Definition of 'Star' - Where are we heading?

The body of Major Manish Pitambare, who was shot dead at Anantnag, was cremated with full military honours at Thane on Wednesday.

On Tuesday a news swept across all the news channels
'Sanjay Datt relieved by the court'.
'Sirf Munna Not a bhai'
'13 saal ka vanvaas khatam'
'Although found guilty for possession of armory, Sanjay can breath sigh of relief as all the TADA charges against him are withdrawn'
And then many experts like Salman Khan saying 'He is a good person. We knew he will come out clean'
Mr. Big B 'Datt family and our family have relations for years he's a good kid. He is like elder brother to abhishek'.
His sister priya Datt 'we can sleep well tonight…it's a great relief'

In other news, Parliament was mad at Indian team for performing bad; Greg chapel said something …..; Bomb scare in gorakhpoor express; and Shah Rukh Khan replaces Big B in KBC and Sonia asked PM to consider reducing petroleum prices (I wonder who's the PM, anyways that is not the topic so leave it…) But most of the emphasis was given on Sanjay Datt's "phoenix like" comeback from the ashes of terrorist charges.

Surfing through the channels, one news on BBC startled me, it read, Hisbul Mujahidin's Most wanted terrorist 'Sohel Faisal' killed in Anantnag, India. Indian Major leading the operation lost his life in the process. Four others are injured.

It was past midnight, I started visiting the Indian channels, the ones who are 'Sabse TEZ', but Sanjubaba was still ruling. They were telling how Sanjubaba pleaded to the court saying 'I am the sole bread earner for my family' 'I have a daughter who is studying in US who will look after her'. And then they showed how Sanjubaba was not wearing his lucky blue shirt while he was hearing the verdict. Also how he went to every temple and prayed for last some months. A suspect in Mumbai bomb blasts, convicted under armory act was being made into a hero.

Sure Sanjubaba has a daughter; sure Sanjubaba did not do any terrorist thing as in bombing some place or hijacking an airplane etc. Possessing an AK47 is considered too elementary in terrorist community and also one who possesses an AK47 has a right to possess a pistol so that again is not such a big crime; Sure Sanjubaba went to all the temples; Sure he did a lot of gandhigiri but then …, people, please read on.

Major Manish H Pitambare got the information from his sources about the terrorists' whereabouts. Wasting no time he attacked the camp, killed the Hisbul mujahidin's supremo and in the process lost his life, to the bullets fired from an AK47.

He has a wife and a daughter (just like Sanjubaba), age 18 months.

Major Manish never said 'I have a daughter …' before he took the decision to attack the terrorist hide out in the darkest of nights.
He never thought about having a family and he being the sole bread earner.

No news channel covered this since they were too busy hyping a former drug addict, an actor in real and reel life, a suspect who's linked to bomb blasts which killed hundreds. Their aim was to show how he defied the TADA charges and they were so successful that his conviction in possession of armory had no meaning. They also concluded that his parents in heaven must be happy and proud of him.

Parents of Major Pitambare are still on this earth and they have to live rest of their lives without their beloved son. His daughter won't ever see her papa again.

Definition of a Star has changed. It really has. So Sanjubaba always has a gun in every one of his movies then in real life if he has an AK47 then what's the big deal. We are used to see him with some ammunition without it he's just a 49yr old hero so he did it for us so that we feel normal;

Even if one of the bullets from one of such AK47's took a Real Star's life …….

but sir bole toh ….. tension nahi leneka. Aapun ko thoda bura laga. Apun pure din aapke baarein mein socha. Sach bataun kya aapun dukhi matlab ki senty ho gaya isliye ye likha.

Baaki Sanjubaba ... bole toh … congrats … aapko salmaan bhai ne kya certificate diya hai …ekdum raaapchik… kal jab unka case (haan woich hiran ki shikar wala) aaye toh aap bhi aisaich bolna unke baarein mein. Abhi aaj paper mein aaya ki woh parliament mein 'lagey raho munnabhai' dikhane wale ….us din dekhna bhai…… pure parliament mein sab saarein sansad honge. koi walk out nahi karega par bhai uska koi gurantee nahi hai kya pata …..agar hamare sansad indian cricket team ke selection pe lad padein?...... Kya bhaai point hain naa ? Are haan apun ko yaad aaya ….woh sansad pe hamla karnewala koi afzal tha ….use abhi fasi hui …ya nahi hui …..jaane do apun ko kya…… kuch log marein ….. sansad ko bachatein hue …but bhai unki daughters toh india mein hich sikhti hain naa aapke jaise amerika mein nahi toh tension nahi leneka………

Sorry major, wo kya hai naa logon ko shudh hindi samztich nahi aajkal bole toh logon ka hriday parivartan hone ke liye aisahich likhna padta hai. But major….. ab ye kaise hoga aaapun ko nahi pata log boley saala lagey raho dekhke puri janta ab change hoegi koi rastein mein nahi thukega ….. koi zhut nahi bolega koi kisi ko pareshaan nahi karega desh mein gandhigiri aayegi…. par major apun ko doubt hai….. pata hain kyon? rang de basanti aayi thi tab bhi log aisehich kuch toh bolein they…

Finally Sir, to my generation there is no greater hero than one who laid his life in the name of this great nation. Hence Sir, I salute you. You are the real Star,

Vande Mataram.

Ad icons as role models will dwarf the nation

Wednesday November 22 2006 00:00 IST 
 
S Gurumurthy

On the Children's Day at New Delhi, Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh exhorted a gathering of destitute,

orphaned, abused and physically challenged children to
look up to Sachin Tendulkar and Sania Mirza as models.
The choice of a role model is a serious issue and
calls for comment. But here, even if one feels like

commenting on the Prime Minister, it is not a pleasant
task because it involves Tendulkar, the most admired
icon of the most popular game in India.

Nevertheless, a comment is needed, even if doing so
risks unpopularity, as when a Prime Minister makes the

choice, he sets the precedent for the nation.
Manmohan's choice has raised an important question:
Who should be the ideal role models for Indian
children? The issue here is not Tendulkar or Sania or
their undeniable popularity. The question simply is:

On what norms a nation chooses its role models?

Nations need heroes. A nation is lifted or dwarfed by
the heroes it is excited about. The enslaved India
looked up to heroes who ignited a movement to free

India from foreign domination. India was led by a Guru
Gobind Singh, Shivaji, Vivekananda, Aurobindo, and
Gandhi to mention a few out of the hundreds of revered
heroes. They aroused India and India rose. But today

everyone is crying about the fall of free India. Has
that anything to do with free India's choice of
heroes? This is where the Prime Minister's choice
merits a comment. A caveat: The Prime Minister has
done nothing wrong. He has mentioned only the names

the media and the children will feel excited about.
But is that the basis for choosing heroes is precisely
the issue.

Sachin Tendulkar is a great cricketer and undeniably a
national idol. His talents have won him great

popularity among millions of cricket fans.
Undoubtedly, he is a compelling role model for
children aspiring to emerge as cricketers. His
popularity has made him an ad icon. And so is Sania
Mirza, a great tennis prospect of India.


Their popularity is reflected in their ad assignments.
That also measures their success. This is the
Tendulkar-Sania paradigm. But there is another
paradigm, the less-known Gopichand paradigm. He is as

good in achievement as a Tendulkar or Sania, but in a
less known game. Gopichand is a badminton player, who
has won global laurels for India. What then is the
difference between Tendulkar paradigm and Gopichand

paradigm? The difference is this.

