Almost all the religious books of the Hindus, particularly the Dharma Shastras

regarded Sakas and Yavanas, the inhabitants of Pakistan in those days, as

M'leechas (unclean). The Atharva-veda regarded Pakistan as outlandish.
Similarly they were unanimous in considering Vangals i.e., Bengalees, as
barbarous, outside the pale of Aryans--outscastes, outsiders. Further, they were
all termed dasyus (slaves) and rakashas (devils). According to a passage in the
Mahabharata, Yavanas and Gandharas (people of Pakistan), and Vangals
(Bangladeshis) are sinful creatures in earth. They did not respect the Brahmins
and their religion; did not follow their laws, spoke different language and were
therefore detested and despised by the Aryan high castes. Inter-mixture with
them was prohibited. Patanjali speaks of Yavanas and Sakas as sudras and
relegates them outside Aryavarta (A History of Indian Culture, by Radhakumad
Mukherjee).
Hindu Dharma and Pakistan
The strange fact is that the basin of the Indus and the Punjab West of Sutlej
came to be regarded as impure land by the Brahmins of interior India at quite
an early date. Orthodox Hindus are still unwilling to cross the Indus, and the
whole of West Punjab between that river and the Sutlej is condemned as unholy
ground, unfit for the residence of strict votaries of Dharma (Oxford History of
India, by VA Smith, 3rd edition, edited by Percival Spear).

The Jat's spirit of freedom and equality refused to submit to Brahminical

Hinduism and in its turn drew the censure of the privileged Brahmins of the
Gangetic plain who pronounced that 'No Aryan should stay in the Punjab for even
two days because the Punjabis refused to obey the priests (A History of Sikhs, by
Kushwant Singh).

The inroads of those foreigners blotted out the memory of the memory of the
Aryan immigration from the North-West (i.e. Pakistan) which is not traceable
either in the popular puranic literature or in the oral traditions of the people.
To the east of Sutlej (i.e. India) the Aryans were usually safe from foreign
invasions and free to work out their own way of life undisturbed. They proceeded
to do so and thus to create Hinduism with its inseparable institution of caste
(Oxford History of India, by VA Smith, 3rd edition, edited by Percival Spear).

It is noteworthy that according to the Bandayana Dharma Shastra the Indus

Valley was considered impure and outside the limits of Aryandom proper. Any
one who went there had to perform sacrifices of purification on return. (Tribes in
Ancient India, by BC Law)

The Brhat-Samhita mentions Vokkana country as situated in the western region

of Indian subcontinent (Pakistan). In chapter XVI, V.35, Varaha Mihira includes the
Vokkana among those belonging to Rahu, together with barbarians, evil-doers
and the like (Roruka: was it Moenjodaro? by Pranavitana, Studies in asian
History: Proceedings of the Asian History Congress held at New Delhi in 1961).

In later vedic literature there are references to confederation of un-Aryan

tribes living in the north-east and north-west of the sub-continent in the first
half of the 1st millennium B.C. Pundra and Vanga in Bengal, Madra in the Ravi-
Chenab Doab (The Peoples of Pakistan, by Yu Gankovsky).

While the Aryans by now expanded far into India their old home in the Punjab
and the north-west was practically forgotten. Later Vedic literature mentions
it rarely and then usually with disparagement and contempt, as an impure
land where the Vedic sacrifices are not performed (The Wonder that was
India, by AL Basham).

Both Buddhism and Jainism flourished in Sind and it had revolted against the
superiority of Brahmins. They ignored their Gods and denied the Vedas (Sindhi
Culture, by UT Thakur).

It might have been noticed that by the beginning of the Christian era, the racial
and ethnic character of Pakistan had undergone complete transformation.
Whatever Aryan elements were left had almost disappeared in the avalanche of
Central Asian Saka and Kushan tribes whose disregard of strict Hindu principles
antagonised the high caste Hindus, ultimately leading to mass conversion of
Pakistan to Buddhism during Kanishka's time. With this development, the
differences in ethnic and racial composition between Pakistanis and Indians also
assumed religious colour. It was because of the hatred for the people of Pakistan
that, as already stated, the Hindus never built any holy city or temple or
regarded any river in Pakistan sacred. The Punjab Gaztteer Vol. XX says that
"the Punjab can show but few Hindu antiquities." It may be be noted that the
remains of pre-Vedic (Indus Valley Civilization) and Buddhist periods are found
in Pakistan but not of the Hindu period which came between the two and again
appeared to a limited extent after the fall of Buddhism.

