in the wrong. The real issue to my mind is not who is in the right but what is right. Taking that to be the main question, my view has always been that the right solution is to partition Kashmir. Give the Hindu and Buddhist part to India and the Muslim part to Pakistan as we did in the case of India. We are really not concerned with the Muslim part of Kashmir. It is a matter between the Muslims of Kashmir and Pakistan. They may decide the issue as they like. Or if you like, divide it into three parts; the Cease-fire zone, the Valley and the Jammu-Ladhak Region and have a plebiscite only in the Valley. What I am afraid of is that in the proposed plebiscite, which is to be an overall plebiscite, the Hindus and Buddhists of Kashmir are likely to be dragged into Pakistan against their wishes and we may have to face the same problems as we are facing today in East Bengal.

I will now refer to the Fourth matter which has a good deal to do with my resignation. The Cabinet has become a merely recording and registration office of decisions already arrived at by Committees. As I have said, the Cabinet now works by Committees.

There is a Defence Committee. There is a Foreign Committee. All important matters relating to Foreign affairs are dealt with by it. All matters relating to Defence are disposed of by the Defence Committee. The same members of the Cabinet are appointed by them. I am not a member of either of these Committees. They work behind an iron curtain. Others who are not members have only to take joint responsibility without any opportunity of taking part in the shaping of policy. This is an impossible position.

I will now deal with a matter which has led me finally to come to the decision that I should resign. It is the treatment which was accorded to the Hindu Code. The Bill was introduced in this House on the 11th April 1947. After a life of four years, it was killed and died unwept and unsung, after 4 clauses of it were passed. While it was before the House, it lived by fits and starts. For full one year the Government did not feel it necessary to refer it to a Select Committee. It was referred to the Select Committee on 9th April

1948. The Report was presented to the House on 12th August 1948. The motion for the consideration of the Report was made by me on 31st August 1948. It was merely for making the motion that the Bill was kept on the Agenda. The discussion of the motion was not allowed to take place until the February Session of the year

1949. Even then it was not allowed to have a continuous discussion. It was distributed over 10 months, 4 days in February, I day in March and 2 days in April 1949. After this, one day was given to the Bill in December 1949, namely the 19th December on which day the House adopted my motion that the Bill as reported by the Select Committee be taken into consideration. No time was given to the Bill in the year 1950. Next time the Bill came before the House was on 5th February 1951 when the clause by clause consideration of the Bill was taken. Only three days 5th, 6th and 7th of February were given to the Bill and left there to rot.

This being the last Session of the present Parliament, Cabinet had to consider whether the Hindu Code Bill should be got through before this Parliament ended or whether it should be left over to the new Parliament. The Cabinet unanimously decided that it should be put through in this Parliament. So the Bill was put on the Agenda and was taken up on the 17th September 1951 for further clause by clause consideration. As the discussion was going on the Prime Minister put forth a new proposal, namely, that the Bill as a whole may not be got through within the time available and that it was desirable to get a part of it enacted into law rather than allow the whole of it to go to waste. It was a great wrench to me. But I agreed, for, as the proverb says " it is better to save a part when the whole is likely to be lost". The Prime Minister suggested that we should select the Marriage and Divorce part. The Bill in its truncated "form went on. After two or three days of discussion of the Bill the Prime Minister came up with another proposal. This time his proposal was to drop the whole Bill even the Marriage and Divorce portion. This came to me as a great shock—a bolt from the blue. I was stunned and could not say anything. I am not prepared to accept that the dropping of this truncated Bill was due to want of time. I am sure that the truncated Bill was dropped because other and more powerful members of the Cabinet wanted precedence for their Bills. I am unable to understand how the Benaras and Aligarh University Bills, how the Press Bill could have been given precedence over the Hindu Code even in its attenuated form? It is not that there was no law on the Statute Book to govern the Aligarh University or the Benaras University. It is not that these Universities would have gone to wreck and ruins if the Bills had not been passed in this session. It is not that the Press Bill was urgent. There is already a law on the Statute Book and the Bill could have waited. I got the impression that the Prime Minister, although sincere, had not the earnestness and determination required to get the Hindu Code Bill through.