Gopichand refused to endorse cola ads when the cola
makers chased him with lucrative contracts. Reason: he
believed that colas harm children. He was a sports
idol, like Sachin Tendulkar, to admire, but more, an

ideal to follow. He is an ideal for the children for
he turned away a fortune for their cause. Gopichand is
thus an idol to admire and an ideal to follow.

In contrast, Tendulkar, a more popular idol, turned an

ad model to sell Pepsi to the children. While
Tendulkar has the right to do what he does, Gopichand
gave up that very right for a higher ideal. This
qualifies him and his like as an ideal role model.
Imagine the Prime Minister had mentioned Gopichand as

the ideal for the children!

This takes us to what should be the norm for choosing
ideal role models for our children and youth. The clue
lies in what kinds of role models have built this
nation. Look at whom Swami Vivekananda would hold out

as the ideals for our nation. He would declare a
Chatrapati Shivaji and a Guru Gobind Singh as role
models for Indian youth. He declared: ''O India!
Forget not the ideal of thy womanhood is Sita,
Savitri, Damayanti.'' A Mahatma Gandhi would commend

Rama as the ideal for young India to emulate. The
entire community of freedom fighters, whether it was a
Tilak or Gandhi, Rajaji or Nehruji looked to Swami
Vivekananda as inspiration for the freedom movement as

well as for their understanding of the identity of
modern India.

A Maharishi Aurobindo was a role model for millions
whose eyes were opened to the idea of India by his
nation-building writings. A Bhagat Singh and a

Chandrasekhar Azad inspired thousands of Indian youths
to plunge into the battle for national freedom.

A Mahatma Gandhi was the role model for millions and
millions of Indians, young and old. Yet he remains so

silently even today despite his name and legacy being
stolen by the Nehru clan by what in trade marks law is
known ''passing off''.

That's how great role models have shaped India during
freedom movement and a while even after freedom. But,

mere ad icons can never be ideal role models. Rarely
is a role model a star of today and even more rarely a
star of today is a role model. A nation that makes a
wrong choice of role models will dwarf its people. The

choice of ad icons as role models is sure to dwarf the
nation and its people.

A leaf from the Past - J.P and RSS

Excerpts from "Perversion of India's Political Parlance" | Sri Sitaram Goel | Voice of India, New Delhi

1) " It was the summer of 1959, I was working as the secretary of an organization of which the late Shri Jayaprakash Narayan (J.P.) was the President. One day an RSS leader walked into my office. I had known him for a number of years. After some small talk, he suggested that I should request J.P. to visit an RSS camp which was being held in New Delhi at that time. J.P also happened to be in town. I was diffident about the proposition. Having worked with J.P. for more than a year, I sensed his preferences and prejudices. But I said to the RSS leader that I would do my best."

2) " I broached the subject to J.P. next day as soon as I found him alone, which was a rare event. J.P. seemed to be stunned as if I had uttered an obscenity. There was an expression of disapproval on his face which made me too feel uncomfortable. He was a gentle person who seldom lost his temper. But now he seemed to be on the verge of exploding. The atmosphere became tense. For a few moments none of us could find words to break the spell of silence."

3) " At last J.P. controlled himself and said: ' Do you know what you are talking about, and to whom'? There was a touch of temper in his voice. By now I had managed to collect my wits to a certain extent. I said: ' I knew the proposition would be annoying to you. Even so, I took a chance.' He relaxed. I also heaved a sigh of relief. He said: ' You know that I have a certain standing in the country and a certain reputation in public life. You should not expect me to get mixed up with an organization which is known for its communal, reactionary, and revivalist character.' I said: ' It is precisely because of your standing in the country and your reputation in public life that I have conveyed their invitation to you'. He said: ' I do not understand. Could you make yourself a little more clear'? I explained: ' Your standing in the country is that of a man of reason, and your reputation rests upon the keenness of your moral sense. I am sure that you will live upto that standard in this instance as well.' He said: ' I try to do my best according to my understanding and strength of will. Tell me where and how I have failed.' This encouraged me and I said: ' You have been practicing untouchability towards a section of your own people. You have never met the RSS people face to face. You have never listened to their side of the story. Yet you have formed an unsavoury opinion about them. This does not sound reasonable to me, nor just.'

4) " He became thoughtful. I continued, ' Your status today is not that of a party politician seeking power, and fomenting partisan strife. You have been a father figure for the nation as a whole, almost the conscience keeper of our people. You raise your voice whenever you feel that an injustice has been done, or that justice is being denied. That is why people of all persuasions- Congressites, Socialists, Communists, Akalis, National Conference people and who not- come to you for consultation, for registering their complaints, for presenting their point of view, and for seeking your advice. You do not always agree with them. Yet you listen to them patiently, and give them your point of view. They do not always agree with your view of men and matters, nor always follow your advice. The point is that you are always accessible to them. You always go out and meet them whenever they invite you. It is only the RSS and allied people whom you avoid, so much so that one of their leaders could not come to you directly and had to convey an invitation through a small fry like myself. Tell me if this is not tantamount to practicing untouchability?'

5) " He closed his eyes and shook his head several times. He seemed to be engaged in some inner struggle. I pressed the point, ' I am not inviting you to get mixed up with the RSS. Nor is it their intention to spread some snare for you. What they expect from a man like you is that you should try to know them first-hand rather than through hearsay or gossip in a partisan press controlled almost entirely by people who are hostile to them. Maybe you find that you have been mistaken about them. Maybe they benefit from the advice you give them. But all this can happen only when you meet them, listen to what they have to say, tell them frankly what you feel about them, and thus open the door for a fruitful dialogue in days to come. In any case, heavens are not going to fall simply because you go and visit one of their camps. That is all I have to say. Rest is for you to decide.'

6) " He opened his eyes, smiled somewhat sadly, and said, ' You have put me in a rather awkward position. But I see the point in what you have said. I cannot easily refute your accusation. I can really be held guilty of practicing untouchability.' I kept quie and waited for him to make up his mind. He did it in a moment, and said, ' Okay, you win. I am willing to visit the RSS camp. Make an appointment with them, and let me know. I hope tomorrow evening will suit them. Day after I am leaving Delhi .'

7) " Next day he spent nearly two hours in the RSS camp, witnessing their mass drill, moved by the songs of devotion to the motherland, meeting and talking to their leaders, asking all sorts of questions, and offering his own comments. Finally, he sat on a chair facing a group of about hundred RSS workers from several parts of the country. The workers sat on the ground in row after row, stood up one by one to introduce themselves to their honoured guest of the evening. Each one of them told his name without mentioning any surname indicative of caste or community, his educational qualifications, the province from which he came, and years he had spent as a Swayamsevaka . I Could see that J.P. was impressed. His face which had been grim so far softened suddenly, and visibly. Most of the Swayamsevakas held graduate and post-graduate degrees in arts, commerce, or science. All of them were between the ages of 20 and 35."

8) " At the end J.P. was requested to say a few words, and bless the quite confused, and did not know really what to say. I conveyed his feelings to the RSS leaders, who showed immediate understanding and did not press him anymore. As he was taking leave, J.P. looked at the Bhagwa Dhwaja, and observed, ' That I suppose is the Maratha Flag'. The RSS leader explained, ' The Marathas did not invent it. They borrowed it from an age-old national tradition. The saffron colour has always been the colour par-excellence of Indian spirituality as well as of Indian nationalism.' J.P. said, ' I do not know. I have not been a student of History. But that is what a well known historian told me.' The RSS leader smiled, and remained silent. The parting was rather warm on both sides."

