|
The Vedic Fatwa
by Anwar Shaikh |
EDITORIAL
| When a nation loses its cultural identity,
it loses its nationhood. This is particularly true in relation to the
Indian subcontinent. Its Muslim population suffered a crisis of cultural
identity at the hand of Islam, and started believing that they were a
Muslim nation and not Indians. This misbelief led to the partition of
India. Having turned their backs on Indianism, the Pakistanis have run
into a greater crisis of cultural identity and feel baffled, betrayed and
blown-off.
No matter whether an Indian is a Hindu, a Muslim,
a Sikh or a Christian, his cultural identity is rooted in the Vedas, and
the only effective way of reviving it, is through the "Vedic Fatwa"
- a new concept, which may even astound the Hindu ears, but it happens to
be the truth.
Possibly, the greatest reason for Indians of all
faiths to suffer cultural crisis is, that they are not aware of their
historical achievements in various fields of life. "Mysticism, The
Vedic Legacy" is an attempt to stir up memories with the facts which
have been blurred by fiction over a long period of time.
These articles have been reproduced from Anwar
Shaikh's unpublished work: "The Wonders of The Rgveda," which
portrays the Vedic roots of all Indians, that is, people from Bharat,
Pakistan and Bangladesh. In fact, Pakistan is the fountain of Hinduism.
Since Pakistanis pretend to be cultural Arabs, it shows, how ruefully the
Vedic Cultural heritage has been deserted by those, who should be proud of
it. And this is the true cause of their sorrows. |
The Vedic Fatwa
Fatwa is an Arabic word; its utterance
immediately brings to mind the denunciation, derision and devastation that Islam
has brought to the Kafirs of India. Lately, it has also been used by some
people to flout the unreasonable precedents set by the mullahs and qazis.
These remarks, though true, do not depict the real
significance of the Islamic mechanism of Fatwa, which simply stated, means
expression of the true Muslim attitude towards a mundane problem as adjudged by
a mullah or qazi. It is a judicial verdict when given by an appointed qazi
(judge) but a binding opinion when declared by a mullah of reputation. In either
case, it is taken to represent the conduct of the Prophet, who is considered the
Model of Behaviour for the faithful, and they cannot retain their faith unless
they follow the Prophet literally.
Of course, a fatwa can be a cause of division among the
believers, but it is also a great source of preaching the faith because it makes
people eager to know what the religious commands are, in given situations. The
mere necessity of asking for a fatwa i.e. the underlying principle, makes one an
active member of the faith. The zeal of Islam, which united the Muslims against
their Hindu compatriots and turned them into fundamentalists, crying for a
separate homeland, largely owes itself to the fatwas of the Ulemas belonging to
the Muslim League. Strictly speaking, I should add that it was these fatwa-mongers,
who through their opinions, played havoc with the cultural identity of the
Indian Muslims: they were told that Kafir-hating is true Islam; thus Muslims are
enemies of the Hindus, but constitute one nation with the rest of the Muslims,
no matter where they are situated in the world; they owe all the hatred to
Kaashi and all the love to Kaaba!
This way of thinking induced by the mechanism of fatwa
has persisted among the Indian Muslims, even after the Partition. In fact, their
crisis of cultural identity was deepened because they refuse to sing the
national anthem (Vande Matram) and think of Taj Mahal, Nizam-ud-Din Aulia and
etiquette of the lingering Muslim nobility as the symbols of their cultural
identity. Yet they want to live in Bharat as her privileged citizens without
having any loyalty to its integrity, law and customs. In Pakistan, the situation
is equally bad. These people have failed to form a unified nation and the flames
of their provincial and lingual prejudices are leaping higher every day. They
are also treating the shrines of their Sufi saints as the symbols of their
cultural identity: Data Ganj Rakhsh in Lahore, Shahbaz Qalandar in Sindh and
Rahman Baba in Frontier seem to be lending them the same support as a straw
offers the drowning man, whose survival actually depends upon a boat. This is
the result of the crisis of cultural identity caused by the Islamic mechanism of
fatwa, but this is not the whole story. The Hindu priesthood stands to share the
greater part of the blame. Why?
It is because the seeds of the Indian nationhood lie in
the Veda, but the Hindu priests and the intellectuals have miserably failed to
disseminate this truth. The cradle of Hinduism is essentially what is called
Pakistan, but it is Pakistanis, who owing to their gross ignorance of the Vedas,
hurl abuse at their own ancestry and adore their predators. This fear of being
plotted against by one's own countrymen (Hindus) is unique example of the
Persecution Complex. The truth is that the brahman has not discharged his duty
as the shepherd who tends his flock.
