Leave IITs & IITians Both Alone

After Shri Narendra Modi of the BJP took oath as the 15th Prime Minister of India on 26th May 2014, owing to the overwhelming absence of a credible and strong opposition to the BJP on political front, media and celebrities have taken it upon themselves to discharge the thankless duty of offering constrictive criticism of policies and everyday functioning of his government, when they are not engulfed in debates over issues, e.g. pinstripe suit of Narendra Modi, which bear national, international and perhaps strategic consequence as well.

Ms. Smriti Irani, the Union Cabinet Minister of the Ministry of Human Resources and Development, seems to have been one of those fortunate ministers to have received an elaborate guidance of media, so far, in discharging her duty. Irani has consistently been told what to do and what not to do with premier institutes of Higher Education such as Indian Institute of Technology (IIT)! She has been asked to discontinue funding the IITs recently. However, I do not agree with whatever Mr. Jeswanth Padooru had to say in his Dear Smriti Irani, stop giving my money to IITians; I am rather interested in analyzing some issues he has presented before us instead of squarely saying him that his demand is outlandish!

THE SUBSIDY SAGA:

Let me begin with a note of agreement! There is absolutely no scope of argument over the importance of rationalization of subsidies and improvement of mechanisms of doling them out in order to achieve curtailment of the total subsidy bill to meet targets set for budget deficit.

The bill for subsidies came to an 18.58 per cent of total non-plan expenditure for the financial year 2015-16, against 23.02 per cent for the financial year 2013-14 and 21.98 per cent for the financial year 2014-15. This declining trend does tell us that unlike other governments, known for their lip-service, the present NDA government is committed to rationalize subsidies and improve their delivery mechanisms.

At this juncture, I would like to inform Mr. Jeswanth Padooru that the government does not treat expenditure on social services as subsidies!

THE FALSE PREMISE:

Mr. Padooru, it seems, is good at stating abridged information, and hence perverting the facts, if doing so would strengthen his argument. It has to be forcefully asserted that the government funds many more educational institutions through the UGC, besides IITs and IIMs! Hence, singling out IITs and IIMs would amount to prejudice against those premier institutions, in my opinion.

I would again, at this juncture, wish to draw attention of Mr. Padooru that he never took into account the money aided to the IITs by Department of Science and Technology (DoST) while calculating the amount of taxpayer’s money 'wasted' on the IITs!

I have done my Bachelor of Engineering from the Faculty of Technology and Engineering of The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara. It is a Government grant-in-aid institute. Against ₹ 90, 000 which, according to Mr Padooru, an average IITian pays as annual fees, I had to pay only ₹ 780 as annual tuition fees, and ₹ 2000 as annual hostel fees.

Now I shudder to think what would have happened to me and thousands of others who have done their Bachelor of Engineering from taxed-funded institutes if Mr. Jeswanth Padooru were the Prime Minister or Union Cabinet Minister of the MHRD!

THE PAYBACK DILEMMA:

While taunting IITs for the ‘sheer waste’ of the taxpayer’s money, Mr. Padooru completely disregards research activities of those institutes; I need not document them as Mr Padooru can always file an RTI if ever he wishes to know about it.

It is ridiculous to expect direct payback to the exchequer in lieu of any social service. The expenditure on social services is aimed at betterment of the society and improvement in standard of living of its people. Does Mr. Padooru have any evidence that IITs have failed on these two parameters?

Just to inform Mr. Padooru, the Haj subsidy incurs some ₹ 700 crore to the exchequer every year. Don’t you think funding IITs is a better use of spending the taxpayer’s money? After all, being a Hindu why on the earth would I want my tax money be used for funding Haj pilgrimage?

It is, at this juncture, imperative to invoke the Nalanda University Project here! I wonder why on the earth is Mr. Padooru not interested in auditing the Nalanda project!

I, for once, would love to pose a question to Mr Padooru- Has he ever thought what all would have done with the money which was siphoned through various scams, e.g. CWG scam, had that money never been siphoned in the first place? Everyone, including Mr. Padooru, would at least concede that financing IITs with taxpayer’s money is no scam.

THE INAPPROPRIATE DIAGNOSIS:

When Mr. Padooru says that IITians are not interested in joining the Army or other wings of the Armed Forces of India, he again does it what he knows the best- perversion of facts! I still remember the campus drive organized by the Indian Army in my college. We all were thrilled and overjoyed, thinking that we may be able to have the fortune to join the Army. A large number of students participated in the campus drive, a couple of students got call from army headquarters to appear for the five-day SSB (Sashastra Seema Bal) interview. Unfortunately, no one got selected in SSB interview wherein one has to undergo psychological test, group test and personal interview. But we all were quite enthused to join the Army! What went wrong then? The Army has its own criteria, to select personnel for TGC (Engineers), which in no term is easy even for the IITians.