9) " On our way back, J.P. muttered as if talking to himself, ' They have a lot of young and disciplined workers. The workers are also highly educated. I NEVER KNEW THAT. In our socialist movement, most of our workers are not even matriculates.' I kept quiet and waited for him to say something more. He made one more comment as we got out of the car at the end of our journey. He said, ' Sitaramji, I am grateful to you for helping me break down what looked like an insurmountable wall. But I am not at all satisfied that it is not an attempt to revive the Maratha Empire.'

10) " I could have asked him as to what was wrong with the Maratha Empire. I could also have told him that the Maratha Empire represented the triumph of a tough and long drawn struggle against Islamic Imperialism. But I was not prepared for some more frowns on his face. I had no status as a historian. Nor was my version of Indian History being taught in school and college text-books. J.P. was only repeating what most of our historians were saying from their august seats in universities and research institutes.

11) - - - --. " J.P. had at last visited an RSS camp. He had been positively impressed by the quality of workers whom the RSS had mobilized in service of the nation. And yet he had retained his earlier reservations about the RSS. He could not visualize that the RSS was not a miracle that materialized out of thin air. He could not see that there was something in a society and a culture and a historical tradition which had created such a splendid band of selfless workers without the benefit of any patronage from the powers that be, and in the face of much malicious propaganda in the national and the international media."

What would be the fate of the truth if a historian seeks advantages like a fiction author?

Dr S.L.Bhyrappa | 8 October 2006 | Vijaya Karnataka, Bangalore

[Editor's note: A statement by the Education Minister, Shri. ShankarMurthy that 'Tippusultan was anti Kannada' was the cause celebre for the ongoing debate which incidentally created an atmosphere for a healthydiscussion. A great thinker and also a well known novelist Dr. S.LBhyrappa has set the platform for the discussions in which notedliterary personalities, dramatists and hundreds of readers participatedenthusiastically. In the midst of the ongoing debate in the matter, Dr.Bhyrappa has written his second article enhancing the scope of the discussions and also throwing light on many confusing thoughts in thestate of the affairs. We hope this will make the discussions meaningfuland also encourage quest for truth.]

I am grateful to Shri. Girish Karnad, Sumatheendra Nadig, Dr. Chidananda Murthy, Dr. Suryanath Kamath, Dr. S. Shettar, Shathavadhani R. Ganeshand others who responded earnestly to my article under the title'Nationalism can never be strengthened by projecting historical lies'which appeared in Vijaya Karnataka dated 24th September 2006 and to all the readers who openly expressed their thoughts and to the Editor ofVijaya Karnataka for providing an opportunity for all, to have an opendiscussion. I am happy to note that Kannada readers are very alert.

To continue the discussions about Mohammed Bin Tugalak and Tippusultanwould be just an attempt to extract the relevant details. We have toanalyse the present political attitude in teaching history. Let me first present the nature of the prevailing political control with my ownexperience. During 1969-70, the Central Government under Smt. IndiraGandhi, with a mission to integrate the nation through education hadestablished a committee under the Chairmanship of G.Parthasarathy, adiplomat and was very close to Nehru-Gandhi family. At that time I was areader in Educational Philosophy at NCERT and I was selected as one ofthe five members of the committee. In the first meeting Mr. Parthasarathy, the Chairman of the committee had explained the purposeof the committee in his diplomatic polite language: "it is our duty notto sow the seeds of thorns in the minds of the growing children which will shape up as barriers for the national integration. Such thorns aremostly seen in the history lessons. Even we can find them occasionallyin the language and social science lessons. We have to weed out suchthorns. We have to include only such thoughts which will inculcate the concept of national integration in the minds of the children. Thiscommittee has this great responsibility on it."

Other four members were nodding their heads respectfully. I said:

"Sir, I am not able to understand your words. Will you please explain with some illustrations?"

"Gazni Mohammed had looted Somnath Temple, Aurangzeb built the mosquesby demolishing the temples in Kashi and Mathura, he collected jizya - isit helpful to build a strong India under the present circumstances by conveying such useless facts, other than generating the hatred in theminds?"

"But are not they the historical truths?"

"Plenty of truths are there. To use these truths discriminately is thewisdom of the history"

The remaining four members simply nodded their heads by saying "yes,yes".

"You gave examples of Kashi and Mathura. Even today every year lakhs of people go to these places from all nooks and corners of the country aspilgrims. They can see very clearly the huge mosques built using thesame walls, pillars and columns of the demolished temples, they can also see a recently built cow shed like structure in a corner, behind themosque, representing their temple. All these pilgrims are distressed towitness such awful structures. They describe the plight of their temples to their relatives after they return home. Whether this can createnational integration? One can hide the history in the school texts. Butcan we hide such facts when these children go on excursions? Theresearchers have listed more than thirty thousand such ruined temples in India. Can we hide them all? . . . . ."

Mr. Parthasarthy interrupted me by asking "you are a professor ofPhilosphy. Please tell us what is the purpose of history?"

"No body can define the purpose of history. We do not know how the things shape up because of the development of science and technology inthe future. Some western thinkers might have called it the philosophy ofhistory. But such thoughts are futile. Our discussion here should be, what is the purpose of teaching history? History is seeking the truthabout our past events, learning about the ancient human lives bystudying the inscriptions, records, literary works, relics, artifactsetc. We should not commit the same blunders that our predecessors committed, we have to imbibe the noble qualities that they have adopted,historical truths help us to learn all these things.. . . ."

"Can we hurt the feelings of the minority? Can we divide the society? Can we sow the seeds of poison . . . ." he stopped me with these questions.

"Sir, the categorization on the lines of majority and minority woulditself result in the division of the society or that would be a strategyto divide the society. This idea of 'seeds of poison' is prejudiced. Why should the minority think that Gazni Mohammed, Aurangzeb are their ownpeople? Mughal kingdom was destroyed by the religious bigotry ofAurangzeb. Mughal kingdom was at its pinnacle because of Akbar's rulesfor religious harmony, can't we teach such lessons to the children without offending the historical truths? Before teaching the lessons tobe learnt from the history, should we not explain the historical truths?These ideals of hiding history are influenced by the politics. This trend will not last long. Whether they are minority or majority, if theeducation does not impart the intellectual power to face the truth andthe resultant emotional maturity then such education is meaningless andalso dangerous." I said.

Parthasarathy agreed. He appreciated my scholarship and ability tothink. During lunch break he called me separately, indicated hiscloseness to me by touching my shoulders, enquired about my native place. He asked me to write a Kannada word, and spoke two sentences inTamil thus emphasized the fact that we are from neighbouring states,speaking the sister languages. Afterwards he said with a winning smile, "your thoughts are correct academically. You write an article aboutthis. But when the government formulates a policy governing the entirenation, it has to combine the interests of all the people. Puritanprinciples do not serve any purpose."

Next day when we met, I struck to my stand strongly. I argued thathistory that is not based on truth is futile and dangerous too.Parthasarathy showed his irritation on his face. I did not budge. The morning session closed without arriving at any conclusion. Parthasarathydid not speak to me again. After a fortnight again we met. The committeewas re-structured, my name was not there, in my place a lecturer inhistory by name Arjun dev with leftist ideas was included in the committee. The revised text books of science and social studiespublished by NCERT and the new lessons that were introduced in thesetexts were written under his guidance. These are the books which wereprescribed as texts in the congress and communist ruled states or they guided the text book writers in these States.

(I am quoting this instance taken from my presidential speech at Alwas Nudisiri, second conference held on October 21,22,23-2005).