No matter how strange it may sound to the Indian ears,
Fatwa is the basic mechanism of promoting, propagating and perpetuating the
spiritual Nationalism of (undivided) India because it is only through the Vedic
Fatwa and its practical realisation that one can establish the cultural identity
of all Indians irrespective of all Indians irrespective of their religious
beliefs.
Since the Rgveda has presented the purpose of life far
more rationally than any other religion, it has a comparatively much deeper and
more proncunced philosophy of vice and virtue. It is this fact which gives birth
to a Vedic mechanism of fatwa so that people can be guided through a set of dos
and donts by separating the truth from triviality. The Vedic priest, who is not
prepared to give a fatwa i.e. unwilling to declare the vedic attitude towards an
issue, is not a priest but a pretender.
An Indian may be a Hindu, a Muslim, a Christian, a
Buddhist or a Jain, yet he knowingly or unknowingly practises the culture whose
foundations were laid by the dictates of the Vedas thousands of years ago. So
Divine is the status of the Vedas that Astikas are those who affirm the
authority of the Vedas and Nastrikas are those who deny it, but God does not
form a part of one's belief or disbelief!
The challenge of the Charvakas, the Buddhists and the
Jains was beaten off by the brahmans for the Vedas to reign supreme for many
centuries to come; sufficient enlightenment was imparted to the Hindus through
the Vedic fatwas, which told the difference between right and wrong, and thus
enabled them to endure the foreign atrocities for 1000 years. But now the
situation seems to have changed entirely: the Vedic principles are no longer
treated as immutable because Hindutva is being presented as a form of
secularism. It is good for the politician to win votes through plausibility and
it is even better for the priestly business, but it is fatal to the dignity of
the Vedas. Of course, economic affluence is helpful to the unity of a nation but
the cultural identity of all Indians depends on the Vedas because this is the
only source of their national dentity whether they be in Bharat, Pakislan or
Bangladesh.
Equating Dharma with Secularism is the greatest of all
blasphemies. This attitude may look beautiful on the surface but deep inside it
is ugly. In fact, it is a denial of Dharma. Not only to the politician, the word
"Hindutva" smells of communalism but some swamies are equally
enthusiastic in this field for attracting non-Hindu disciples in the name of
love, and thus fail to observe the difference between the dictates of Kaashi and
Kaaba, which are diametrically opposed to each other. Following the Vedic
principles, requires an honourable conduct based on boldness, truth and
self-sacrifice, but the Hindu character does not measure up to these standards
because Hindutva has become the means of self-promotion, especially at the
expense of the national interest. The recent episode of the Ramakrishna Mission
explains the situation: they are Hindu but want to be treated as non-Hindu for
personal and communal gains. Forcing such people to wear the Hindu robes through
a process of law is even more questionable because Dharma is a matter of the
heart and not showmanship.
In view of the above discussion, I believe that it is
possible to highlight the misconceptions about Hindutva through the doctrine of
the Vedic Fatwa. It is not my intention to propose remedies but this discussion
is bound to pinpoint some of the evils that have been made to look the virtues
of Dharma, and may prompt the true lovers of the faith to do something about it.
As this article is about the "Vedic Falwa,"
it is based on the authority of the Rgveda. Since exploiting religious
convictions of the faithful, is a cheap old device of the political and priestly
sharks, I must not follow this example, and demonstrate the authenticity of the
Rgveda as the only reliable historical document, which may decisively settle the
issue that I am about to tackle.
It is only through the mechanism of the Vedic Fatwa
that the national identity of the Indians can be ascertained, and this point, as
I shall discuss shortly, is vital to the foundations of Hindusim. In fact, it is
equally applicable to all people of the Indian subcontinent i.e. Bharat,
Pakistan and Bangladesh. It is because the word: "Hindu" refers, not
only to the member of a religious group, but also to the national of a homeland.
A Jewish person is a good example of this fact: he is a Jew not only because he
professes to have the Mosaic faith but also because he belongs to a certain
racial group. Exactly, what is called a Hindu today, was once known as an Aryan,
who believed in the Rgveda and belonged to Saptasindhu, land of the Seven
Rivers, his original home.