In regard to this Bill I have been made to go through the greatest mental torture. The aid of Party Machinery was denied to me. The Prime Minister gave freedom of Vote, an unusual thing in the history of the Party. I did not mind it. But I expected two things. I expected a party whip as to time limit on speeches and instruction to the Chief Whip to move closure when sufficient debate had taken place. A whip on time limit on speeches would have got the Bill through. When freedom of voting was given there could have been no objection to have given a whip for time limit on speeches. But such a whip was never issued. The conduct of the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, who is also the Chief Whip of the Party in connection with the Hindu Code, to say the least, has been most extraordinary. He has been the deadliest opponent of the Code and has never been present to aid me by moving a closure motion. For days and hours filibustering has gone on a single clause. But the Chief Whip, whose duty it is to economise Government time and push on Government Business, has been systematically absent when the Hindu Code has been under consideration in the House. I have never seen a case of a Chief Whip so disloyal to the Prime Minister and a Prime Minister so loyal to a disloyal Whip.

Notwithstanding this unconstitutional behaviour, the Chief Whip is really a darling of the Prime Minister. For notwithstanding his disloyalty he got a promotion in the Party organisation. It is impossible to carry on in such circumstances.

It has been said that the Bill had to be dropped because the opposition was strong. How strong was the opposition? This Bill has been discussed several times in the Party and was carried to division by the opponents. Every time the opponents were routed. The last time when the Bill was taken up in the Party Meeting, out of 120 only 20 were found to be against it. When the Bill was taken in the Party for discussion, 44 clauses were passed in about 3 1/2 hours time. This shows how much opposition there was to the Bill within the Party. In the House itself there have been divisions on three clauses of the Bill—2, 3 and 4. Every time there has been a overwhelming majority in favour even on clause 4 which is the soul of the Hindu Code.

I was therefore, quite unable to accept the Prime Minister's decision to abandon the Bill on the ground of time. I have been obliged to give this elaborate explanation for my resignation because some people have suggested that I am going because of my illness. I wish to repudiate any such suggestion. I am the last man to abandon my duty because of illness.

It may be said that my resignation is out of time and that if I was dissatisfied with the Foreign Policy of the Government and the treatment accorded to Backward Classes and the Scheduled Castes I should have gone earlier. The charge may sound as true. But I had reasons which held me back. In the first place, most of the time I have been a member of the Cabinet, I have been busy with the framing of the Constitution. It absorbed all my attention till 26th January 1950 and thereafter I was concerned with the Peoples' Representation Bill and the Delimitation Orders. I had hardly any time to attend to our Foreign Affairs. I did not think it right to go away leaving this work unfinished.

In the second place, I thought it necessary to stay on, for the sake of the Hindu Code. In the opinion of some it may be wrong for me to have held on for the sake of the Hindu Code. I took a different view. The Hindu Code was the greatest social reform measure ever undertaken by the Legislature in this country. No law passed by the Indian Legislature in the past or likely to be passed in the future can be compared to it in point of its significance.

To leave inequality between class and class, between sex and sex which is the soul of Hindu Society untouched and to go on passing legislation relating to economic problems is to make a farce of our Constitution and to build a palace on a dung heap. This is the significance I attached to the Hindu Code. It is for its sake that I stayed on notwithstanding my differences. So if I have committed a wrong it is in the hope of doing some good. Had I no ground for such a hope connection to refer only to three of the statements made by the Prime Minister on the floor of the House, for overcoming the obstructionist tactics of the opponents? I would like in this n 28th November, 1949 the Prime Minister gave the following assurance. He said:

" What is more, the Government is committed to this thing (Hindu Code). It is going through with it."

***

" Government would proceed with that. It is for this House to accept a measure, but if a Government takes an important measure and the House rejects it, the House rejects that Government and the Government goes and another Government comes in its place. It should be clearly understood that this is one of the important measures to which the Government attaches importance and on which it will stand or fall."

Again on 19th December 1949, the Prime Minister said :

" I do not wish the House to think in the slightest degree that we consider that this Hindu Code Bill is not of importance, because we do attach the greatest importance to it, as I said, not because of any particular clause or anything, but because of the basic approach to this vast problem in problems, economic and social. We have achieved political freedom in this country, political independence. That is a stage in the' journey, and there are other stages, economic, social and other and if society is to advance, there must be this integrated advance on all fronts."

On the 26th September 1951 the Prime Minister said:

It is not necessary for me to assure the House of the desire of Government to proceed with this measure in so far as we can proceed with it within possibilities, and so far as we are concerned we consider this matter as adjourned till such time as the next opportunity—1 hope it will be in this Parliaments—offers itself.