NCERT books for XI standard, Ancient India is written by a Marxist historian R.S. Sharma and Medieval India written by another Marxisthistorian Satish Chandra, when reviewed, one can observe that howmembers belonging to this group had a scheme to invade the minds ofgrowing children. According to them Ashoka preached to respect even(stress is mine) Brahmins by advocating the quality of tolerance. He hadbanned the ritual of sacrificing the animals and birds, performance of yagnas were stopped due to this ban, Brahmins lost their share ofdakshina (cash gifts) and their livelihood was affected. After Ashoka,Maurya kingdom was disintegrated and many parts of this kingdom cameunder the rule of Brahmins. How childish it is, to say that a highly influential religion, which had spread all over India and even crossedthe borders to reach foreign shores declined because of dissatisfiedBrahmins who were deprived of their dakshina (cash gifts). Muslimsdemolished the temples to loot the riches and wealth accumulated in these temples- this explanation softens their actions. In some othercontext they may even say the looting may be according to the laws ofShariat which again paints the events as insignificant.

Dr. Ambedkar in the section, the decline and fall of Buddhism (Writingsand Speeches volume III, Government of Maharashtra 1987 pp 229-38) afterexplaining the events like Muslim invaders destroying the universitiesof Nalanda, Vikramasheela, Jagaddala, Odanthapura etc., brutal killingsof the Buddhist monks, escape of Buddhist monks to Nepal, Tibet to savetheir lives says, "the roots of Buddhism were axed. Islam killed theBuddhism by killing priestly class of Buddhism. This the worstcatastrophe suffered by the Buddhism in India."

These Marxists who quote Dr. Ambedkar whenever it is convenient for them to denigrate Hinduism, ignore nicely these words'the decline of Buddhismin India is due to terrifying actions of Muslims'of Dr. Ambedkar, whofought against the caste system in Hinduism throughout his life and at the end embraced Buddhism; this may be it is one of the importantphilosophies of Indian Marxists. R.S. Sharma the author of NCERT textAncient India, New Delhi, 1992 p 112 writes, "Buddha viharas attractedTurkish invaders because of their wealth. They were the special greedy targets for the invaders. Turks killed many Buddhist monks. Despitethese killings, many monks escaped to Nepal and Tibet."

Here the clever Marxists have hidden the fact that Muslims destroyedthese religious places as dictated by Shariat by calling Muslims of Turkey with a tribal name Turkish. At the same time they write thatBuddhism declined during Ashoka's reign because of Brahmins who weredeprived of their dakshina (monetary gifts). One should appreciate theircleverness to hide a truth by creating an untruth.

The English scholars who started writing Indian history on the lines ofEuropean history have introduced us to a good method. They had a cunningidea behind their scholarship. First they established that Indianculture is Vedic culture. The creators of this culture are Aryans whowere outsiders. They established themselves by destroying the localcivilization. All the invaders who came later were outsiders. Muslims came. After them we (English) came. Therefore if we are not natives ofthis country, you are also not natives of this land. Englishstrengthened this argument in the universities, media and also in theminds of the English educated people. Rigveda the so called religious text of Aryans was written when they were outside India. That means thebasic religion of Indians was originated from a foreign land. Thisargument severed the spiritual relationship between India and Indians.English educated Indians were struggling with this alien feeling forabout 100 years. This argument sowed and enraged the feelings of hatredand racial hostility between Aryans who were outsiders and theDravidians the natives of this land. It is easy to create the feelingsof hatred and hostility. But the people who know the human psychologycan understand that it is very difficult to come out of such feelingseven after knowing that the reasons quoted in support of these arguments were proved wrong. Although the research conducted in the later periodsdiscovered many facts which were against the theory that Aryans wereoutsiders, nobody has written a complete history of India from theIndian point of view. Under such circumstances, freedom fighter,follower of Gandhi, famous advocate, the member of Constitution DraftingCommittee, a great scholar, founder of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan,Kanhiahlal Munshi had planned to write a complete Indian history. He invited an eminent scholar and researcher

R.C. Majumdar to be the editor of this book. Both of them entered into acontract. As per the terms of the contract Munshi should supply all theequipment and finance that is required by Majumdar. But he should neverinterfere in the matters of choosing the historians to write varioussections, and also in the ensuing discussions. Munshi was committed tothis agreement. Majumdar was able to produce and publish 11 volumes of a complete, objective and scholarly book, 'THE HISTORY AND THE CULTURE OFTHE INDIAN PEOPLE' with the cooperation of the scholars specialized inwriting various sections. In the last 15 years nobody has written a book like this singly or jointly. I had read all these volumes long back. Ifone refers the sections of this book to know about any period or thesubject one will find the resource material of all the research happened so far in the matter. The recent research findings should only be addedin the recent editions of this book. I have kept all the 11 volumes inmy collection.

National Book Trust had proposed to translate all these volumes in all the Indian languages. The proposal was sent to ICHR (Indian Council forHistorical Research) because this is a history book. ICHR constituted acommittee comprising of S.Gopal, Tapan Roy Choudhary, Satish Chandra,Romilla Thapar to review this book. In the meantime ICHR was under the full control of Marxists. All these people were strict Marxists. As thepecked this committee had recommended that 'these volumes from BharatiyaVidya Bhavan are not suitable for translation and hence the proposal should be rejected', with this recommendation the proposal died anatural death. Further the committee suggested alternative books for thetranslation into Indian languages. All these books were written byeither these members of the committee or by their other Marxist comrades. Their list included five books of ICHR president R.S. Sharma,3 books of S. Gopal (the son of scholar philosopher S. Radhakrishnan), 3books of Romilla Thapar, 2 books of Bipin Chandra, 2 books of IrfanHabib, 2 books of his father Mohammed Habib, one book of Satish Chandra,books of E.M.S. Namboodri, the senior leader of Communist Party of Indiaand the book of British Rajni Pamdatta (who was controlling Indian communists during the decade of 1940s). But there was not even a singlebook of Lokamanya Tilak, Jadunath Sarkar or R.C. Majumdar!

(One has to refer Arun Shourie's EMINENT HISTORIANS: Their Technology,Their Lime, Their Fraud, ASA 1998 for this information). Various groups hate Arun Shourie for various reasons. Shourie is special, in the sensethat he will investigate thoroughly until he reaches the roots of anysubject which he intends to write. In the book Eminent Historians, Sri Shourie has investigated about these writers and has unearthed thedetails of who had recommended the books for translation and who hasreceived what remuneration how much fees and in what form .)

The influence of Gandhian thoughts had declined in the Congress Party in the last days of Gandhiji. Nehru never followed Gandhian thoughts. Though he had great admiration for the democracy of England, in his heart he had love for the communism of Russia. After he came to power he gradually sidelined other congress leaders. The death of Patel was a boon to him. Rajendra Prasad as a President was only a formal head. Rajaji, Krupalani though they formed their own parties, were not influential enough. Nehru was not innocent though he was under the control of a radical communist like Krishna Menon. He was well known in the international circles because he was one of the leading figures who followed the global non-alignment policy but yet he was disliked by western countries like America as the non alignment policy had the strong support of communist Russia. As a result India suffered a loss. India's loss was not Nehru's loss. He was so much devoted and had a strong faith in communism that his government and the entire Indian Media was chanting the mantra, Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai as a daily ritual till China forcibly kicked us out of our own land. In the meantime communists (Marxists) had occupied the Indian intellectual world. Nehru had a scheme to divide Hindus and to please the Muslims for his political survival. Nehru adopted the same strategy that British used to continue their regime in this country. Secularism means a word of contempt used to address only Hindus. Secularism means our duty towards Muslims and Christians. Nehru spread the message that minority will never be secular. M.C. (Mohammed Karim) Chagla in his autobiography, 'Roses in December' writes, he was born and brought up in Mumbai. He was a lawyer in the same city, earned a great name as an honest person. Later he retired as the Chief Justice of Mumbai High Court. He wanted to contest for Loksabha. He wrote a letter to Nehru asking for a ticket for one of the constituencies of Mumbai. He was given a ticket for Aurangabad constituency through a letter from Congress high command. He had written a letter in reply to the high command letter, "I was born and I grew up in Mumbai, I am familiar with the people of Mumbai by serving them. Why did you give me ticket for the unfamiliar Aurangabad ?" Nehru's high command answer for this letter was, "Aurangabad is a Muslim majority constituency. You are also a Muslim. So you can contest from that constituency."