The word "Aryan" has special significance in
relation to the Vedic Fatwa but through a long and variegated debate, the
meaning of the word: "Aryan" and the location of his original homeland
have been made highly controversial. This knot, I believe, can be undone by the
Rgveda only, which is considered the only authority on this subject by the
international scholars of all creeds.
In view of his great scholarship, I am tempted to quote
the late Professor Ralph T. H. Griffith, whose monumental work: "The Hymns
of the Rgveda," needs no introduction.
In the preface, he quotes F. Max Muller:
"What can be more tedious than the Veda and yet
what can be more interesting, if once we know that it is the first word spoken
by the Aryan man?"
"The Veda has a two-fold interest: it belongs to
the history of tlhe world and to the history of India ... As long as man
continues to take an interest in the history of his race, and as long as we
collect in libraries and museums the relics ot former ages, the first place in
that long row of books which contain the records of the Aryan branch of mankind,
will belong for ever to the Rgveda." ( P.i )
This quotation evidently proves the greatness of the
Rgveda as the most authentic and significant part of human history, which owes
its origin to India. The late Professor further describes the international
cultural influence of the Rgveda when he states on P vi-vii:
"The great interest of the Rgveda is, in fact,
historical rather than poetical. As in its original language, we see the roots
and shoots of the languages of Greek and Latin, of Kelt, Teuton and Slovanian,
so the deities, the myths, and the religious beliefs and practices of the Veda
throw a flood of light upon the religions of European countries before the
introduction of Christianity. As the science of comparative philology could
hardly have existed without the study of Sanskrit, so the comparative history of
the religions of the world would have been impossible without the study of the
Veda. "
It clearly shows that Sanskrit is the mother of the
European tongues. How shameful it is that the Western scholars talk of a sister
Indo-European language with the sole purpose of avoiding their indebtedness to
Sanskrit. Is it not amazing that Sanskrit is still live and kicking despite the
horrendous adversities that it has suffered through the ages but the
"Indo-European" became extinct without any trace in the green valleys
of Europe? The truth is that this language is just a figment of the Western
imagination. Sanskrit being the mother of the European languages, also proves
that it is a lot older than Greek and Latin. Again, as the Rgveda was composed
in the Punjab, Sanskrit must be the language of the Punjab, spoken by its
people. This is considerable evidence to show that civilisation started in the
Punjab, which has got to be the original homeland of the Aryans.
Having established that the Rgveda is the most reliable
source of history on the subject, I may now quote from it to establish that
Panjab is the original home of the Aryans. With a view to expressing the
significance of my argument, I may ask the reader to bear in mind the concept of
Tutelary God. In the olden times, every country believed in a Chief God,
exclusive to itself. Even if that God claimed to be the Creator of "heaven
and earth, " He was considered by the people of the country as their Patron
God, who dwelt in their land. Some of the ancient examples are: Zeus of Greece
and Jupiter of Rome. These gods had the same nationality as their worshippers.
Thus Zeus was Greek and Jupiter was Roman.
However, a more relevant instance is that of Yahwe, the
Jewish God, who claims to be the Creator of heaven and earth, yet He is very
much Jewish Himself because He lives in Jerusalem and openly announces that:
" ... thou mayest bring forth my people the
Children of Israel (EKodus 3: 10). This is the statement of the Jewish God in
relation to the Jewish people. In Exodus 7: 4, He again asserts that the Jews
are "my people." In Leviticus 20: 24, He promises His people a
homeland, which is roughly the modern Israel and in Leviticus 20: 26, He openly
declares: "And ye (the Jews) shall be holy unto me: for I the Lord am holy,
and have severed you from other people, that ye shouId be mine."
Hopefully, the above quotations explain the concept of
a tutelary God, who belongs to a certain land and people, and protects them for
belonging to them exclusively even though He may claim to be the Creator of the
universe. Tutelage, is thus the choice of God, and there is nothing that one can
do about it. Now, against this background, read the following statement of Lord
Indra, the Tutelary God of the Aryans:
" ... Over all the streams that flow along
the earth, I took the Seven Rivers as
mine own domain .." ( Tg. X: XLIX: 9)
"Domain" means: what one is master of or has
dominion over: an estate: territory: ownership of land, etc. The word
"mine" is also noteworthy because the God Indra is categorically
stating that He has chosen the Land of the Seven Rivers, as His own territory
i.e. His homeland. It is generally agreed that the Seven Rivers refer to the
following rivers of the Panjab:
1. Sindhu (Indus),
2. Sutudri - later Satadru, the modern Sutlej,
3. Parusni - later Iravati, modern Ravi,
4. Askini - later Candrabhaga, modern Chenab,
5. Vitasta, modern Jhelum,
6. Vipas, modern Beas, and
7. Kubha/Sarasvati.
However, there is a difference of opinion about the
identity of the Seventh river. Some think that the Kubah i.e. the modern Kahul
is meant whereas others include Sarasvati into the Land of the Seven Rivers.
