I Am A Practising Hindu. My Single Most Concern For India Is…

I am writing this post today as a practising Hindu, grateful to be from a well-to-do-yet-middle-class family in Singapore. I recently read an article written by Rana Ayyub, a left ‘liberal’ and ‘secular’ journalist from New Delhi. I have been contemplating for some time to write a reply to her, but I have decided against it. I would rather give an alternative viewpoint to the issues raised by her in her article, which were mostly just rantings of an ungrateful Indian Muslim living in India.

Like Rana did in the introduction paragraph of her article, it is impossible for me to provide you a proud gist of how great Hinduism is and the number of intellectuals, philosophers, scientists, poets, yogis, social reformers, and teachers it has produced. Frankly, a book needs to be written on it, as there is not enough space here. But sure, let us talk about Islam, because the single most concern I have for India is the rise of Islam and Islamic terrorists in India. The root of all problems that India is facing today is only because of Islam, the politics played in the name of Islam and the lives taken in the name of Islam.

As a teacher of Sanatana Dharma, I will not personally attack anyone for their views. I am no enemy to freedom of expression and freedom of speech. Rana is free to express herself and her views in any way whatsoever. However, truth is always one and two contradictory statements cannot be true at the same time. Being a practising Muslim and being a ‘liberal and secular’ person is impossible, if the words of the Quran were to be entirely taken into account. If Rana’s claim that she is a liberal and secular person were true, then she is not a practising Muslim in the true sense. The real practising Muslims are actually in the Lal Masjid of Pakistan. Maybe Rana should go and take a look at how devotedly they are practising Islam at the Lal Masjid. If she were a sensible liberal and secular person, she would see the fallacies in her reasoning.

Being liberal is akin to being open to changes. In this sense, the Quran and its teachings are already very restrictive, and none of which can be reformed or changed for the betterment of the society and to keep up with the changing times. For example, many communities around the world are more accepting of the homosexuals and transgenders today. However, these same people face significant death threats within their own Muslim community. Therefore, for a Muslim, it is impossible for him or her to be a devout practising Muslim and at the same time accept that the homosexuals of his or her own Muslim community have the right to live, pray and marry.

Likewise a practising Muslim cannot be secular as well. Secular Muslims have often identified that they do not pray five times a day, they do not read the Quran that often, and they do not spend much time in the Mosque. Frankly, many Muslims around the world are not really practising the five basic tenets of Islam at all! In fact, they cannot be referred to as practising Muslims at all! Likewise, Rana cannot be a practising Muslim, just because she claims that she is secular at the same time. The real practising Muslims today are the ones waging the Jihad, and some of them can be found in the Lal Masjid in Pakistan, the country that Rana so lovingly praises whenever she gets the chance.

Unlike Islam, Hinduism does not divide the world into believers and disbelievers. This is the utmost crucial distinction between Islam and Hinduism that makes all the difference between a rigid and cruel religion that condemns the disbelievers to eternal damnation, and a dynamic, pluralistic, and liberal religion like Hinduism. Take for example the Quran (commentary by Muhammad Ali) verse 4.144 below:


Allah will severely chastise the disbelievers and will reward the believers. The believers should rather be friends with the believers only. Outwardly they may seem to like the disbelievers, but inwardly, they hate them. This is the view of the Quran, the Holy Book that Rana claims to read fervently during the month of Ramadan, and that which she claims teaches her compassion and empathy for the poor and the down-trodden (as long as they are believers too).

This divisive mentality of the Quran can also be found within the Muslims, when they put the religion first ahead of their country, India. This is because their allegiance is more towards Muslim countries where Islam is predominantly practised and where Islam was born. How can they show allegiance to a country that has given birth to idol-worshippers like us? This is why people like Rana praise Pakistan, whenever they get the opportunity to do so, and it shows how they inwardly hate India and the increasing saffronisation of India. By any small chance, even if they do profess their patriotism towards India, it becomes really hard to trust them. Especially when ISI is rampant in India, and they are literally showing what true practising Muslims really look like.


India flourished when Sanatana Dharma was the only way of living for its indigenous population. For India to flourish again, Islam must go. In fact, all foreign faiths must go. This is the only way India can step into another Golden period. Sensible people will eventually agree that Sanatana Dharma is the only religion that makes perfect sense. For India to prosper and survive, Dharma must spread, and only Dharma will win eventually.

Anti-Hindu Agenda of India Today!