Then he goes on to mention that less than 2 per cent of engineers at the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) are from IITs and NITs. This remark of him has two dimensions. Firstly, it is insulting to the engineers at ISRO as he does not consider him best despite a slew of achievements, of ISRO, owing to those very engineers for everyone to see. Secondly, does he even know anything about how engineers are recruited at ISRO? Mr Padooru rightly expresses his concerns over the inadequate talent pool of Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO).  Again, does he know anything about how engineers are recruited at DRDO? Or does he know anything about the unprofessional work-culture there?

What Mr. Padooru doesn’t want to tell is the sordid saga of political indifference, bureaucratic lethargy, unprofessional work-culture, unattractive remuneration, and above all, a rigid recruitment policy which refuses to be flexible even for the best talent.

Over an interaction on Twitter, Ms. @Sai_swaroopa narrated the experience of a couple of people she personally knew to me. According her, a Wharton PhD holder who wanted to join DRDO was rejected by the organization because he had less than 65 per cent marks in Bachelors of Engineering. Her husband too wanted to join DRDO but was discouraged to find that no incremental value is given to a Masters degree over Bachelors the degree.  She describes their experience as ‘horrible’.

In order to get into the IITs, one has to face a very fierce competition and get through the same! So does not it occur to us that in order to hire the best pool of talent, government organizations such as ISRO, DRDO, and even Indian Railways for that matter, will have to indulge in a fierce competition with those employers whom IITians find attractive to work for?

THE STALINIST INSTINCTS: 

Let me remind Mr. Padooru that it is a fundamental right of every Indian citizen to practise any profession, or to carry any occupation, trade or business as bestowed by the article 19(g) of Constitution.  Who gives him the right to ban engineers working in a field different from their area of expertise?

Then he indulges in personal attacks on Mr. Chetan Bhagat. I would like to inform Mr. Padooru that Chetan Bhagat is an IIM(A) alumnus as well and before becoming a full-time author he was pursuing a career of investment banker. If we go by Mr. Padooru’s logic/argument, BJP leader Manohar Parrikar, the Union Defence Minister of India, and Raghuram Rajan, the RBI governor and an acclaimed Economist, are useless as they failed to build a career in their area of expertise after passing out from the IITs. Do you even know how bizarre your argument/logic is, Mr. Padooru?

THE LOAN MYTH:

Mr. Padooru again perverts the facts to make his argument at least tenable. Contrary to what he claims, collateral security coverage, of no less than 50% of the limit sanctioned, to get educational loans, is required even if a student has secured admission to the IIT. Now the only acceptable collaterals are either fixed deposits or property (residential). This is not all. No bank offers educational loans on the prospective future salary of the student; his parent/spouse has to be the co-applicant in order to get the loan. One thing I would like to underline that this is not about the IITs alone. I am rather talking about the viability of educational loans in general. So how realistic does this ‘solution’ sound? I leave the answer of this question up to you.

Besides, they are not dying to dole out educational loans to IITians, as banks feel heat of bad study loans. Needless to state that NPAs of the PSU banks are liabilities of the government, i.e. taxpayers!

THE BRAIN-DRAIN BARB:

Instead of regretting the lack of enough opportunities for the best talent in India, Mr. Padooru goes on to compare the resultant brain-drain phenomenon with Indian expatriate in middle-eastern countries doing blue-collar jobs.

In this era of globalization and information, one does not mind relocating in order to build a successful career. IITians are no exception.

Finally, let me reiterate that funding IITs, or any government run institute of higher education, with the taxpayer’s money is rather a strategic investment and not an act of doling out mindless subsidy to some as Mr. Padooru wants us to believe.

PS: I have deliberately avoided commenting upon reforms in higher education.

The Truth Is Under Siege- Will You Protect It?

Media is often referred as the fourth pillar in the functioning of a democracy. Brazenness and partisanship of the Indian media neither astonishes nor shames me anymore! “When asked to bend they crawled”, is how Lal Krishna Advani described role of the media during Emergency, proclaimed by Mrs. Indira Gandhi of Congress. Devoid of any objectivity, which is a prerequisite to call oneself a journalist, members of the Indian media ac as cheerleaders of the Government when Congress is at the helm of affairs; assume the role of a mindless crusader against the Government whenever there is a non-Congress Government at the centre.

During campaign trail of the Lok Sabha elections the same media fueled the malicious campaign of propaganda and hate, waged by political and ideological adversaries, against both the BJP and its Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi. The media did everything it could to stop Narendra Modi marching towards Delhi; if one relied solely on the media the paranoia of certain ‘journalists’ and ‘public intellectuals’ would have made him/her believe that ‘If Modi becomes PM… aag lag jayegi’! Nevertheless, rejecting the propaganda of paranoia and politics of fear psychosis, the people of India overwhelmingly voted in favour of the NDA and gave BJP a decisive mandate to govern India for the next five years.