One should bear in mind that the Sindhu or Indus is a
great trans-Himalayan river, stretching for 1800 miles. It rises in the
southwestern Tibet and crossing the southeastern boundary of Jammu and Kashmir,
enters Pakistan and is joined by the Kabul River just above Attock. This fact
brings into the territory of the Seven Rivers, the Panjab, Kashmir and Frontier
Province including the Tribal lands of the North West. Sarasvati, an eastern
river of the Panjab though often mentioned and highly eulogised stream of the
Rgveda, may not be included for two reasons: firstly, it has been remarked that
it is another name for the Sindhu, and secondly, the following verse from the
Rgveda clearly states that Sarvasti does not form part of the Seven Streams
because the Aryans settled in this area after they had heen forced by the Dasa
to emigrate; the Hymn LXI dedicated to Sarasvati showers a lot of reverence on
this stream, and also adds:
9. She (Sarasvati) has spread us beyond all foes,
beyond her sisters, Holy one,
As Surya spreadeth out the days.
10. Yea, the most dear amid clear streams,
Seven-sistered, graciously inclined,
Sarasvati hath earned our praise."
(VI: LXI: 9-10)
Read with the above, the following, and you get the
clearer picture
26. "For thou (Indra) art he who conquers all our
foes for us.
27. Who will set free from ruinous woe or Arya on
the Seven Streams:
O valiant Hero, bend the Dasa's weapon
down."
(VIII: XXIV - 26, 27)
For the proper understanding of the problem, one must
realise that there lived Five Tribes in the Land of the Seven Rivers, who called
themselves the Aryans. They were closely related and war-allies. Thus, they
formed the dominant force ot the area. They were by no means the only Aryans.
The word Aryan applied to all inhabitants of the territory, but those who
practised a different faith, were contemptuously called Dasa and Dasyus, though
racially they were also natives of the same land. Besides, there were
"lesser Aryans" who practised the same faith as did the Five Tribes
but did not have closer ties with them. Thus they did not form part of the
ruling Five Tribes of the Aryans. These verses clearly state that the Five
Tribes were at war, not only with the Dasa, but also with the "lesser
Aryans." When the Five Tribes suffered a setback, at least some of them
emigrated to the area where the Sarasvati flowed. As they found peace and
prosperity there, they raised this stream to the rank of a goddess like Sindhu.
This land of Seven Streams, the home of Indra, God of
the Aryans, was once called Panjab. It was the force of the vedic Fatwa i.e. the
fundamental Vedic doctrine of Dharma which caused the division of Aryan and
Dravidians and forced the Aryan emigration to various parts of the world, but
the West, unwilling to accept this historical truth, invented the theory of the
"Aryan invasion of India" to hide their Indian ancestry. Anyway, who
wants to be called an Indian when an Indian has come to mean a "slave,
" a "savage, " an "uncouth, " and so on.
I have a genuine praise for my ancestors, who civilised
the world with their sword and the spiritual might of the Veda. I am, therefore,
inclined to add a bit more about Panjab, the original homeland of the Arvans
before dealing with the concept of the Vedic Fatwa:
" (Indra) who slew the Dragon, freed the Seven
Rivers .." ( II: XII: 3)
The legend has it that Vrtra the Dragon also known as
"serpent of the cloud" and "demon of draught," when sealed
the sources of the Seven Rivers, Indra, the tutelary God of the Panjab, slew
Vrtra ( Ahi ) to restore water supplies to the area. It demonstrates the special
relationship of Indra with the Punjab.
As in the Islamic mythology, all benedictions from
heaven, descend on Mecca, the hometown of the Prolphet Muhammad, according to
the Rgveda, all celestial bounties are reserved for the land of the Seven
Rivers. The Hymn LXVII of Book VII, addressed to Asvins (the deities of light),
states:
One can see here that the chariot af Asvin i.e. the
beneficent role of Asvins is confined to the Panjab only.