The Aryans who settled down in the Gangetic Valley had come to their
journey's end after a very long and arduous march. The rich fertile doab of the
Ganges was the baikuntha, according to their heart's desire. To entrench
themselves in this paradise they took two measures:

(i) they adopted the policy of aparatheid (the caste system); and
(ii) they made earnest efforts to turn the marginal lands into a buffer zone and
to seal their nearer borders (i.e., the eastern border of the western wing and
vice versa) against foreign intrusions.

For their further expansion and colonisation they took north-south bearings.
This vertical lay-out of this Hindu (Neo-Aryan) map of the subcontinent is the
key to the understanding of geo-history of this part of the world. Vishnu Purana
(II, 3.1) thus delineates the land of Bharata:

The country that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains
is called Bharata; there dwell the descendants of Bharata;

Kautilya, the Hindu Machiavelli, spoke of the "thousand Yojanas (leagues) of

land that stretch from the Himalayas to the sea" as "the proper domain of
chakravartia patha (a single universal emperor)". This north-south (vertical) lay-
out of the land of Bharata has been well summed up in the famous aphorism:
Himalachala stu paryantum, i.e. from Himalayas to the end of land
(Rameswaram). Vishnu Purana (11. 127-9) gives the geo-political reason for
the vertical lay-out of Bharat; it states:

On the east of Bharata dwell the Kiratas (the barbarians); on the west, the
Yavanas (the outlandish Greeks/ Bactrians); in the centre reside Brahmans,
Kshatriyas, Vaishayas and Sudras.

To protect the blue-blooded Aryans from the contamination of the

'demonaic' (Ashuras), 'wild' and 'carrion-eating' (Paisachas) and outlandish
(Yavana)--people of the western wing and the 'barbaric' and 'boorish' Kirates,
Pundras and Vangas of the eastern marginal land, the Hindu shastras laid down
strict rules. The Dharma Sutra (II, 1.2.2) of Baudhayana states:

Who visits the country of the Arattas (the Punjab), or of the Pundras and
Vangas (Northern and Eastern Bengal) must perform a purificatory sacrifice.

The Sutras and the Puranas are relatively late compositions. We find that the
Aryan aversion for the people of the rimland had developed quite early during
their migration from the land of the seven rivers. The Satapatha Brahmanas of
the "White" Yajur-Veda (OX.31 18) show that the emigrant Aryans regarded
those Aryan tribes, that were still in the basin of the Indus, with mistrust. The
Aitareya Brahmana of the Rigveda states that beyond Magadha lived the Pundras
of North Bengal and the Vangas of Central and Eastern Bengal who were outside
the pale of Aryandom. The Mahabharata speaks of the Bahikas of the Punjab
"who are outcasts from righteousness, who are shut out from the Himavat, the
Ganga, the Saravati, the Yamuna, and Kurukshetra, and who dwell between the
Five Rivers" (VIII 202, 9) It further lays down:

In the region where the Five Rivers flow let no Aryan dwell there even for two
days. There they have no Vedic ceremony nor any sacrifice (V, 20, 63).

The imperialistic Hindu chakravartins did not always follow these rules of their
Shatras. Whenever they found themselves powerful enough they invaded,
pillaged and annexed as much of the portions of the marginal lands as they
could. This expansionist hunger of the Hindus has not been satiated to this day.
However, though they protested vehemently against "the vivisection of Bharat
Mata" yet they never ceased to regard the marginal lands as impure. A
remarkable evidence of their constancy in this respect is the fact that while the
length and breadth of Bharat is studded with their tirathas, --- holy towns, e.g.
Kurkshetra in Hariana, Kashi (Benaras), Mathura, Haridwar (Hardwar), Prayaga
(Allahabad) and Ayodha (Faizabad) in UP; Gaya in Bihar; Navadvipa (Nadiya) in W.
Bengal; Cuttack Puri in Orissa; Avantika (Ujjain) in central India; Dvaraka in
Gujrat; Kanchi and Ramesvram in the south; holy rivers all over Bharat and
their holier confluences,--- not a single notable tiratha ever existed in what
is now Pakistan (Islam in the Geo-historical Perspective of Pakistan, by
Qudratullah Fatimi).

The cleavage, as such, is not new as Indians try to make out; and what is more,
the cleavage is not due to Islam only as they further try to stress. It is age-old,
has its roots deep in history and is not only temperamental and spiritual but
racial as well as geo-political.

It is indeed strange for the Hindus to claim Pakistan as part of Akhand Bharat on
the basis of history when the entire history not only thoroughly disproves
this claim but, on the contrary, amply bears out that Hindus themselves have
regarded it as outside Aryavarta, as an impure land, not fit for their holy
places; a land inhabited by sinners outside their fold.
Indian delusion for power
Present day Indians suffer with a pathetic obsession for recognition as a political and
military power. They are the only people who talk it rather loudly and with so little to
justify it. Greatness does not come through bragging or begging nor at the cost of others.
Unfortunately, however, in this obsessive quest they have and continue to employ the
most unscrupulous tradecraft in true Kautiliyan traditions to glorify their nebulous past
and build-up an image of dubious greatness through deceit, falsities and distortions. That
in applying these Kautiliyan virtues, the Indian rulers not only misguide and brain-wash
the ignorant and simple minded people but also indulge in bluff and intimidation through
cheap propaganda and rumour mongering.