It took a while for the media to recover from the severe setback of 16^th May, 2014 and re-launch the propaganda of deceit and paranoia. Almost a hundred days! They began with the black-money. Notwithstanding the facts that no leader of the BJP ever said that they would bring back black-money within 100 or 150 days of forming a government at the centre and the first cabinet decision of the Modi Government was to set up a Special Investigation Team to hunt for all the black-money stashed abroad, the media has been working in cahoots with Congress to needlessly attack the government over it. So-called anti-corruption crusaders, e.g. Anna Hazare too have joined the bandwagon despite ongoing efforts to prosecute of black-money hoarders by the SIT and sincere efforts of the government to curb the menace of black-money. Then they attacked the Modi government over The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill, 2015. However, such attacks failed to deplete the popular support for the Modi government or tarnish its image; hence a propaganda of fear psychosis was launched.

All it began with casual rumblings of religious intolerance, towards so-called religious minorities, having been ramped up right after 16^th May, 2014. The agenda is clear- to paint the government at the centre as intolerant and fascist! The message also is the obvious- to showcase so-called religious minorities being under siege. Despite Law & Order being the state subject, BJP was dragged into the Saharanpur riots between Muslims and Sikhs in order to cover-up the Muslim aggression which led to these riots and inapt handling of situation by the state government. An honest and upright journalist Gaurav C Sawant was publicly rebuked by a controversial journalist Rajdeep Sardesai, notorious for abusing and assaulting an NRI at the Medison Square Garden, for asking a few bold questions vis-a-vis Saharanpur riots. Sawant was forced to retract and made delete his tweets. When Trilokpuri riots broke out, media in cahoots with the Aam Aadmi Party alleged that BJP perpetrated those riots in order to polarize bye-elections in Delhi and electorally capitalize from the polarization without even a shred of any evidence.

The new dimension was added to this propaganda of deceit when the media went on and on with the story of churches in Delhi being vandalized and ascribing some pattern to such incidents, despite Delhi Police dismissing the possibility of any such pattern. The propaganda of paranoia took a bizarre turn when attempts were made to ascertain that ‘Ghar wapsi was motive behind Ranaghat attack’, the unfortunate incident of a gang rape of an elderly Christian nun. Without even a shred of any evidence and fathomable logic! When the findings of investigation agencies were broke out, that all gang-rape accused were Muslims whose activities were traced to Bangladesh, those who were holding ‘Ghar wapsi’ responsible for the incident of gang-rape mysteriously went silent. Nevertheless, no one, including the National Commission for Women, had time to hear the plea of a Hindu Sadhvi, of Ramkrishna Mission,  who was brutally gang-raped a day before the gang-rape incident with the elderly Christian nun. The Sadhvi in question, when she went to the police station to lodge an FIR against her culprits, was asked by the West Bengal Police to compromise with her rapists, instead of being assured of prompt action.

The issue here is skewed coverage of events and incidents and deliberate concealing of the truth! The media went hyperventilating when the office of Holy Child Auxilium School of Delhi was allegedly vandalized and a theft of merely 8000 rupees took place. The PM had to summon the Commissioner of Delhi Police, under the media pressure. Repeated assurances of security were issued by the government, followed by prompt actions. Nobody ever cared to ask what happened to those 206 temples, 30 gurdwaras, and 14 mosques which also were ATTACKED in the year 2014! Talking about the year 2015, 14 temples, 5 gurdwaras, and 2 mosques, along with 1 church, have been attacked so far…

Nobody is bothered about incidents of theft in Hindu temples. The casual attitude of media, when it comes to Hindu temples, is evident from the reportage of such incidents. Nobody feels outraged over incidents of theft, robbery or vandalism when it comes to Hindu temples!

So what exactly is under siege? The truth is under siege, credibility of Indian journalists is under siege, the trust of readers/viewers upon media houses is under siege, the reputation of a vibrant democracy is under siege! Above all, the leftover mutual trust between communities is under siege. Will you protect the truth from predators?

BUT WHERE’S BEEF TO BAN IN THE FIRST PLACE?

The #AdarshLiberal gang, as the twitter nowadays refers to them, in their ‘religious’ zeal to defame the BJP and its mentor RSS as fascists and intolerant towards the minority communities, has crossed even the red line of sanctity, crossing which will only make you look like a retard of the highest order, a long back. The paranoia of the #AdarshLiberal gang ramped at the peak on 16th May, 2014 as the unthinkable happened. People gave the BJP, led by Modi, a resounding and historical mandate- a mandate of 282 seats, i.e. majority in the Lok Sabha to the BJP. Since that day, the paranoid #AdarshLiberal gang has been attempting all sort of attacks- personal to political, on Narendra Modi. BJP and RSS and even the majority community, referred to as Hindus too have been dragged into their attacks. Be it the matter of pinstriped suit, or Modi’s inevitable foreign tours, the #AdarshLiberal gang has attacked Modi, forsaking even the basic logic. These days, they have got a new toy, i.e. so called #BeefBan by the BJP governments of Maharashtra and Haryana, to play with. It is, therefore, time to set the record straight to get rid of this nonsensical debate once and for all.