I was a boy when India got independence and also during the elections conducted later on. But I knew very well even as a boy, which caste is strong in which constituency and was familiar with the discussions held to select the candidates belonging to the same caste to contest from that constituency.

Indira Gandhi had one and only aim of retaining the power, so she needed the support of communists to crush the Jansangh and the old guards of Congress like Morarji Desai, Nijalingappa, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy, Kamraj and others. Communists knew pretty well that they cannot occupy the seat of power directly, so they devised a plan so that at least their theories would capture the seat of power. Therefore Indira Gandhi helped them to enter and occupy the posts in the universities, media, ICHR, NCERT etc. Communist Russia also pressurized to tread this path. Nehru and his daughter had become so close to Russia that they were not in a position to oppose her strongly. Communists somehow learnt the tactics from the dictatorial administration models of Russia and China to take the reins in their hands completely after occupying the vital places in the intellectual life of the country. However the lifeline of UPA government of Sonia Gandhi is in the hands of communists.

Media pretended silence when leftists occupied the education and history commissions, the departments of history, social science, literature and other subjects of the universities in our country. Leftists raised their voices when Murali Manohar Joshi from NDA government tried to bring the changes like Indianising the education, directing to mention the contributions of the ancient India to science while teaching science, advising to begin the day in the schools with Saraswathi Vandana. Even media projected them as great calamities. Congress members and the proponents of equality started a movement because they could visualize the rising storms in the country due to these changes. Nobody from these groups is objecting when Arjun Singh from the present UPA government is resurrecting the leftist agenda in its extreme form. Media, specially the English media, in fact is encouraging this trend.

The only aim of Congress is to retain the power and it lacks the original thinking. It is sleeping blissfully in the thought of borrowing it from the communists. But it is following the liberal policies, thinking that the economic polices of the previous government had damaged the economy. Communists have accepted these policies in their hearts and are unable to come out of the clutches of Marxism, the very basis of their identity.

The methods adopted by the leftists to spread their roots is not different from the bane of caste politics in India. They systematically execute the tasks of appointing people who are loyal to their theories in the universities, presenting their own theories through newspapers, television and other media, getting appreciative criticisms for the books written by their favourite writers, devising plans to banish the writers from the opposite group, spreading their messages by organizing the seminars frequently to attract the growing minds, getting awards and titles for their own men from the government. They have started a system of literary criticism for evaluating the books in the light of the standards defined in their theories. They think that they have reduced to the dust the traditional concepts of criticism like pure literature, aesthetics, imagery, context etc.

Even the truth in case of communists would be the stand taken by their party, similarly other values like art, morals etc. I need not explain these things to the people who have read the books written about these topics published by the communist Russia and sold at cheaper rates in India and in other countries.

I am always interested in the sociology, psychology history and other branches of humanities. I have studied all these subjects to some extent. Philosophy is my professional subject. Soundarya Meemse is my research field. But I am interested in the literature, I started writing novels. Truth and beauty, specially the relationship between the truth and the literature is haunting my mind. How much liberty an author has while creating the historical characters which are clearly defined by the inscriptions, records, relics, excavations and other evidences? I am haunted by this query- what is the nature of this liberty? The statements made by the author of 'The Real Tipu'(Kannada translation "Tipu - nija swaroopa" by Pradhan Gurudatta, Sahithi Sindhu Prakashana, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore 1) H.D. Sharma in his preface in the matter has stimulated my thoughts. "Tipusultan has recently leaped from the history books on to the small screen. This has created a special interest about him and his period. This has raised a serious debate. Because many people - specially the people from Kerala - feel that Tipu was not like he was shown in the TV serial. (The serial is based on the novel 'The Sword of Tipusultan' by Bhagwan S. Gidwani is full of lies and has twisted the facts.) TV serial has contributed the untruths in its own way. This raging debate motivated me to make a detailed study about Tipu. When I learnt the facts I was shocked." (This is the English translation of Pradhan Gurudat's Kannada translation quoted by Mr. Bhyrappa in the article.)

Of course, one should not think about the Indian, specially the bollywood people who are experts in selling their thrilling, colourful entertainments. Even the people who write ballads are from the village fairs and dramas. But why people who write serious literature create thrilling, entertaining scenes of different type? Why do not they be loyal to the historical facts? Why do not they release themselves from the clutches of the historians of their ideology and try to interpret the historical evidences thinking independently? The historian S. Shettar (ICHR president) who supported Girish Karnad says, "Girish Karnad while writing a drama on Tippusultan, was searching for his good qualities only with the purpose of writing a drama. Dramatists and historians and creative writers will have their own ideals." (Vijaya Karnataka, 27th September, 2006). In this context, what is the difference between ideology and ideals? An author can escape under the cover of an advantage of an idea. If a historian attempts to use such advantages what would be the fate of the truth? Marxist historians cannot understand this question, even after explaining the subtleties of the question. Of course we cannot comment about the authors who are under their control.

Tughlak, Tippusultan, S.L. Bhyrappa (Vijay Karnataka, Bangalore)

Girish Karnad | 28 September 06

My literary works got several forms of reactions right from the day I started writing plays. Some have criticized me and some others haveappreciated me. But I never wished that after reading these works aprominent Kannada novelist would become an'instant historian'. I am really worried about the kind of influence my plays had on S.L.Bhyrappa. (Vijaya Karnataka, September 24).

One must appreciate the list of books that Bhyrappa has read to knowabout not only Tippu Sultan but about Tughlak also, just to write hisarticle. He has worked very hard. But instead of struggling so much if he would have asked me I would have told him: "I am least interested inthe historic character Tughlak. I am not at all interested to knowwhether he is good or bad, whether he loved Hindus or hated them. I wanted to write an entertaining Play. I had an yearning to create themost complex character possible. I was able to get the required materialin Tughlak to achieve this. I used as much material as I needed to adopt them in my own way. My Tughlak is not Tughlak of history. That is animaginary character. If I wanted to write history I would have done itand would not have bothered to write a drama.

It may be surprising to note that a person like Bhyrappa who is alwaysin the midst of discussions-lectures-articles about art-literatre-lifecould not understand this aspect. But whosoever has read his books doesnot find this as anything new. Let me discuss about it later.

One has to remember that history is a branch of knowledge. It has gotits own analyzing methods and systems like any other branch. A studentof history should be trained first, to know what type of evidences should be accepted, which records could be interpreted in the context oftheir special historical events, how to discriminate the arguments andother methodologies of history. Once a strong foundation is laid, one should attempt to understand the subtleties of the period that they havechosen for study. Only then one can have a scholarly discussion.

For the same reasons, it is difficult to accept the arguments put forth by Bhyrappa, who thinks that he is qualified to talk about any period ofany region authoritatively. It is certainly not 'history' to read 3books in two or three days and to use them suitably in his arguments bychoosing the facts convenient to his prejudices.