Again, another hymn states:
"Most active of the active, Sindhu unrestrained,
like to a dappled mate, beautiful,
fair to see.
Rich in good steeds is Sindhu, rich in cars
and robes, rich in gold, nobly fashioned,
rich in ample wealth ... " (X: LXXV: X: 7-8)
There is a good deal of depth in these verses: Sindhu is
not only a river of the Panjab because it runs through the entire length of this
land but it also itself means the Panjab because other Six rivers of the Panjab
also join Sindhu at different points, and thus it becomes the representative of
the entire Panjab, which is addressed as Sindha, the God, by the Vedic rishies.
The aim of tnis lengthy discussion is to destroy the
myth that the Aryans were foreign invaders in India, and to establish that the
truth is the other way round, that is, the Aryans were the natives of the Panjab
who migrated to other countries of the east and the west; they took with them
the Vedic principles and culture, which civilised the world. The first challenge
to the Vedic civilisation came from Christianity when Rome crumbled before its
sallies. I have discussed these historical facts in various issues of the
quarterly "Liberty" under the following headings:
The purpose of this article is to eplain the concept of
Vedic Fatwa in action, which caused waves of emigration from the Panjab leading
to the civilisation of the world.
What is Vedic Fatwa? It is the exact antithesis of
secularism, which has given birth to an international culture, believing in the
justification of means to gain the end, thus commending the Machiavellian
morality of deceit, duplicity and devastation. On the contrary, the Vedic stance
is based on high morality and chivalrous attitudes. Scores of times the Rgveda
mentions Mitra and Varuna, the Twin Lords of Law and Morality. Being totally
free from guile themselves, they expect an honourable conduct from their
devotees.
The Chief God of the Panjab was called Indra. Those who
believed in Indra and other senior Gods of his group such as Agni, Aryaman,
Mitra, Varuna, etc., called themselves Aryans i.e. pure, noble and civilised but
those who did not believe the Aryan Gods, were contennptuously called Dasa and
Dasyus. Both the Arvans and Dasa-Dasyus were the natives of the Land of the
Seven Rivers. It is the Vedic Fatwa which brought about their permanent
division, and the political forces of times played havoc with the unity of these
people. A comparatively recent example is that of Islam in India. Those
countless millions who embraced Islam, they fell into a psychological depression
and began to believe that they were the children of foreign invaders! Thus they
destroyed the unity of their Motherland by creating Pakistan which suffered a
similar fate. These Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are Aryans, and not the children
of the Semitic invaders. There is no mention anywhere in the Rgveda that the
Arvans came from abroad. Whenever they praise the natural phenomenon, they extol
the Land of the Seven Rivers, and nothing else. Had they come from elsewhere
they would have naturally expressed nostalgia for that country. Even the
Dasa-Dasyus do not call them as foreigners. Sometime the Dasa won and sometime
the Aryans. It led to a perpetual outflow of manpower, which proved disastrous
to the political glory or the Panjab.
Now South India is nursing a similar dream of
separation. The irony is that these people call themselves Dravidians, the true
natives of India, yet they want to divide their Motherland! What a strange
patriotism! To expel the grave misunderstanding of history which treats the
Aryans as foreign invaders, I have allotted sufficient space to this issue. Now
I may demonstrate that the Aryan-Dravidian dichotomy is not racial, but a
spiritual division between members of the same race. History repeats itself: a
similar tragedy has been echoed by the Hindu- Muslim rift despite the fact that
95% Muslims are of the Indian origin and the remaining 5% have become Indian by
their long domicile. However, what is astonishing is that this separation has
been caused by the Koraic Fatwa, but the Aryan-Dravidian gulf has been created
by the Vedic Fatwa. However, there is a difference between the two: the former
is the tool of foreign dominance but the latter is an example of virtue versus
vice. It is simply because the Veda does not compromise on its basic principles,
which constitute Dharma irrespective of what the Secularists may claim. See this
truth for yourself:
"Around us the Dasyu, riteless, void of
sense, inhuman, keeping alien laws.