It is a pity that many including quite a few amongst educated Pakistanis fall victim to this
deception and charade. Our failure to promote education and spread of knowledge,
particularly our lack of interest in history have been the main cause of our weak national
confidence and made us vulnerable to false and distorted propaganda. Though it seems
ironical but factually every crisis or problem, however, petty tends to shake our very
existence and bring us at the very brink. It is a sad reflection on our national leadership
and their inability to discern truth from history whose evaluation and application continue
to suffer with dogmatic reservations. Its time that we put our feet on ground.

Recently in a spurt of national fervour, the Indians changed the names of two of their
great cities; Bombay and Madras, both exclusive British contributions. The new names
are those of two obscure and insignificant fishing villages on whose foundations the two
mega cities had supposedly sprung. But their national pride does not get hurt by
identifying their country as India or calling themselves as Indians, both being British
in origin and usage. They would not like to call their country Hindustan or themselves
Hindustanis though this was the mark of identity for a thousand years (including the
early British period), because this identity was given by and is associated with the
Muslim rulers! But sadly still and much against their hearts desire, it could not be
replaced with the vedic Bharata, because historically it constituted so little of India
(Jamuna-Ganges Doab) which cuts at the very root of their elusive dream of greatness. It
is, therefore, so expedient to accept the well-known and widely glorified colonial identity,
even though its creation resulted from the British swords and guns. Happily for the
Indians, the British had gone and the inheritance of British colonial identity and power
became a justifiable ground for imperial pretence, even impertinence.

Now, the seemingly ordinary and nebulous Hindu history and its culture could be built in
a sub-continental mould by clever borrowing and mixing to create Indian Culture and
Civilization and to project Hindu greatness. Buddhism became a mere deviation from
Hinduism and its great contributions and glories were impounded to propagate and build-
up the image of Hindu India and its cultural influence from Oxus to Mekong. Hindu
writers freely plagiarized Buddhist philosophy and architecture, decrying it as Indias
contribution to world culture. Buddhism which rose as a social rebellion in the very
Hindu heartland, miserably failed there but spread through Gandhara to Central Asia and
China and eventually embraced half of known humanity with its own distinct philosophy,
social attitude and culture. Despite the unpleasant causes of its demise amongst the
Hindus of Northern India whose cruel practices drove the Great Gautama to ethereal
revelations and discoveries, Buddhist achievements are impudently appropriated as
Indian (Hindu) achievements. With so little to show of their own in the Indian heartland,
the Indian writers stretch themselves over-board to find Hindu influence in the numerous
great Buddhist temples and viharas throughout Asia. And all this with the strict religious
sanctions against crossing the two flanking rivers and the black water! But nearer home,
Hindu prejudice and animosity exclude equally great contributions made by the Muslim
and British rulers to Indian culture during the last thousand years. To many Hindu writers
this constitutes the darkest period of Indian History! These are too peculiar and distinct
to be called Hindu or Indian and, therefore, consistently undermined, insinuated and even
ignored being taunting displays of alien arrogance from the hated invaders.

To the radical Hindus (and their strength is increasing rapidly think of the BJPs rise to
political power), India is for the indigenous Indians; all others are aliens and invaders
(singling out the Muslims since the British have gone). In emphasizing it, they assume of
course that the invading Aryans, the proud ancestors of the high-cast Hindus, sprung out
of the bowels of Gangetic Valley! In their highly selective presentation of Indian History,
they do not correctly account for the successive waves of Aryan invasion spread over a
millennium, in which considerably large and powerful Aryan tribes actually settled down
in the areas referred to in the oldest vedic scriptures as Septa Sindhu meaning the land
of the seven rivers (including Kabul and the Indus with the five rivers of Punjab) and who
still constitute the bulk of the people of this region. They were the Rig-vedic Aryans
who fought the great legendary Battle of the Ten Kings around 1100 B.C. with the
conglomerate of the Gangetic tribes a few miles east of Beas and decided the earliest
division of India. They were the rebels and the earliest political rivals who would not
accept the tribal hegemony of the heartland India. It is, therefore, no surprise to find these
proud and freedom loving Aryans being hurled with abuses and frequently referred to as
outlandish, barbaric and arrogant in the later vedas and declared outcasts from Manos
Dharma. Since the descendants of Bharata have regained political power in India in 1947,
they have revived the old traditions! And what about the original inhabitants, the truly
indigenous Indians, the Dravidians - the Sudras and the untouchables of the vedas? Never
mind, their social status was divinely fixed. They did not exist; they were created and
absorbed as a part of Brahmanic order to suffer their karma miserably and infinitely
(notwithstanding some social improvements brought about under the Muslim and British
rule). In the wake of resurgent Hindu nationalism in form of Hindutva, it should not be
difficult to discern the fate that awaits these unfortunate aliens and invaders, the
degraded and condemned.