This was after the Prime Minister had announced the dropping of the Bill. Who could not have believed in these pronouncements of the Prime Minster? If I did not think that there could be a difference between the promises and performances of the Prime Minister the fault is certainly not mine. My exit from the Cabinet may not be a matter of much concern to anybody in this country. But I must be true to myself and that I can be only by going out. Before I do so I wish to thank my colleagues for the kindness and courtesy they have shown to me during my membership of the Cabinet. While I am not resigning my membership of Parliament I also wish to express my gratitude to Members of Parliament for having shown great tolerance towards me.

New Delhi,

10th October 1951                     

B. R. AMBEDKAR

---

 [F1]P.D., Vol. XV, Part II, 21st September 1951, pp. 2974-3008,

Native People's Party ;

Brahmin Guru Ghantals :

What is this Brahmin Guru Ghantals ? We should go by each word . Brahmins means Videshi Brahmins. Guru means Teacher and Ghantals means making noise without doing any work .

In the past we have come across two three such cases .

First case is Videshi Brahmin Dronacharya who did not teach Eklaya the Native Boy any thing yet asked for his thumb in Daxina .
Second case is Videshi Brahmin Ramdas who never met Native King  Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj yet made propagand that he was guru of Shivaji and Shivaji has placed his kingdom in his Zoli as Guru Daxina .

Third case is Videshi Brahmin Namdar Gokhale who is called Guru of  Native Hero Mahatma Gandhi after Gandhi becoming National Leader and Mahatma . This propaganda was done by both Jahal and Moderate Videshi Brahmins which Gandhiji very politely rejected telling that he was working in socio -political field in South Africa even before meeting Gokhale in Pune . Gandhiji acknowledged greatness of Anni Besant , Dada Abdulha and Dada Bhai Navroji apart from Arnold whose book on Gita Gandhiji read at young age at London . Apart from that Gandhiji was influenced by Raichand and his Kabir Panthi Mother . Finally Gandhiji was Kabir follower of Satya Hindu Dharm .

In short we reject Guru Ghantals Dronacharya , Ramdas and Gokhale as they were sound makers and not actual gurus .

Nv. D.D.Raut , President , NPP

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo

MUL BHARTIYA VICHAR MANCH :

Question of Brahmins in Non Brahmin Organizations and Non Brahmins in Brahmin Organizations , a matter of serious thought :

We see there are two types of organizations , political , non political working in Hindustan . For example Congress was founded in 1885 by A.O.home , a Non Brahmin , Britisher . Many Brahmins joined it as office bearers and they took over control of that organization very soon by Brahmins and Tilak , Agarkar , Malviya , Nehru , etc . were in such a position that the whole organization was Brahminized . Only from 1920 and onwards entry of Non Brahmin M.K Gandhi from 1916 made Congress felt presence of Non Brahmins and Muslims and Brahmins immediately founded Brahminwadi RSS in 1925 helping other Brahminwadi organizations like Hindu Mahasabha etc to eliminate and create problems of Non Brahmin leadership of Gandhiji .

There were also Brahmin organizations like Hindu Mahasabha , Ram Raj Party where some Non Brahmins were members but primarily they were either fund givers , jamidars , businessmen supporting Brahminwad or those small workers for cleaning pandal, as unimportant workers. They were always told by Brahmins that they are masters and others are workers .

Now same position we see in present day political organizations founded by Brahmins and Non Brahmins . They have cells like OBC , SC , ST , Muslims in Brahmin founded parties as they are founded for Brahmin Rule and others are considered as Cells .

In Non Brahmin political parties there are cells like Minority , Christians , Muslims but not a separate cell for Brahmins . Brahmins join these parties with direct big positions like second in command and soon take whole charge of that organization or threaten to leave this organization ,party . In any case Brahmins never want to work as subordinate and never want to leave his Brahminism , Varn and Brahmin Dharm Vikruti of Vedas , Hom - Havan , Janeu , caste-ism etc .

Now the question is how good these Videshi Brahmins are for Non Brahmins in both Brahmin formed organizations and organizations formed by Non Brahmins . And in both the case we find they are useless for Non Brahmins , Native people . Therefore , we feel , Non Brahmins should not waste their time in such organizations where Brahmins are Members as the movement of Non Brahmins get stagnated and without final results such as Videshi Brahminless Society .