Let me begin with a frank admission that our ancestors ate beef. So what? Now just for the sake of information, our ancestors once offered human sacrifice as well. So what?

With the evolution of the civilization, our ancestors forsook Beef and began revering cow as it was a milch animal. Quoting Vedas or any other Hindu scripture for that matter, to favour or oppose the so called #BeefBan hence serves no purpose. Can we, therefore, now consider the debate over whether Hindus once ate beef settled?

Let’s now dispel the propaganda which is designed to make one believe that till 26^th May, 2014, everyone in India used to eat #Beef in breakfast, lunch, and dinner; and ever since this fascist BJP government has taken over the office, they banned #Beef, leaving everyone in the country so rattled that they’re now determined to challenge the ‘fascism’ of the government they themselves have elected by organizing countrywide #BeefFestivals, taking a cue from the #KissOfLove events of ‘Krantikari’ people.


Chakravartin Samrat Ashoka was the first ruler, of the known history of India, to order restriction of number of animals slaughtered for the royal kitchen; but he did not ban animal slaughter altogether. It was Babur, the very first Mughal ruler, to ban cow slaughter and this ban continued till the British took over. His grandson, Jalaluddin Akbar, banned Haj because of its hazards and made it clear that “India cannot be ruled by Arab rules of a thousand years ago”! Akbar’s great grandson Aurangzib banned Tazias as ‘un-Islamic’. (Arabs know nothing about Tazias. In India, Tazias were developed in imitation of the Rath Yatra of Puri Jagannath.) So what did we learn? The tradition of ban on slaughter of cows was started by the very first Mughal ruler of India. So may I, with the kind permission of secularists and historians who hail Mughal rulers as reformers and epitome of religious tolerance, now proclaim that the ban on cow slaughter is NOT an act of religious intolerance?

Now let’s talk about India’s erstwhile colonial masters, i.e. the British who are credited for bringing civilization in India! White man’s burden, you see! Indian Rebellion of 1857, known to us as India’s first war of independence, and known as The Sepoy Mutiny to the #AdarshLiberal gang! The final spark of that mutiny was provided by the ammunition for the new Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifles. These rifles, which fired Minié balls, had a tighter fit than the earlier muskets, and used paper cartridges that came pre-greased. To load the rifle, sepoys had to bite the cartridge open to release the powder. The grease used on these cartridges was rumoured to include tallow derived from beef, which would be offensive to Hindus, and pork, which would be offensive to Muslims. So what did we learn here? The usage of #Beef may lead to disruption of the public order and can be proven to detrimental to the communal harmony. India is a secular nation, after all! So what if Hindus are the majority community here? They too have their religious sentiments, which ought to be respected. Now if you ask me why, despite being an #AdarshLiberal, I am equipped heavy ammunition. I will then go on to quote- from Shah Bano to Satanic Verses, from Rangeela Rasool to Vishwaroopam, from UCC to family planning- and embarrass you.

Many members of the #AdarshLiberal gang are obsessed with the cult that Mohanlal Karamchand Gandhi has become over the years. Shouldn’t they have made themselves acquainted with the teachings of the very individual whom they so fondly call the Mahatma or Father of the Nation!? If they claim to be Gandhians, they should turn vegan or at least staunchly advocate the ban of cow slaughter as Gandhi asserted so! If they’re not ready to do so, I will break their jaws when they preach any of his lunatic ideas including his celibacy experiments! 

Whatever I’ve written so far is just to show the ‘mirror’ to our #AdarshLiberal gang. I will, now, make serious arguments in favour of the ban on cow slaughter, or rather ban on the slaughter of ALL milch and draught cattle.

The article 48, of Directive Principles of State Policy reads as: “The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.” Hence, it wouldn't be far fetched to say that it was the wish of our constitution makers to impose a complete ban on the slaughter of milch and draught cattle.

The Adarsh of the #AdarshLiberal gang, Nehru did not really have any regards for either the constitution or the makers of it. It was Nehru to bring the first amendment of the constitution known as article 19(2). Therefore it is no surprise that the Central Government (of Nehru), in a letter dated 20 December 1950, directed the State Governments not to introduce total prohibition on cow-slaughter, stating, "Hides from slaughtered cattle are much superior to hides from the fallen cattle and fetch a higher price. In the absence of slaughter the best type of hide, which fetches good price in the export market will no longer be available. A total ban on slaughter is thus detrimental to the export trade and work against the interest of the Tanning industry in the country."

Nevertheless, at present, there exists a ban on cow slaughter, albeit punishment being in varying degree, in almost 25 states and UTs of India. I will, henceforth restrict my arguments to two states- Maharashtra and Haryana as respective BJP governments of these states are at the centre of the fabricated controversy, called #BeefBan by the #AdarshLiberal gang.