Baffle, thou Slayer of the foe, the weapon
which Dasa wields." (X: XXII: 8)
This hymn is dedicated to Indra, Chief God of the Aryans
i.e. the people who obey his commands. The rishi (priest) is invoking God's
succour against those who do not follow the Vedic doctrine. It must be noted
that these infidels are not being called as "foreigners" but those who
have got used to "keeping alien laws." At that time, Law applied to
both legal and moral practices. Since it is the Aryan priest, who is pleading
with the God, he himself cannot be a foreigner. Thus both Aryans and Dasa are
members of the same race, and it is the Vedic Fatwa or attitude towards the
unbelievers, which instigates believers i.e. the Aryans to engage themselves in
an active struggle against the infidels, that is, the Dravidians, contemptuously
called Dasa and Dasyu.
Since Aryan versus Dravidian divide has been a ruinous
misunderstanding of India, I may emphasise again that the rift is not racial but
spiritual, being an expression of the Vedic Fatwa i.e. the vedic attitude
towards the lawless, determined to destroy peace, prosperity and plentitude. The
Rgveda declares:
"(Indra) Burn like a vessel with.the flame, the
lawless Dasyu, Conqueror!" (I: GLXXV: 3)
" ... (Indra) chase thou the many godless evil
creatures,
and give us, Maghavar,
heaven's light to help us." (III: XXXI: 19)
" ( Indra ) down sink the sorcerer, the
prayerless Dasyu." (IV: XVI: 9)
There are many more verses in the rgveda, which testify to
the fact that the Dasa and Dasyus were the deniers of Indra, who practised
non-Vedic laws and rituals and were held as "Raksasas," a race of
demons, hell-bent on perpetuating evil. This divide was strictly spiritual
because racially both the Aryans and Dravidians (Dasa-Dasyus) belonged to the
same stock. The Rgveda is quite clear about it:
" Good Lord of wealth is he to whom all
all Aryas, Dasas here belong."
(Valakhilya, VIII: III: 9)
"Good Lord" is Indra, who is the tutelar Deity
of the Panjab. The word: "here" clearly denotes the area: it means
that as Indra is God of the Panjab, both Dasas and Aryans are racially His
people, though spiritually they are miles apart.
However, the mischiet-mongers have exploited the
following verse:
"Treasure of gold he (Indra) won; he smote the
Dasyus, and gave protection to the Arya colour."
(III: XXXIV: 9)
Since this verse blatantly contrasts with the one already
quote. "Arya colour" cannot mean what it appears to be. Again, the
theme of colour is nowhere pursued in the Rgveda. This phrase is ambiguous.
"Aryan colour" implies the degree of devotion of those, who profess to
be Aryans i.e. the worshippers of Indra.
The following quotations may help solve this problem:
"Those who array themselves as foes to
smite us, O Indra,
be they kin or be
they strangers, -
Strike thou their manly strength that it
be feeble, and drive in headlong flight
our foemen backward." (VI: XXV: 3)
It means that there was a continual strife not only
between the Aryans and Dasa-Dasyu but also between the Aryans and Aryans. In
this situation whose colour was Indra to protect? Basing Aryan distinction on
colour is the apex of mischief-making.
This problem is better understood when we realise that
there were Five Tribes of Aryans, the believers, who claimed special
relationship with Indra:
"The Five Tribes whom He loveth well
have entered the light he loveth that
was made aforetime." (X: LV: 2)
The "Five Tribes loved by Indra" were possibly
the priestly-warrior people, a kind of the English Puritans, who lived austere
lives and loved dominance. They had closer family-ties and also practised
nnilitary alliance:
"When the Five kindered Companies, active
in duty, with the song
Establish Him, the Powerful." (IX: VIV: 2)
They have beer referred to repeatedly n the Rgveda. From
the above, it is evident that they fought other tribes to establish God, as the
Powerful. The Islamic doctrine of Jehad is a reflection of this practice whereby
a clan or a nation secures the right of dominating other people in the name of
God, and thus all those who try to defend their honour qualify as infidels or
Dasyu irrespective of who they are:
"The godless man, much lauded Indra,
whether he be Dasa or be Arya, who
would war with us, -
Easy to conquer be for thee, with us, these
foes: with thee may we subdue them
in the clash of fight." ( X: XXXVIII: 3)
Colour of skin had, obviously, nothing to do with the
Dasas or the Aryans. It is simply a spiritual division dictated by the Vedic
doctrine to enforce the rule of virtue. It is a consequence of the Vedic Fatwa
though viciously exploited by those, whose purpose it serves.