Bhyrappa is not a historian. Even I am not. Therefore it is better that we do not indulge in a clash with each other in a fields in which bothof us are not qualified.

The invitation for a public debate about history is not extended by me,Shankar Murthy did it. I accepted the invitation not to discuss history but to discuss about the responsibilities of an education minister.

For the same reason, it would be more meaningful if we read his novelsthan his 'history' to know about the thinking methodology of Bhyrappa, and also to know about the objectivity of his theoretical views.

Many of Bhyrappa's novels would have their own 'thesis'. The characterswould be developed around this thesis either for it or against it. Then the novelist Bhyrappa would thrash the characters mercilessly which areagainst the thesis that he has presented.

The thesis of 'Vamshavriksha' is 'vamsha prajne' (the consciousness ofthe lineage). Therefore Bhyrappa aborts frequently Kathyayini's pregnancies who being a young widow deserted her first husband's lineageon her remarriage. He would not leave her till her death.

The thesis of 'Tabbaliyu neenade magane' is cow slaughter. The centralcharacter of this novel is an American girl Hilda who settled down in a village of Karnataka after her marriage to Kalegowda.

There are plenty of women who have settled here after their marriage toIndians. All these women came here with a purpose to lead a harmoniousIndian life. The wife of Hiremallur Eswaran a well known Anthropologist converted herself to Veerashaivism. When I asked her what is the reasonfor this conversion she said, "if I do not wear Linga, I will not beallowed to enter kitchen. I cannot enter poojaroom. I will be anoutsider in my own house." The American wife of S.R. Hiremath who worksfor I.D.S has settled with her children in a village of Karnataka.

But while creating Hilda's character Bhyrappa does not think of these living models. Instead, 'madams' who loved IPS officers during Britishperiod, who came to India to live here always with a conscious thoughtthat they are from 'ruling class' were the models for the character of Hilda. She loathes to step on the ground scrubbed with cow dung! Thenovelist does not have any compassion for a girl who came alone to avillage leaving her motherland and does not know anybody there exceptingher husband. The village is divided because of her. She kills a cow. Herbreasts would be dry because of this sin that she committed. Her childwould be saved with the milk of Punyakoti breed cow though she killed a cow of this breed. Nature does justice on behalf of Bhyrappa.

Bhyrappa has a violent attitude towards his own characters which arecreated in his imaginary world but went against his central thesis inhis novels. The very purpose of the novel would be to punish such characters. In this context can we expect an objective view of a Muslimlike Tippusultan from Bhyrappa who is in forefront of a group of Hinduprotagonists who flare up whenever 'Muslim, Christian, avaidika' are uttered?

His baseless accusation that the folk singers wrote ballads in praise ofTippusultan with an eye on the cash gifted by nawabs is the proof forhis mental makeup.

When Babri Masjid surrounded by the blood of hundreds of innocent people was demolished for the political benefit, under a pretext that a sort ofinjustice had been meted out some 300 years ago, Bhyrappa supported thebarbaric act with the words, "lakhs of people want this, therefore, it is right". Last year when his statements on Buddhism created commotionhe blurted out some lies, "Hindu traditions always protected the avaidik(non-conformists to Vedas) people like charvakas." Does Bhyrappa with apersonality like this have any moral authority to talk about Tippusultan's fanaticism or to lecture on entire historical truths and untruths?

I owe some explanation because I directed 2 films based on the novelscited above jointly with B.V. Karanth. When Karanth encouragingly said, "producers have come forward to support the filming of these popularnovels" I retorted, "I detest the philosophical attitude of Bhyrappa",instead of accepting the offer. Then Karanth consoled me with the words "Bhyrappa has agreed to make the required changes in the story."Afterwards we directed the films changing the story as we liked.

But when I think of this now, I realize that I have made a mistake. There is no doubt that we did injustice to Bhyrappa. Whatever may be hisphilosophical attitude he is a proficient novelist. I should not haveagreed to the foolish act of segregating his philosophical motives fromthe material churned out of his experience. There is no doubt that both of my films Tabbiliyu ninade magane' and 'Vamshavriksha' are my ineptworks as I had no faith in the original thesis of these works..

Projecting the historical lies can never strength Nationalism

S.L. Bhyrappa | 24 September 2006 | Vijay Karnataka, Bangalore

The political scenario at present in Karnataka is very colourful. Education Minister Shankar Murthy said that Tipu was anti Kannada because he introduced Persian as the administrative language in place ofKannada, as expected, various groups from various corners are protestingagainst this statement, government is being warned if he does not resign or if he is not asked to leave the ministry there will be an intensestruggle for the same, finally the minister has again bolstered that heis ready for a public debate.
Yesterday (21.9.2006) actor, director, dramatist Girish Karnad with his associates K. Marulasiddappa and the former primary education ministerin congress government Prof. B.K. Chandrashekar called a press meet toinform that he is ready for an open discussion with Shankar Murthy as hehas written a drama about Tippu. I appreciate this stand. But he and hisassociates have already concluded that Shankar Murthy's statement is dangerous and against the interests of the nation. I do not have anyintention to discuss the political intricacies of the discussion here.Just I want to say some words here keeping in mind that Karnad is anartist and an author.

I read his Thughlak drama as soon as it was published. The style isgood. The combination of humour and tragedy is effective. There is lotof scope for direction. It has similarities to the play Caligula, written by an influential author of his time Albert Camus and is alsoinfluence by the same. I felt that in the play, Mohammed Bin Tughlaq'scharacter is more idealized than the historical Tughlaq. At that time I had neither time nor interest to do research on this topic.

After about 40 years, I read his drama 'Tippusultan kanda kanasu.' Hehas completely changed Tippu's character by projecting him as amagnanimous tragic hero. I come from old Mysore region, naturally I knew more details about Tippu.

In the meantime, after observing his political statements, movements andprotests I understood that Karnad is a rigid leftist. Of course he hashis own thoughts and activities. I kept quiet with the idea that every person has his own beliefs. But when I read 'Tippusultan kanda kanasu',I felt like studying thoroughly about Tippu and Tughalaq to know to whatextent the dramatist is loyal to the historical truths. I started my study. History is always my favorite subject. I had already read IndianHistory to some extent.
Even though, it is mentioned in the epilogue that the story contentthough historical, the purpose of the play is not to portray history,wherever the drama was enacted and whosoever has watched the play wouldcarry the impression that he is the real sultan. 'A Brahmin sufferedinjustice because of my officers. You have observed that I was ready to tread the path of justice to set right the injustice. The disintegrationof our kingdom due to religious intolerance is an unforgettable momentin the history of my regime. I want equality, progress and logicaljustice. It is not enough if peace is achieved, I want vibrant life.''The most significant fact is Daulathabad is a Hindu dominant city. Iwant to take my capital there so that I can develop Hindu-Muslim amity.These words of Sultan and the words'Sultan would very happy if he sees aBrahmin with a Muslim friend'would depict a feeling in the minds thatSultan was more religious tolerant than Akbar, even before 230 years ofAkbar's period.