So far as Maharashtra is concerned, the ban on cow slaughter dates back to 1976. The then Congress government of Vasantdada Patil banned the cow slaughter in Maharashtra by passing THE MAHARASHTRAANIMAL PRESERVATION ACT, 1976.  

So what exactly did the BJP government of Devendra Fadnavis do to leave our #AdarshLiberal gang so rattled? According to The Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Bill, 1995, ban on cow slaughter is just an extended prohibition which also covers the killing of calves, bulls and bullocks. Calves, till now, could be slaughtered after acquiring the 'Fit for Slaughter' certificate from certain civic authorities. So outrageous, isn't it!?

Now according to Riyaaz Amlani, head of National Restaurant Association of India, no restaurants that he knows of in Mumbai serves cow or bullock meat. What we eat in the guise of cow beef is actually Buffalo meat.  He said, "We've been eating buffalo meat for a lot of time and we (restaurants) have been only serving buffalo meat." The new ban allows the slaughter of buffaloes whose meat is called carabeef which is generally seen as an inferior quality meat that constitutes 25% of the total beef market in the state.  So, with the kind permission of Shobha De, let me ask- WHERE’S THE BEEF (BAN imposed by the BJP government)?

Now let us talk about Haryana. Here too is a similar story. THE PUNJAB PROHIBITION OF COW SLAUGHTER ACT, 1955 (which also applies to Haryana), not only bans cow slaughter but also prohibits sale of beef. All that the BJP government of Manohar Lal Khatter has done is to increase the quantum of punishment from 2 yrs to 10 yrs. That’s it! So again, WHERE’S THE BEFF (BAN imposed by the BJP government)?

Let me now address the fundamental rights crap of the #AdarshLiberal gang! As I’ve shown above, the ban on cow slaughter, and also beef ban was already in place even before the formation of BJP, in both Maharashtra and Haryana. So what is this outrage all about? Let us, only for the sake of argument, concede that BJP governments indeed imposed a ban on both cow slaughter and beef in Maharashtra and Haryana. So what? So bloody what? The freedom of eating anything and everything does NOT fall under the fundamental rights, bestowed upon the citizens of India by the Constitution. Animals, not reared for meat, are liable to protection from slaughter. If you think that cow is the only animal whose slaughter is prohibited, you’re horribly wrong! According to THE INDIAN WILDLIFE (PROTECTION) ACT, 1972 hunting, or poaching of wild animals also is prohibited. The list of wild animals whose hunting or poaching is prohibited also includes some endangered species, e.g. rhinos, or tigers which are on the verge of extinction. Now what if I want to eat the meat of tiger or rhino? I will type the answer you give me to this question and will read it out loudly to you whenever you ask –WHERE’S THE BEEF?

There’s no religious angle in Directive Principles of State Policy of our constitution as it is essentially secular in nature and ethos! Is it too hard to see the logic behind the article 48 of the constitution? Slaughter of milch animals will lead to a steep fall in the production of milk; this will lead to the inflation in milk prices. Despite being the largest producer of milk, India continues to face the shortage of milk owing to its ever rising demand. As I know that few in the #AdarshLiberal gang have anything to do with Science, I advise them to visit this site to educate themselves about the nutrition facts of milk and its importance in the daily diet. 

It’s always better to deal with the question WHERE’S THE BEEF than WHERE’S THE MILK!

[PS: #AdarshLiberal gang must thank me as I didn't utter even a word on ban on various types of food in their dreamland, the US!]

Distilling Hindutva from Propaganda

Hindutva! There is something uncanny about this term that it leaves some people jittery even merely on its mention. The left-centric academia, which is still struggling to overcome the colonial hangover, has accorded to Hindutva everything it is not- from lack of scientific temper to superstition, from jingoism to religious intolerance, from hooliganism to (saffron) terrorism; innumerable reiteration of such false equivalences by the mainstream media coupled with fear mongering by Leftist propagandist(s), masquerading as public intellectuals, have not only perverted it but also made people preclude that Hindutva, espoused by the Bharatiya Janata Party, is a regressive ideology which has no place in India of the 21^st century.

The devastating impact of this propaganda and fear mongering can easily be gauged when you come across people, claiming to be staunch supporters of the BJP, who feel that Hindutva is a hindrance to the development agenda of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, or apprehend that the BJP can easily extend its support base if it, once and for all, discarded Hindutva.

It is, therefore, time to reiterate what Hindutva essentially is in order to shun this propaganda which is slowly yet steadily encroaching minds of some BJP supporters (who thankfully don’t yet constitute a vast majority).

If one goes by the media alone, his attempts to know Hindutva would be reminiscent of the profound story of ‘blind men and an elephant’. The meaning of Hindutva changes from person to person and organization to organization, depending upon the ideological leanings and ulterior motives of that person or organization. As has always been the case with ideologies, Hindutva too has been subjected to revisions and perversions during its journey from the 1920’s to the present date; it is, therefore, imperative to avoid both revisions and perversions while reiterating the essentials of Hindutva.