It is now clear that the distinction between the Aryans
and the Dravidians is not racial but spiritual and stems from the Vedic
attitude, which is determined not to compromise its fundamental principles at
any costs. Though the modern Hindus have drifted miles away from the basic Vedic
faith yet they have endured a great deal of sufferings and made tremendous
sacrifices to maintain their Vedic appearance. It is a lot to be proud of yet it
is not enough to survive as an honourable nation because lately they seem
ashamed of their Vedic heritage and falling for secularism. Option for
Secularism at the expense of Vedisim exhibits love for the former and lip
sympathy for the latter. The Hindus think that their secular approach serves the
national interest because it brings their Muslim brethren closer to them. How
mistaken they are! Those who refuse to sing the national anthem (Vande Mataram)
cannot be nationals of the land. Such people have developed morbid conscience
which has lost receptivity to reason and moral decency.
May be the major cause for Secularism is the political
drive for cheap popularity, prestige and power. Men like Gandhi and Nehru, who
showed the most dishonourable conduct in yielding to the demand of partition,
have been raised to the status of gods instead of being awarded posthumous
punishment befitting impostors. The Vedic Fatwa against such people is quite
clear:
When in my dwelling-place I see the
wicked enemies of Gods,
King chase their l atred far away, thou
Bounteous One, dispel our foes (VIII: LXVIII: 9)
India was surely the dwelling-place of all Indians but
those who demand the partition of the Motherland, must have been expelled from
the country. When the right time for expulsion came and it was quite feasible to
do so, the Hindu leadership stood by the Bharat-bashers and begged then not to
leave. Still worse, these people have been wooed since then for their votes and
the Vedic principles have been shelved to promote Secularism.
Secularism is great if it means democracy based on
equal human rights with freedom of conscience, but this principle also implies
equal responsibility to the Law and complete devotion to the integrity of the
Motherland. However, in India, Secularism means persecution of the majority by
the minority and gradual demolition of all its cultural institutions and
traditions. How many Muslims are in India, who do not think of this land as Dar-ul-Harb?
How many of them are willing to intermarry with the Hindus? How many of them are
willing to pray to Allah facing Kaashi instead of Kaaba? (After all, according
to the Koran, Allah is everywhere.) How many of them are willing to sing Vande
Mataram?
The people who refuse to accept their country of birth
as their Motherland and deny her the motherly reverence, are simply traitors,
and must be resisted to the hilt.
Before I pronounce the Vedic Fatwa against such people,
I must declare that the truly Vedic Society is humanistic and liberal. Here is a
very brief sketch:
1. "O Earth and Heaven, with all the Gods, protect
us." (I: XXXI: 8)
It means that the Vedic Society is a pluralistic society,
protected by all Gods. Therefore, there is no sectarianism therein, and nobody
shall be discriminated against on the ground of colour, creed or race.
2. The Vedic Society is based on the universality of
mankind:
"Held in the lap of Savitar, divine One, all
men,
all beings have their place for ever." (I: XXXV: 5)
3. Savitar is the sun-god, who is generator, vivifier
and stinnulator. This hymn dedicated to him, announces the equal rights of all
men. Also look at the following:
"Thou as a god, O Mightiest (Indra) verily
blessest mortal man .....
And measure out to us, thou (Indra) lover of
mankind." (I: LXXXIV: 19-20)
Here one can see that the Vedic Society is all about human
welfare and does not advocate sectarianism. It is certainly different from an
Islamic Society in which a non- Muslim is legally treated as a dhimmy, a second
class citizen, who being a Kafir, has no substantive rights, whatever. To
acknowledge his own contempt, he has to pay Jaziya, a religious tax, and if he
does not, he becomes an outlaw.
However, there is a fundamental difference between a
Vedic Society and a Secular Society. The latter allows convenient morality,
which allows the choice of means to secure the end, whereas the former is all
about piety and righteous character governed by the Vedic Law:
" ... ye bounteous Gods:
Let not the wicked master us." (I: XXIII: 9)
It is the aim of the Vedic Society to secure righteousness
by eliminating wickedness from the society. Therefore, evil men shall have no
place in the administration. Again, as the appeal is to the "bounteous
Gods" who are Universal (I: XXIII: 10), the Vedic Society is a Welfare
Society dedicated to the good of all.
Thus non-Hindus stand to gain everything that the
Hindus shall, but they shall not be allowed to flout the Vedic Law because the
entire Vedic Sripture is based on the acknowledgement and reverence of the Law.
It is because the Veda holds the Law as the Supreme governor, and the source of
knowledge, which is the fountain of civilisation.