But (Ibn Battuta, The Rchla of Ibn Battuta, eng-translation by Dr. MahdiHussain 1953, page 95. Eshwar Prasad's Qaraunah Turks in India, Vol I,Allahabad 1936 P 65-66 Mahdi Hussain: Tugalaq Dynasty, Calcutta 1963 p207-208. Quoted in Muslim slave system in medieval India by K.S. Lal,Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi, 1994 p 56). The same Mohammed Bin Tugalaqbuilt mosques by destroying Hindu temples. There is a mosque by nameDeval masidi in Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist, Andhra Pradesh. The name itself denotes that it is a mosque built by destroying a temple. It is presumedthat two inscriptions available even now, were inscribed during theregime of Mohammed Bin Tugalaq. In Epigraphia Indo-Mosliemica 1919-20 p 16, G. Majdaniya says,'as the name itself denotes the Deval Masidi wasoriginally a Jain Temple, Mohammed converted this into a mosque when heconquered Deccan. This building was a star like structure. But Muslims (Tugalaq) built a platform for sermons in place of inner sanctum, exceptthis, no other changes were made. The original pillars are there withoutany modification, one can see the carvings of Thirthankars on thepillars even now.'( see Seetharama Goel: Hindu Temples: What happened tothem? Vol II p 67.)

According to Aboonasir Icy that Sultan carried the flags of Islam to theplaces where they were not seen earlier, Koran was heard in the placeswhere it was not read earlier. He stopped the recitation of Agnipoojaka mantras and Asr prayers reverberated everywhere. (S.A.A. Rizvi: TughlaqKaleena Bharatha, Aligarh, 1956 Vol. I p 325). Can there be any otherreason other than the agenda of Marxist propaganda to portray the Sultan as a religious tolerant?

Sultan Mohammed was notorious for his habit of hunting slaves in far offcountries. Shahabuddin Mohammed Abbas mentions about his enthusiasm,'Sultan was always eager to attack Kashmir. The number of prisoners captured by him would be so huge that thousands of slaves were solddaily at cheaper rates. (Masaliq-ul-Abiser Phi Mumaliq -ul-Amser.Tr.in.E.D. III p 580. The Hindi version of Rizvi's 'Tugalaq KaleenaBharatha'). He was not only capturing prisoners of war, but had a fancy for buying and keeping the foreign and Indian slaves. The number ofkafir (non Muslim) women captured in the wars or the invasions was sohuge that Ibn Battuta writes, 'once lot of women prisoners were gatheredin Delhi. Ten women out of this group were sent to me by the nazir. Ireturned one girl to the person who brought me them. But he was notsatisfied. My associate selected 3 young girls. I do not know whathappened to others.'(Ibn Battuta- from the book cited above). Shahabuddin Al Umri says about Sultan Mohammed,'when he was a prince,his hunting group consisted 1200 hakims, 10,000 expert cavalry men, 300drum beaters, 3000 traders who sell hunting equipment, 500 cooks, 1000 paid musicians other than slave musicians, 1000 poets. (Shahabuddin AlUmri: from the book cited above p 578-80).

How can we call such a Sultan an ideal king?

Girish Karnad's mind consciously worked on the same thoughts in the play 'Tippusultan kanda kanasu' also. During the days of Indian Freedom Movement, semi literate folk singers,with no knowledge of history were singing ballads to the drum beatsextolling the virtues of Tippu in the corners of the markets of the village fairs and shandies in the old Mysore area. Muslims, especiallyMuslim traders, were encouraging these singers with cash gifts.Similarly there were plays written glorifying him. Plays were writtendepicting him as a patriot of the nation for the simple reason that he fought against British during the days of the anti British movements.The audience believed that the plays depicted true history. Afterindependence, Marxists, Vote Bank generators, loyal Muslim artists,dramatists, film producers projected Tippu as a national hero. Truehistory died a natural death. The event, British seizing the children ofTippu as hostages, was used to describe how cruel they were. Girish Karnad committed to the tradition of projecting Tippu described above,as a national hero, uses the same event to write this piece of dialoguefor Tippu in a philosophical tone of a sociologist, 'we have a newlanguage in our country at present. A new culture has arrived. Angreji !a culture to use 7-8 year old children as hostages.'

But taking hostages in the war was a tradition of Muslim kings who ruledIndia. Karnad does not know that British followed the same here or he deliberately hides it. It is written in Aurangazeb's official history(Masic-e-Alanghir, Saki Mustad Khan, 5th year, 5th Jamad, Al Hijira1072, 5, 1663) that the commander of Aurangzeb Mir Jumla when hedefeated the king of Assam he plundered the gold, silver and the cash ofthe palace and forcibly had taken the daughter and the sons of the king,Burha Gohen, Bar Gohen, Gud Dyoyapu Khan and Bad Pathwapu Khan, the foursons of his chieftain as hostages till the king paid the indemnity amount. During the regime of Mughals Rajput kings should have left atlease one of their sons in the court of the Badshah. In fact this wassame as taking hostages in the wars. Even the tradition of marrying ofdefeated Rajput king's daughter to Badshah, that was started duringAkbar's regime and continued thereafter, was same as taking hostages inthe wars. Akbar asked Maharana Pratap to send his son to his court. ButPratap did not agree. Later Kurram who called himself Shahajahanrebelled against his father Jahangir and was defeated by his father.Jahangir had taken hostage of sons of Jahangir, Kurram Dara andAurangazeb, his own grandsons. Muslim kings had never looked after theirhostages with as much care as British governor general Cornwallis hadfor his hostages. If the prisoners of war were non-Muslims theirconversion would be certain.

What were the terms of the pact under which Tippu's sons were taken hostage? Tippu agreed to pay some amount to British on his defeat. Atthat time he had no money. He had nothing to pledge. Could British trusthis words? British had no intention to take children as hostages. Just because Tippu had nothing to pledge he agreed for this. British hadtaken care of the children quite well.
It is not something new that some politicians call Tippu a 'Kannadakuvara' in their lectures. But Tippu introduced Persian in place of Kananda that was the administrative language during the regime ofOdeyars. I know the system of maintenance of revenue accounts duringthat period as I am from the family of Shanbogues of old Mysore region.The Persian words were introduced in the administration during Tippu'speriod, for ex: khathe, kardi, pahani, kanisu, mari, gudsta, kakhte,khushki, bagaytu, banjaru, jamabandi, ahavalu, khavand, amaldar,shiresthedar etc.

Tippu changed the names of the places to Persian. Brahmapuri - Sultanpet. Kalikote of Kerala, the present Kallikote to Pharukabad,Chitradurga - Faruq Yab Hissar, Coorg - Zaffarabad, Devanahalli -Yousuphakhan, Dindigul - Khalilabad, Gutti - Phyz Hissar, Krishnagiri -Phulk Il Azam, Mysore - Nazarabad (now Nazarabad is one of the extensions of Mysore city), Penugonda - Phakarabad, Sankridurga -Muzafarabad, Sira - Rustumabad, Sakleshpur - Muzidabad. Do theseindicate Tippu's nationalism, loyalty to Kannada, tolerant of otherreligions?

The title of Girish Karnad's play 'Tippu Sultan kanda kanasu' is basedon the title of a booklet 'Tippu Sultan's Dreams' written by Tippuhimself in Persian and the said title was suggested by English editorMajor Beatson. I read the English version of this book. Tippu wasparticular that nobody should see him writing or revising this book.Tippu's most trusted servant informed that this book was found in a toilet in the palace of Srirangapatnam and also said that it was writtenby Tippu himself. Both the original and the English versions are inIndia Office at London. If one reads this book one will certainlyunderstand to what extent Tippu was a fanatic. In the book : he calls Hindus as Kashmiris, addresses English as Christians and writes that inhis dreams, frequently he saw the moulvies with long beards, he went toMecca on a pilgrimage, an Arab with a long beard told him 'ProphetMohammed had informed him that he would not step into heaven withoutTippu', he had changed all the non-Muslim kingdoms into Muslim kingdomsby converting all the non-Muslims to Muslims.