What Is Hindutva?

As I have said earlier, the meaning of Hindutva changes from person to person and organization to organization. Nevertheless, it would amount to intellectual dishonesty if one tries to understand and then goes on to judge Hindutva, or any ideology for that matter, through any of its revised or perverted version. It is, therefore, incumbent upon me to present the definition of Hindutva which is free from both revision as well as perversion. The bona fide definition, pivotal to cognize Hindutva, is the one compiled by Sri Vinayak Damodar Savarkar who also coined the term Hindutva.

Savarkar wrote, and I quote: “To this category of names which have been to mankind a subtle source of life and inspiration belongs the word Hindutva, the essential nature and significance of which we have to investigate into. The ideas and ideals, the systems and societies, the thoughts and sentiments which have centred round this name are so varied and rich, so powerful and so subtle, so elusive and yet so vivid that the term Hindutva defies all attempts at analysis. Forty centuries, if not more, had been at work to mould it as it is. Prophets and poets, lawyers and law-givers, heroes and historians, have thought, lived, fought and died just to have it spelled thus. For indeed, is it not the resultant of countless actions- now conflicting, now commingling, now cooperating- of our whole race? Hindutva is not a word but a history. Not only the spiritual or religious history of our people as at times it is mistaken to be by being confounded with the other cognate term Hinduism, but a history in full. Hinduism is only a derivative, a fraction, a part of Hindutva. Unless it is made clear what is meant by the latter the first remains unintelligible and vague. Failure to distinguish between these two terms has given rise to much misunderstanding and mutual suspicion between some of those sister communities that have inherited this inestimable and common treasure of our Hindu civilization. Here it is enough to point out that Hindutva is not identical with what is vaguely indicated by the term Hinduism. By an 'ism' it is generally meant a theory or a code more or less based on spiritual or religious dogma or creed. Hindutva embraces all the departments of thought and activity of the whole Being of our Hindu race.”

As is self-evident from Savarkar’s profound definition, Hindutva is neither religious nor spiritual in nature; it is rather a magnificent documentation of the voyage of a spectacular civilization, India, from the ancient times to this date.

How Do We Interpret Hindutva?

In order to distil the ideology from falsehoods and propaganda, it is imperative to interpret Hindutva; and if the interpretation comes from a nonpartisan Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India, it bears the utmost importance as well as credence.

Justice Verma Bench has observed: "Thus, it cannot be doubted, particularly in view of the Constitution Bench decisions of this Court that the words `Hinduism' or `Hindutva' are not necessarily to be understood and construed narrowly, confined only to the strict Hindu religious practices unrelated to the culture and ethos of the people of India, depicting the way of life of the Indian people. Unless the context of a speech indicates a contrary meaning or use, in the abstract these terms are indicative more of a way of life of the Indian people and are not confined merely to describe persons practising the Hindu religion as a faith. Considering the terms `Hinduism' or `Hindutva' per se as depicting hostility, enmity or intolerance towards other religious faiths or professing communalism, proceeds form an improper appreciation and perception of the true meaning of these expressions emerging from the detailed discussion in earlier authorities of this Court. Misuse of these expressions to promote communalism cannot alter the true meaning of these terms."

The Bench then goes on to assert: "It is, therefore, a fallacy and an error of law to proceed on the assumption that any reference to Hindutva or Hinduism in a speech makes it automatically a speech based on the Hindu religion as opposed to the other religions or that the use of words `Hindutva' or `Hinduism' per se depict an attitude hostile to all persons practising any religion other than the Hindu religion. It is the kind of use made of these words and the meaning sought to be conveyed in the speech with has to be seen and unless such a construction leads to the conclusion that these words were used to appeal for votes for a Hindu candidate on the ground that he is a Hindu or not to vote for a candidate because he is not a Hindu, the mere fact that these words are used in the speech would not bring it within the prohibition of sub-section (3) or (3A) of Section 123. It may well be, that these words are used in a speech to promote secularism or to emphasise the way of life of the Indian people and the Indian culture or ethos, or to criticise the policy of any political party as discriminatory or intolerant. The parliamentary debates, including the clarifications made by the Law Minister quoted earlier, also bring out this difference between the prohibited and permissible speech in this context." 

The Hindutva Judgment of Justice Verma’s Bench, a constitutional as well as political landmark, not only dispels apprehensions of secularists but also vindicates the BJP and the RSS. The judgment also asserts that Hindutva can be interpreted as promotion of secularism as well. The judgment established it beyond any doubt that contrary to the ill-founded criticism offered by its ideological adversaries and falsehoods spread by political adversaries of the BJP, Hindutva is essentially inclusive in nature. Hindutva is neither jingoism nor religious intolerance; it promotes neither hooliganism nor (saffron) terrorism.

Does Hindutva Mean Lack Of Scientific Temper/Superstition? 

