On behalf of the besieged, battered but not yet shattered Hindus of India, Dr Hanuman Chowdary has issued a historic landmark document called The Hindu Manifesto which I would call as Hindu Magna Carta Libertatum (‘Great Charter of Hindu Freedoms’). What is Magna Carta? In 1214, the Barons of England met in the Abbey Church and swore that they would force King John(1199 – 1216) to accept the Charter of Liberties later known as Magna Carta.
On 15 June 1215 at Runnymede, the Emperor of England King John (1199-1216), agreed to a document that later became known as Magna Carta. He did not sign it: indeed there is no evidence that he could write, but within days copies bearing his seal were produced by the royal chancery. Four originals of this document survive, one in Lincoln Cathedral, one in Salisbury Cathedral and two in the British Library.
The constitutional importance of Magna Carta lies in the fact that it placed limits upon the absolute power of the King John and made him subject to the law. The most famous of its sixty-three clauses said that no free man could be imprisoned, outlawed or exiled except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land, and that justice could not be sold, delayed or denied.
Sir Edward Coke, (1552 – 1632) the Lord Chief Justice, said that Magna Carta was ‘declaratory of the principal grounds of the fundamental laws of England’ and it formed a basis for the Petition of Right (1628).
One of Coke’s greatest contributions to the LAW was to interpret Magna Carta to apply not only to the protection of nobles but also to all subjects of the crown equally, which effectively established the LAW in England as a guarantor of rights among all subjects against even Parliament and the King. Sir Edward Coke famously asserted: ‘Magna Carta is such a fellow, that he will have no sovereign.’
The clauses of Magna Carta were also echoed in early American colonial charters, in the American Declaration of independence (1776) and in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Three of its clauses still stand on the English Statute Book, including its most famous one protecting free men from arbitrary imprisonment and prohibiting the sale, denial or delay of justice. Magna Carta (Latin for ‘Great Charter’, literally ‘Great Paper’), is considered one of the most important legal documents in the history of democracy.
Dr Hanuman Chowdary’s ‘Hindu Manifesto’ makes it clear that the Government of India and all the State Governments after our independence have only functioned as effective spokesmen and official defenders of so called ‘Minorities’—the peace-loving and compassionate (?) Muslims and even more compassionate (?) Christians—at the cost of ever-tolerant and ever-defenceless Hindus in majority in India. His ‘Manifesto’ clearly brings out the fact that the Hindus in India have been reduced to the status of marginalized second class citizens in a planned and diabolic manner.
Against this background—known and unknown—I am presenting below ‘The Hindu Manifesto’:
1. Preamble:
No nation is shy of proclaiming and taking pride in its heritage. Although the European nations had been converted to Christianity in the first millennium, all of them especially, the Anglo-Saxons are proud of their Greco-Roman heritage and civilization although they were pre-Christian and “pagan” at that. Also those countries are not ashamed of affirming their Christian identity despite their having various religious and racial minorities in their midst. In fact, there are Christian Democratic Parties in Germany and Italy which have held and are holding power and have been affirming their commitment to Christian values.
2. Unfortunately in India, it has become almost insufferable in some quarters to say, that we are a Hindu people with a Hindu civilization and culture. Even the words Bharat & Bharatiya are being shied away from being used. A leftist “progressive” professor of the Jawaharlal University violently denounced these words Bharat & Bharateeyas and asserted that “we are all Indians”. She did not realize that there is no word, India in any of the languages of this country. Such is the visceral hostility of some sections of people in India towards Hindu, Hinduism, Bharat & Bharateeyas.
The reason for this perverted vision largely appears to be the result of the ‘Macaulayan Education’. The famous Minute of Lord Macaulay recorded in 1835 passionately advocated English education aimed at producing generations of Indians who would be Indian only in colour and blood but who in tastes, in views, in preference and in culture would be English men in every sense of the word. On top of this, many of our Universities and educational institutions are infiltrated by Marxists. These two streams of “educated but anti-national” men are united with Muslim residents of India, 95 per cent of whom have descended from converts from Hinduism but are totally alienated from its culture and civilization and who have been trying assiduously to keep themselves separate from the rest of the population.
3. It is therefore absolutely necessary that the spirit of patriotism, pride in our Hindu heritage, culture and religion are revived just as in the days of the Vandemataram Swadesi Movement of 1905. In today’s India, Hindus must stridently tell all political parities that those who do not respect our Hindu heritage and are not proud of their own Hindu religion and their own Hindu culture would not get any Hindu votes. We should proudly assert our right to call ourselves Bharateeyas and our country as Bharat.
4. Our Manifesto:
4.1 Article-30 of the Constitution guarantees extraordinary rights and privileges to religious (and linguistic Minorities) to establish and manage educational institutions of their choice. By an unfortunate judgment of the Supreme Court, this Article is being utilized by the religious (and linguistic) minorities to start professional colleges for engineering, medicine, dentistry, management computer applications etc. There is no limit to the number of the Minority Colleges. None of these subjects have anything to do with Islamic/Christian religion or Islamic/Christian culture or that Islamic/Christian civilization.
The ‘Admission capacity’ for these institutions is not at all related to the population of the Minorities or more importantly and relevantly to those who are educated among the minorities and thus eligible for admission to these ‘Minority Institutions’. 70-80 per cent of the seats in these ‘Minority Institutions’ are being sold to the II Class Hindus and the monies thus collected from them are being utilized only to destroy Hinduism by conversion and other aggressive activities. Governments have little control over the management, selection and appointment of teachers and other staff in these Minority Institutions. They are thus functioning above the law of the land and the declared spirit of the Indian Constitution.
Such a right is denied to the Hindus of India. Hinduism is a religion with followers drawn from several castes. Actually, every caste is a ‘Minority’ within the fold of Hinduism. Either Art-30 must be so amended as to confine educational institutions to which this Article refers or applies, to be applicable only to religion and culture and language and history of these people and not for non-religious secular subjects like engineering, medicine, law, education etc. In the alternative, the same ‘Minority’ right and privilege must be given to the Hindus also which should include Buddhists and Jains and every other religious sect in India.
4.2 Art -25 gives the right to profess, practise and propagate religion. Actually, all rights included in Articles - 26 to 30 of the Indian Constitution ought to be made applicable only to individuals and not doled out as a cluster of rights given to a group of people, by calling them a Minority or a religious group. The term ‘right to propagate’ is being used to by Christians to decimate the Hindus. Conversion has become a full time business of Christian Missions and Churches and their allied NGOs. with tens of thousands of full time paid religious mercenaries.
They receive money from all quarters of the world. We cannot view this freedom as the right of an individual but as unbridled freedom given undeservedly to aggressive, proselytizing Christian religious organizations to market religion in a commercial manner so as to gain converts just as any other sphere of corporate commercial business gets customers.
There are advertisements, there are TV/stage shows and talks and rallies and assemblies on par with commercial companies which launch their products and services through aggressive propaganda. This has nothing to do with spirituality. It is plain and simple aggression on Hindus who don’t believe in conversion. This one-way aggressive trade is obnoxious and amounts to war on Hindus. The Art-25 should be amended to restrict the freedom of religion to profess and practise and not to propagate. Propagation by multi-national conversion enterprises is aggression on Hindus and infringement of their own existence. The Article 25 should be amended to delete the word ‘Propagate’.
I shall deal with the remaining parts of Dr Hanuman Chowdary’s ‘Hindu Manifesto’ in Part III of this article.
(to be continued)
No comments:
Post a Comment