There is not even a single idea to modernize India in the entire book.He had the desire of overthrowing English (in the entire book he callsthem with their religious name, Christians).

Tippu did not dare to convert Hindus in the Mysore region though he attempted it in Malabar and Coorg. In 1791 he was defeated by theBritish in the 3rd Mysore war, he paid a huge amount, surrendered manyparts of his kingdom and his children were taken as hostages, after thisevent he attempted to satisfy Hindu feelings by contributing toShringeri Mutt. Even today secularists call him as religious tolerantfor this gesture. Tippu had written the letters to Zimalshah, the kingof Afghan and to the Khalifa of Turkey requesting them to invade India and to establish the kingdom of Islam in the entire country. He orderedto use the prized collection of books, palm leaf manuscripts and thefiles in the library of the palace, as fuel to cook the food for thehorses.
Even today Muslims of Malabar speak, read and write Malayalam at home,similarly Muslims of Tamilnadu use Tamil. But Muslims of Mysore speakUrdu, they do not know to read and write Kannada. The problem ofmainstreaming all into the state language in Karnataka lies with the Persian and Urdu educational system introduced by Tippu.

My basic question is to what extent an author can take liberty whileportraying the historical characters and dealing with the historicalcontent? An author always got the liberty to portray the imaginary characters as he likes as he only created all these characters. But whenhe is creating a historical character he should be loyal to thehistorical truths. There is nothing like consensus historical truths.People comment that whatever a historian interprets the same becomes the historical truth. If the author is committed to an ideology then it isinevitable for him to portray each and every historical character andthe event according to the dictates of the ideology or group of theideology. There may be Communism, JNU group or some other sub group, nodoubt that Girish Karnad is a leftist. This group believes that there is socialism in Islam but not in Hinduism. During the days of cold war,with a strategy to have an alliance with Arabs against America, Stalinonce again emphasized the social justice of Islam. They were unable toanalyze the Muslims in the Indian history. They have got one moremission to overwhelm BJP, the proponents of Hinduism, instigatingMuslims by lending their support to them. Therefore intellectuals likeKarnad always have political preparedness to protest against BJP. They will be waiting for an issue to be raised whether it is Datta Jayanthior Saraswathi Prarthana in the schools. The authors who are so muchcommitted to their ideology would use their creativity as a slave oftheir ideology. The art would be an instrument of their politicalideology. Author should be politically neutral. Even if he joins thepolitics he should be politically neutral in his writings but I believethis is difficult to follow. Leftists declare that there no art, moral, meaning, history and spirituality can exist without politicaldimensions.

The purpose of this article is not to support Shankar Murthy. Not evento derogate Muslim personalities. All the Muslims of India are our brothers. Our nationalism should be strengthened on the basis of thisbrotherhood. But projection of historical lies can never strengthennationalism. It is more than a century that we started discussing openlyabout the merits and demerits of Hindus. In fact these open discussionsand criticisms are strengthening the Hindu society. It will not amount to disparaging Muslims if we openly write the facts of Muslim regimes. We all should learn lessons from the history. If we create false history by hiding the truths, apprehending that the facts of history if written would hurt people then we can never build strong buildings on such fake foundations. Accusing the present generation for the mistakes of the past generations exhibits the immaturity of the mind. It is equally immature to flatter or to depress ourselves, by aligning us with our predecessors, imagining ourselves as their successors.

Back to roots: Kashmiri Pandit youth fight back

http://www.rootsinkashmir.org/aboutus.php

17 years ago, some of them were just toddlers.
17 years ago, some of them were still sucking their thumbs.
17 years ago, some of them were still trying to learn their ABCs.
17 years ago, some of them were still playing with their trucks and dolls.
17 years ago, during the darkest night of January 19, 1990, their parents had to clutch them to their chests and escape the claws of death looming over their heads. That night, these parents had to take the extreme step of leaving their roots behind in the land of their ancestors so that their toddlers could have a life of their own.

17 years later, these toddlers have grown up and the only passion in their lives is to look for and connect back to their roots.
Yes, these are the unfortunate and forsaken young adults from the Kashmiri Hindu community who have spent their entire childhood and adolescence in exile, living as refugees in their own country. For the last 17 years, they have been growing up dreaming about the roots they want to connect to.

These young adults are very grateful to all those communities, spread all across the nation, who embraced them and gave them the love, compassion and warmth that they badly needed during their growing years. All their lives, while going through the rigours of childhood and adolescence, they have hoped against hope that the respective governments in the Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir will take concrete steps to help them connect with their roots. Sadly, their dreams and aspirations still remain dreams.

After waiting and hoping for 17 long years, these young adults have now decided to take charge and be the change that they want to bring about. They are ready -- charged with 'passion', armed with 'reason' and primed with 'zeal' -- to take the bull by the horns and make a difference. And the difference they will make.

Roots In Kashmir is an initiative that these young Kashmiri Hindus have launched to reclaim and connect back to their roots. It is an initiative to protest and increase the awareness of human rights violations against the Kashmiri Hindu community, who have been languishing in refugee camps and elsewhere in their own country.

To escape persecution, more than 400,000 Kashmiri Hindus had to leave their homes and hearths back in the valley. Even after 17 years in exile, more than 50,000 of these Kashmiri Hindu refugees are living in hellish conditions in uninhabitable refugee camps.
Roots In Kashmir strongly believes that successive Indian Union and state governments have failed in protecting the human rights of the Kashmiri Hindu community. It also believes that various human rights organisations have miserably failed in highlighting the human rights violations against the minority community in the Kashmir valley.

Roots In Kashmir demands that the Indian Union government should grant the status of 'Internally Displaced People' to Kashmiri Hindus. This demand is in line with the United Nation's definition of 'Internally Displaced People'. It also demands that a blueprint for the rehabilitation of Kashmiri Hindus should be created by the Indian Union and Jammu and Kashmir state governments at a war-footing.
Roots In Kashmir organised its first event in the form of a protest rally at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi on Human Rights Day, Sunday, December 10, 2006 . This protest rally was to highlight the government's apathy towards its citizens, who have steadfastly stood for her identity, integrity, and sovereignty.

The Kashmiri Hindu community is the one community that has lost its own identity because it stood for India's identity in the state of Jammu and Kashmir . In spite of the threats perpetrated by global terrorism, supported and abetted by our friends across the border on the west (Yes, I mean Pakistan ), it is the community that continues to keep the Indian tricolour up and flying in the Kashmir valley.
This protest rally is not only to highlight the ethnic cleansing of Kashmir Hindus. It is also to highlight the grave danger that our great nation is facing at the hands of global terrorism. The menace of global terrorism is not making any distinction between those who raise the Indian tricolour in Kashmir and those who raise the Indian tricolour in Kerala.

Anyone who believes in the Indian tricolour is in the line of fire and this fire of global terrorism is spreading at such an alarming pace that it needs to be quelled now. If the powers that be don't wake up today, tomorrow might be too late. The tentacles of global terrorism are well spread all across the nation and only a traitor will ignore such a threat.
I believe our politicians are selfish with no regard for the security and sovereignty of the nation. They are not patriots who will be united in their fight against the nation's enemies.

Under such circumstances, it becomes imperative for today's youth to take the cudgels and lead the efforts to change the system that badly needs an overhaul. These young Kashmiri Hindus are our future and they need all the support and encouragement from one and all.
It is imperative for all the youth of our great nation to step up to the plate and be involved in creating India's destiny. We cannot afford to wait for our senior politicians to wake up. They can be there to provide the moral support but the baton has to be handed over to the youth.

And these youth are ready -- ready to take the charge.