One of the oft-repeated criticisms of Hindutva is that it is devoid of scientific temper, promotion of which is a fundamental constitutional duty of every citizen of India. Of all criticisms of Hindutva, I find this particular one not only grotesque but also condescending in nature. As I have said earlier, Hindutva is documentation of the voyage of Indian civilization from the ancient time to the present date. It is, therefore, intelligible that the ideologues of Hindutva would want to promulgate what all was achieved during the course of that voyage. These achievements include scientific achievements as well. This is where the critics of Hindutva glimpse a chance to attack the ideology, in their anticipation that people will discard Hindutva as a religious dogma, devoid of scientific temper.

Ignorance and only ignorance of astounding scientific achievements of the Indian civilization is responsible for this. Unfortunately, the ignorance is equally prevalent among critics as well as some proponents of Hindutva. Ignorance of so called Hindutva supporters, who want to assert their fantasies as achievements of the ancient Hindu civilization, has delivered a severe blow not only to the Hindutva itself but also to serious scholarly attempts to proclaim and celebrate those authentic achievements which truly belong to the ancient Indian civilization. At the same time, critics lose their credibility when they dismiss genuine achievements of the ancient Indian civilization just to score petty political points over BJP.

Recently, when Dr Harshvardhan, in his inaugural speech of the 102^nd edition of the Indian Science Congress, asserted that algebra, Pythagoras Theorem originated in India, he was squarely criticized for his ‘lack’ of scientific temper, despite being the Union Cabinet Minister of Science & Technology. This bait of Dr Harshvardhan was not only superfluous but also ignorant and hence dishonest as well as condescending in nature. The criticism was so ridiculous that even his ideological and political adversary, Dr Shashi Tharoor of Congress, too could not fathom it. Tharoor not only defended Harshvardhan but also went on to spell out numerous scientific achievements of the ancient Indian civilization. Poor knowledge of individuals, critics and proponents alike, does not make Hindutva devoid of the scientific temper.

Respect and regards for centuries old rituals can never be dubbed as superstition. Faith is not superstition, so is not mere observation of rituals. Proclamation of archaic beliefs, resoundingly discarded by Science, such as the earth is round, or miracles can heal terminal illness is of course superstition. Hindutva neither preaches nor promulgates any superstition.

Does Hindutva Mean Amalgamation Of Myths With Historical Truths?

One of the major charges often leveled by Leftist academia is that Hindutva essentially seeks the revision of India’s history and amalgamation of certain so called myths and legends with ancient history. Nevertheless, it has to be asserted that rejection of canards, some of which are still hailed as historical truths, e.g. Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) is inevitable revision in order to defeat and dispel falsehoods spread by the propagandists of India’s erstwhile colonial masters as these were nothing but the techniques devised and adopted to create fault-lines and exploit them to further their colonial and imperial policies. Scholarly and rational efforts to reinstate history are therefore neither revision nor perversion of history.

The historical and etymological genesis of the word 'Hindu' is yet deemed controversial in the left centric Indian academia. Although the Aryan Invasion Theory stands discarded, controversy apropos of history of the word 'Hindu' still continues to serve the same purpose that India is not one nation and Indians are not one people.

A historian of international repute, John Keay, in his book India: A History writes: “The word for a ‘river’ in Sanskrit is sindhu. Hence sapta-sindhu meant ‘[the land of] the seven rivers’, which was what the Vedic arya called the Panjab. The Indus, to which most of these seven rivers were tributaries, was the sindhu par excellence; and in the language of ancient Persian, a near relative of Sanskrit, the initial ‘s’ of a Sanskrit word was invariably rendered as an aspirate- ‘h’. Soma, the mysterious hallucinogen distilled, deified and drunk to excess by the Vedic arya is thus homa or haoma in Old Persian; and sindhu is thus Hind[h]u. When, from Persian, the word found its way into Greek, the initial aspirate was dropped, and it started to appear as the route ‘Ind’ (as in ‘India’, ‘Indus’, etc.). In this form it reached Latin and most other European languages. However, in Arabic and related languages it retained the initial ‘h’, giving ‘Hindustan’ as the name by which Turks and Mughals would know India. That word also passed on to Europe to give ‘Hindu’ as the name of the country’s indigenous people and of what, by Muslims and Christians alike, were regarded as their infidel religion.”

It is quite clear from Keay’s observation that Hindutva is rooted in the word Hindu that historically referred to people beyond the Indus, but was created into a religious denomination by the British. All it means is, "the way of life of the Indian people and the Indian culture or ethos", and by no means an anti minority or anti-Muslim potion.

You are naive if you believe that such criticism stems purely from fierce ideological rivalry. As Arun Shourie notes in his book Eminent Historians Of India:

"For fifty years this bunch has been suppressing facts and inventing lies. How concerned they are about that objective of the ICHR -- to promote objective and rational research into events of our past. How does this square with the guidelines issued by their West Bengal Government in 1989 which Outlook itself quotes -- "Muslim rule should never attract any criticism. Destruction of temples by Muslim rulers and invaders should not be mentioned"? But their wholesale fabrications of the destruction of Buddhist vihars, about the non-existent "Aryan invasion" -- to question these is to be communal, chauvinist! It is this which has been the major crime of these "historians"."