Now, let us see how the mechanism of the Vedic Fatwa is
built:
1. A hymn to the God Agni, states:
"Agni bring hitherward the Gods whose Laws we
love,
whose Laws we love, to show us grace."
( X: GL: 3)
Here the repetition of the "Laws we love" shows
the fundamental position of the Vedic Law in the society. There is no compromise
on this point. A Vedi (follower of the Vedas) must fight the enemies of the
Vedic Law:
"Around us is the Dasyu, riteless, void of
sense, inhuman, keeping alien laws,
Baffle thou (Ubdra) Slayer of the foe, the weapon
which this Dasa wields." (X: XXII: 8)
It must be noted that the Veda does not allow the
introduction of the alien laws in the Vedic Society. Believe me, the Vedic Law
is still the most advanced in the world today.
2. According to the Vedic Law, it is a grave offence to
speak ill of Dharma or molest the followers of the Veda:
"May sin overtake our human foes, the
man who speaketh evil things,
Him who would cause our misery, whose
heart is false." (VIII: XVIII: 14)
3. The followers of the Veda are required by Law to
preserve themselves against the Godless:
"Preserve us from the Godless, from
ill-omened voice of one and all .." (IX: XXIX: 5)
4. A Vedi does not surrender to the aggressor or
spoiler. If he runs away, he does so only to fight another day: his withdrawal
is only tactical to bounce back with greater dctermination:
"Give not us up a prey to sin, O Agni, the
greedy enemy that brings us trouble;
Not to the fanged that bites, not to the
toothless: give not us up, thou Conqueror,
to the spoiler
Such as thou art, born after Law, O Agni
when lauded give protection to our bodies." ( I: GLXXXIX: 5-6)
5. No aggression without a cause, is an important law
of the Veda:
"Him to who threatens without offence
of ours, the evil minded, arrogant,
rapacious man,
Him turn thou from our path away,
Brahspati .." (II: XXIII: 7)
6. Checking the evil is a fundamental duty of a vedi:
" ........................................
Strike, O Brhaspati, the God's revilers
down, and let not the unrighteous come
to highest bliss." (II: XXIII: 8)
7. Over a period of centuries, the whole of India
became the Land of the Vedas, making her the Home of all those, who feel
Indian by virtue of birth and devotion. Therefore, defence of Bharat-Mata is
the most sacred duty of a Vedi.
To express the reverence of Bharat Mata to an Indian, I
may quote from First hymn, Book XII of the Atharva Veda, comprising sixty three
verses, referred to as Bhumi- Sukta. It describes the heavenly esteem that the
Vedas attach to India.
Verse 12 expresses the total devotion of an Indian to
Bharat Mata:
" ... I am the son of Earth, Earth is my
Mother."
It is all about the Earth which is Bharat Mata. The One
who acknowledges her such is a patrict irrespective of his personal beliefs but
the one who does not, is a traitor both to Bharat Mata and Dharama. It is
because Bharat Mata is the fountain of all the Vedic traditions. Treason is one
offence which is not pardonable.
In view of the size of this article, I think that I
have said enough to give a fair idea of the basic principles, which constitute
the mechanism of the Vedic Fatwa.
It is high time that the Vedic priests invoked
different sections of the veda to issue fatwas for stimulating interest in its
fundamentals. For example, a unified Civil Code for India is a must. Since the
Vedic Law is supreme in the Land of the Vedas, no alien law should be allowed to
prosper there. No conspiracy or open rebellion must be tolerated. The Rgveda
proposes severe punishment in such matters:
"Agni, whoever secretly attacks us, the
neighbour, thou with Mitra's might,
who harms us,
Burn him with thine own Steers (strong flames) for
ever youthful, burning with burning heat,
thou fiercest burner." (VI: V - 4)
Using the Vedas just for the birth-wedding-death rituals,
has made them dumb and ineffective; pronouncing fatwas (responsibly) on
important issues is the only way of making them active and effective again.
Upholding the Law is the foremost duty of a Vedi, who
must wage a war against those who oppose the introduction of a unified Civil
Code:
"Indra give up the lawless to the pious
man, destroying by the Strong Ones
those who have no strength." (I: LI: 8)
Law, here means the Vedic Law, and the Vedi has got to be
strong to enforce it. Obviously, a weakling is no Vedi because he cannot protect
the Law.
|
Previous
Essay