Screenshot 2017-06-21 17.39.41

Indian National media houses these days are spewing so much hatred towards Hindus and Hindu mythology, that it is becoming a norm. The Leftist so-called intellectuals are feeling threatened by the rise of Hindu Rightist intellectuals, and they are ready to be paid to write crap about a subject whose depth they have hardly understood. This is what we Hindu Intellectuals call “presstitution” and we will fight with words that follow the rules of Vak Tapas (austerity of speech); namely satyam (truth), priyam (pleasantness) and hitam (usefulness). Because unlike the pseudo-intellectual leftists, we do not spew harsh words that provide nothing useful and do not stand the test of truth.

India Today published an article on 15 June 2017, titled “8 dads from Hindu mythology we are glad we don’t have”. The article starts with justifying that there are bad examples of fatherhood even in ancient Greek culture and Christianity. But the authors conveniently miss out the worst example of a father who invented the religion called “Islam”, Prophet Mohammad. After allocating just one small paragraph in acknowledging the lack of good fatherhood examples in other religions and cultures, the rest of the article is completely dedicated to dehumanising, degrading and distorting the Hindu “mythology”.

The authors’ understanding of the Puranas and Itihasas is rudimentary and juvenile. They could have just left a single bibliography at the end of the entire article, quoting just the Amar Chitra comics. Let us take the first dad quoted by the authors as an example. The authors mention that Dushyanth (actually it is Dushmantha as per the text, but the geniuses renamed our dad-hero) and Shakuntala fell in love and got married as per the Gandharva ritual. Would the authors care to explain what rituals are involved in a Gandharva marriage? The authors also mention that Shakuntala was cursed by Sage Durvasa. Hope they have a proper Sanskrit verse to quote this detail, but I doubt they would find Sanskrit verses of the Mahabharatha in Amar Chitra Kathas. There is no single reference to Shakuntala being cursed by Sage Durvasa in the Mahabharatha. Neither did the King Dushmantha forget who is Shakuntala. The King has a primary duty towards his subjects and he cannot let any unknown woman to claim that the child belongs to him. The Gandharva form of marriage is devoid of any proper rituals and is not the best recommended form of marriage, also it is not denied for Kshatriyas. The marriage between Dushmantha and Shakuntala happened in the form of mutual and consensual sex, in secret, without the knowledge of the public. Therefore, the King Dushmantha had to publicly challenge Shakuntala to prove herself, despite knowing and remembering her involvement in his life. Shakuntala also clearly owned up to the decision she made in consenting to marry and accept Dushmantha as her husband, and she was determined to go to any lengths to make true the promise Dushmantha made to her before they had consensual sex. The promise being that the son born to both of them, Bharatha as we know now, will be the heir-apparent. She also succeeded in her endeavour. I would say that Dushmantha was a great father and a great ruler! He acted according to Dharma and he also upheld the reputation of Shakuntala and Bharatha.

I can go on to refute every single narrative that the “geniuses” have presented in this article, but I would rather not waste time when there are bigger fishes to fry.

The Leftist “intellectuals” will go to any lengths to smear the meaning of Hinduism. Their knowledge of Hinduism is forever limited and will remain limited because they do not take efforts in studying about Hinduism from the correct Hindu Scholars. Instead they rely on the likes of Sheldon Pollock, Wendy Doniger, Devdutt Pattnaik and the likes of Amar Chitra Kathas for gaining knowledge in Hinduism, conveniently avoiding true Hindu Panditas and Shrotriyas like Swami Dayananda Saraswati (Arsha Vidya), Swami Sathyanarayana Dasa (Jiva Institute) and Dr David Frawley.  It is because of their lack in this discrimination of what constitutes true knowledge, they end up employing hermeneutics of derision. The end result is the perversion of what they refer to as Hindu mythology, which is not even a mythology in the first place!


Bharat Mata Ki Jai – A Reply to Sanjukta Basu

With immense amount of respect, I bow down to Bharatha, my punya bhumi and my janma bhumi, the land of Vedic civilization, which has been the only civilization that referred to the world as one huge family; “Vasudeiva Kutumbhakam”.


Recently someone commented on my social media profile that “Hindutva” needs more women like me. My reply was simple: “If believing that #Bharat is punya bhumi, and if following #SanatanaDharma makes me a Hindutva, then yes I am. But I don’t like labels.”

Terms such as “Hindutva”, “right-wing”, and “nationalist”, are all new to me as I am also pretty new to the Twitter world. I never realized that what I have been thinking, being and practicing is being labelled as such. But as I said, I do not prefer to label myself as a “right-wing” or as a “nationalist”. I give importance to truth and only truth. I give importance to reason and knowledge. Trying to fit me under labels may give others a sense of comfort, but I simply do not care.

Despite having moved to my karma bhumi, Singapore, where I have lived since 1996, I have always felt that India is my janma bhumi and my punya bhumi. Despite the distance between me and my motherland, I find it hard to digest when someone is very unappreciative and ignorant about their own land. It boils my blood to see so-called intellectuals, Lutyen’s media, presstitutes such as Sanjukta Basu cry out loud on why they will not say “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”.