Not only are these "historians" partisan, not only are they nepotists, they are ones who have used State patronage to help each other in many, many ways. The people of India deserve to know true history of India and a party claiming to be the home for Hindu Nationalists must present the accurate narrative of history, consisting of irrefutable historical truths, and not amalgamation of legends and myths as their ideological adversaries allege.

Let me quote a stark example! It is about How history was made up at Nalanda. Arun Shourie nailed omission, distortion, and concoction of historical facts while documenting history of the ancient Nalanda University by eminent Marxist historian D.N. Jha. Shourie pronounced Jha guilty of not referring to primary sources to document history of Nalanda and willfully putting the blame of destruction of the 'mine of learning- honoured Nalanda' on some "Hindu fanatics". D.N. Jha hit back on Shourie in his article how history was unmade at Nalanda. Jha was then taken to the cleaners by an eminent Indologist Koenraad Elst in his article an "eminent historian" attacks Arun Shourie. This was just one example. Imagine how many lies, half-truths, perversions, omissions, distortions would be there in the vast history of India?

Is Hindutva The Nemesis Of Development?

I completely fail to understand why (some TV hitched) people of Indian origin buy the propaganda that Hindutva is the nemesis of development or the BJP would be able to widen its support base if it completely discarded Hindutva. Maybe they are convinced that the opposition parties are constantly stalling important legislations in the Rajya Sabha solely because of ongoing efforts of Hindu organizations, however within the realm of Constitution of India, to reconvert people to the Hindu fold (‘Gharwapsi’) or RSS’ Sarsanghchalak’s remarks on Mother Teresa and would promptly stop doing so if BJP steered clear of Hindutva.

What is so detrimental about the historical and cultural identity of India, which Hindutva essentially is, that the BJP needs to steer clear of Hindutva? More importantly, how exactly is Hindutva the nemesis of development? The Prime Minister, so far, has given in to the opposition and made a statement in the Parliament every time the opposition demanded his intervention. What did such interventions change? Absolutely nothing! Forget everything else, how do you explain the entire opposition slamming the government on the terror boat issue? Was Hindutva responsible for this as well?

The fact remains that the opposition parties simply don’t want any development to take place as it’s detrimental to their brand of socialist politics- the politics of poverty, caste divisions, and divisions based on religion. The opposition would like to cooperate with the BJP in passing legislations only if Modi continued with pre-existing yet flawed and failed policies espoused by them.

Nevertheless, most analysts do concede that people gave the historic mandate to the BJP for comprehensive change. So why should the BJP continue with policies which are flawed and failed? Legislations like The Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Bill, 2014 and The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment)Bill, 2015 are stalled by the opposition in the Rajya Sabha despite the fact that these bills are not only crucial to usher infrastructural development but also beneficiary to the states ruled by those very opposition parties. Are we to conclude that petty political interests are dearer than the national interest to these opposition parties? How come Hindutva becomes the nemesis of development?

That the opposition is stalling important legislations in the Rajya Sabha and not letting the Upper House of the Parliament function bears a testimony to the fact that they are using Hindutva as a proxy to justify their anti-development politics. The opposition will not cooperate on the development front even if the BJP government becomes more ‘secular’ than its predecessor UPA.

In a vibrant democracy, as India proudly proclaims itself to be, is honouring people’s mandate not a sacred duty of the opposition? During the campaign trail, the adversaries of BJP and Narendra Modi relentlessly ranted that the main agenda of the BJP was Hindutva and not development; yet the people gave a clear and decisive majority to the BJP despite all such tall claims. Are we, then, not to believe that the people voted BJP for both development and Hindutva?

Let’s be very clear here that anyone and everyone who wears the saffron robe is not the ‘thekedar’ (custodian) of Hindutva just by the virtue of the colour of his robe; Hindutva just cannot be held responsible for acts of vandalism or hooliganism espoused by a bunch of lunatics. Hooligans belong only to the prison. Hindutva is not the nemesis of development; rather both Hindutva and development are essential for India’s reinstatement as ‘Jagadguru’ (super power).

To sum it all up, Hindutva is one of the important components of the derailed growth story of India which this government is heroically trying to reinstate. Hindutva imparts the much needed self-esteem to the people of a nation which has a long history of being subjugated and enslaved. Only Hindutva has the potential to establish India as the soft power which both Narendra Modi (BJP) and Shashi Tharoor (Congress) often talk about. At the same time, many supporters of the BJP are disappointed because they feel that the BJP government has done nothing apropos of Hindutva. I do not share their pessimism. The first priority of the government is to restore the growth story of India which was derailed during the UPA regime. We must understand that Hindutva will remain a shallow exercise of sloganeering if economic prosperity does not precede cultural renaissance!