We see some of the organizations trying to make Videshi Brahmin faltu leaders great taking shelter of Mahatma Gandhi . Some Brahmins worked under Gandhiji , some Brahmins worked under Dr . Ambedkar but non of them said they are Not Brahmin or Left Brahmin Dharm For Ever . In fact they used Pandit , Brahmarshi , Arya etc words to show that they are Brahmins . Nehru , Malyiya , Tagore were Brahmins and remained Brahmins always .

Similarly , Non Brahmins working in Brahmin organizations were remained subordinate even after reaching the position PM . See the case of Modi , who is Non Brahmin , in Brahmin organization but can not say he will carry out census for OBC even though he himself is OBC . So Shudra remains Shurda in Brahmin organizations .

Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch wants Native Rule , means our organization, our mind and our benefits . We reject both the types of organizations infected by Videshi Brahmins .

Nv. D.D.Raut
Vicharak , MBVM

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo

Native People's Party

To solve problematic Videshi Brahmin resettlement in their Home Land in Artic , Modi should take Bhagwat and Advani to Russia

Tilak had already found out Home land of Videshi Brahmins in Artic which is now in and above present day Russia . Brahmins have been going to their Swa - Grah  that is Swarg frequently as per their Brahmin Dharm Vedic literature . That is Brahmha , Vishnu , Indra Lok where plenty of Somraas, Hom - Havan Cow , Horse meat and Apsaras cum Prostitutes like Rambha , Urvashi , Menaka were always available to anybody and Brahmin enemies for deceiving them . This place , they said is Swarg and said one goes to Swarg after death if one donates and give Dan , Daxina to Videshi Brahmins . It seems this was some sort of entry fee collected by brothel keeper Brahmins .

Now our PM Modi is visiting Russia . We think , he is aware how Videshi Brahmins are problematic to India and people of Hindustan . Even every Brahmin wants his Swarg and therefore , we think Modi should take RSS chief Bhagwat and waiting in PM Advani to Russia so that settlement of Videshi Brahmins in the Artic home of Brahmins can be discussed with Russian authorities and soon Advani becomes PM of Brahmin home land and Bhagwat as President . Other Brahmins can leave India once this settlement is reached . This would be peaceful solution to Videshi Brahmins problem in India as no Non Brahmin can tolerate Videshi Brahmin Dharm Vikruti any more .

Nv. D.D.Raut , President , NPP

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo 

Native University

Mul Bhartiya Vichar Manch :

Hindustani First , then Hindu , Jain , Buddhist , Sikh , Muslim , Christian etc but never Videshi Brahmin :

Nativist D.D.Raut is Hindustani first then Hindu , Jain , Buddhist , Sikh , Muslim , Christian etc but never Videshi Brahmin as they are enemy of my Native land Hindustan .

We all Non Brahmins are Hindustani , therefore Hindu but Videshi Brahmins are aliens , foreigners and they are Brahmins and followers of Vedic Brahmin Dharm which is separate from Native Hindu Dharm and totally against Native people .

Hindustani first said Dr Ambedkar . Hindustani first said Gandhiji . Hindustani first said Nativist D.D.Raut .

Brahminwadis , Panditwadis , Manuwadis , Godsewadis , Peshva-wadis Sankaracharya-wadis , RSS -wadis , Congress-wadis, BJP-wadis have been doing all work to finish Hindustan First cherished by Gandhi - Ambedkar . They wiped out Gandhi movement and brought down Ambedkar movement to 1 per cent Ambedkarite New Buddhist which they have further reduced to 100 Guts and Divisions .

Nativist D.D.Raut brought Gandhi - Ambedkar Movement to life educating native people tirelessly that both Gandhi and Ambedkar were and are part of Native Rule Movement that is Swadeshi or Hindavi Swaraj as dreamed by our Native Heroes like Shivaji , Kabir , Fule and other Native great people , warriors and solders . Nativist said there is no contradiction in the work of Gandhiji and Ambedkar both are Native Non Brahmins . This made all Non Brahmin irrespective of their religions they follow part of 97 per cent Native People's movement segregating 3 per cent Videshi Brahmins and reducing them to powerless , helpless , beggars position asking them to Quit India .

Nv. D.D.Raut ,
Vicharak , MBVM

Our Message to Nation : Janeu Chhodo , Bharat Jodo