Sanjukta, I have been watching you tweet for some time now. I see the harsh words you spew in your twitter feed, and I see the way you try to pull cheap publicity stunts by calling out on the freedom of expression utilized by actors like Raveena Tandon. I am younger than you, but I can tell from reading your blog, that you have lived a life of seeking outwards for happiness, with no shine of positivity or goodness from within. Otherwise you would not be spewing such hatred and venom in your twitter feed.

Somewhere, somehow, it seems like you have lost your bearing, and that you have lost the rational part of your mind. You have such a skewed view of feminism as expressed in Hinduism. Your idea of a woman adorned in a saree is that she has been “domesticated”. Your idea of liberalism and feminism is that of a jeans and a t-shirt. Your idea of Hinduism and “Hindu Rashtra” is that in which women will be “controlled”, “subjugated” and “forced to breed” many children for the propagation of a Hindu nation. As I type out these words, I cannot believe that I am writing about a TED Fellow, a writer and a photographer. For someone as talented as you are, I simply cannot believe you can be this dumb!

Please watch her TEDx talk here before reading further. Just for laughs!

My issue is not with how Sanjukta looks, nor the way she delivered her talk on TEDx. My issue is only with the content of her talk and her article on Huffington Post, pertaining to the issue of Nationalism and Feminism.

The image of the Bharatha Mata with a lion, a trident, and adorned in a saree with gold ornaments is a narrow representation of India, according to Sanjukta. Isn’t a mother (mata) someone who nurtures you, who provides you food, who provides you knowledge and provides you sustenance? Likewise, the punya bhumi has nurtured you, and provided you food, knowledge and sustenance. We therefore equate Bharatha to the status of mother. Isn’t that why we call it our “motherland”? So, representation and imagery is not the issue here. There is clearly an issue of wrong equivalency, to which Sanjukta has not given much thought.

Apparently, this particular Shankaracarya and that particular BJP MP have said something in the lines of how many children women should have in order to increase the number of Hindus in India! Propaganda media stories are the sole source of information for Sanjukta, which she uses to portray the idea that Hinduism is severely harsh on the women folk, treating them as objects of reproduction and nothing more. In today’s world, she has this notion that women can be controlled, as though they will willingly submit themselves to the cause of Hindu Nationalism. So she uses this narration to discourage women from chanting “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”. How much more ludicrous can this sound? There is no papacy and there is no force used in Hinduism. Who is this Shankaracarya and who is this MP to dictate how men and women should behave? Are their statements substantiated by the Vedas? Sanjukta’s argument is very silly, not properly substantiated, and I really thought she would be more matured for her age and background.

“Hyper-nationalized images of Bharatha Mata strip women of their individual identity and reduce them to objects of patriotic, communal and national gratification.” This is like saying that the imagery of Goddess Parvati, Goddess Lakshmi or Goddess Saraswati, strip women of their individual identity and reduce them to objects of gratification. This cannot get more absurd. In the imagery of Bharatha, the “motherhood” is emphasized. Motherhood is seen akin to Godliness, which is translated to patriotism. What can be communal about motherhood? Is it communal if I see India as my “motherland”?

Comparison of “cow worship”, “yoga, “surya namaskar” to saluting the Indian flag, standing up for the Indian National Anthem, saying “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”, and equating both categories to “rituals”, is beyond understanding. Sanjukta has transcended all of us and she is living in a planet called “La La Land”! She denigrates Nationalism to just a performance of saluting to the flag and singing National Anthem. Then isn’t this statement questioning the sovereignty of the Nation? Isn’t this against the Constitution of India?

Nationalism is born out of the notion that we should be a free and distinct nation, governed without any interference from external influences. Nationalism is geared by the recognition of a common identity, not by the recognition of ownership of the land. No land is ever truly owned by anyone. There is only common identity that binds us as One Nation, One India. We are bound together by our cultural heritage and spiritual richness of our Vedic civilization. Anybody who denies this does not truly share the common identity of Indians. It is as simple as that! You may be a Muslim or a Christian in India today, but your cultural roots are always from the Vedic civilization. Truth does not hurt, it liberates!

I am well aware that people like Sanjukta should not be dignified with a response. But if I did not put my opinion and my response out there, there will be many Sanjuktas today blindly following each other and refusing to say something as simple as “Victory and glory be to Mother India”! At the end of the day, a feminist narrative of pro-Nationalism should also be out there for people like Sanjukta, who would never be able grasp the notion of a “Vaidika Feminist” and “Hindutva”. But hey! I do not like labels! 🙂