Harijans and the emancipated converts to Islam and Christianity. The recurrent
communal violence against the Indian Muslims and the growing spurt of barbaric assaults
on the Indian Christians are sombre reminders. The Hindu writers and propagandists who
talk so loudly of secularism, non-violence and Indian humanness and show it to the
world in the dead and frozen engravings of the temples and the amorous gaiety of
dancing women should look for it in the sad faces of these unfortunates.

As the struggle for independence from the British colonial rule in India started, the Hindu
mindset steeped in unbridled lust for absolute power was starkly obvious. There was no
compromise in their attitude against Muslims just demands. There leadership would
rather have the British India plunged into anarchy and blood bath, see every village in
flames and even accept its partition than agree to basic democratic tenets of
accommodation and sharing. Because in their conniving mind they felt confident that
partition could yet be undone through dishonest machination and for which fate had so
favourably placed Mountbatten to supervise the dishonourable dissolution of British
India. The Congress Hindu leaders exploited everything with full support of the Viceroy
to achieve their unholy political goals; false and fabricated propaganda through a highly
unscrupulous Hindu press, communal riots, arsons, large scale killings and brutalities,
unprecedented uprooting of population, usurpation of Pakistans rightful share of British
assets, immoral tampering of the Boundary Commission Award and aggression into and
unlawful occupation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The list and its details are
inexhaustible. Not to mention Nehrus pride of performance in cultivating Edwina
Mountbatten through a relationship which went beyond amorous embraces for political
favours and which the Indians are so proud of! No wonder they go along so well with the
Liberals, whether British or American! The charade of non-violence and the most
vaunted claims of Indian Humanness and Civilization were thrown to the wind. But for
all these cruel and hypocritical activities, the Indian gains were pretty little and Pakistan
braved the onslaught even more firmly. Panini, the great ancient scholar of Slatura
(present day Lahore on the bank of Indus, a few miles south of Topi) had made a
proverbial statement as early as 900 B.C. and not without reason that Udycyia (upper
land - Upper Indus Valley) could never be overtaken by or merged into Prascyia (lower
or midland Gangetic Plains) but Prascyia could. History has proved him right
repeatedly.

Quaid-e-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah is much blamed for the partition of India, Did he
or the Muslim League really want the partition or merely used it as a strategic lever of
last resort? A lot of now available documentary evidence reveals that till March 1947, the
Muslim League was still amenable to a united dispensation which ensured equitable
distribution and sharing of political power and was opposed to the partition of Punjab and
Bengal. But the Hindu Congress was in no mood to give in. They wanted total control
and absolute powers to themselves. Forced by their obsession, the inner logic of Indias
geo-historical truth reasserted itself. Today the Indians talk of a confederation of South
Asian states but they never pause to ask themselves as to why their political leadership
rejected the agreed Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946 which was much more than a mere
confederation.

The post-independence decades had been a continuous period of belligerence between

India and Pakistan. During this period, Pakistan has been subjected to three full-scale
wars, at least two limited confrontations, unlimited border ingresses, skirmishes and
physical violations, continuously growing scale of sabotage and subversion,
uninterrupted stream of virulent propaganda, cheap threats and intimidation, combined
with a vicious diplomacy. Indians have constantly increased their military power
ostensibly to counter imaginary threats, but really to support their coercive policy in the
region. Those who nag all the time against Pakistans defence budget should ask a
question or two on Indias military spending. Admittedly they have more resources, but
should they be wasting it without cogent reason?

An objective analysis leads to three main conclusions. Firstly, for all the propagated
democratic dispensations for national integration, the Indian leadership had been fully
conscious of the difficulties posed by Indias staggering physical vastness and racial and
social diversity. It is interesting to read views of persons like K.M. Panikar and
Radhakishnan who admitted the absence of most basic organic attributes essential for
converting the Hindus into a nation and that the uncompromising Brahmanic caste system
made Indias social structure permanently inequitable and divisive. Therefore, while the
democratic process continued, it was essential to maintain strong military power at the
centre to ensure unity. The imperial solution which was followed by the ruling
dynasties and the colonial British before them. It was put to test immediately after
partition Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir and, thereafter, has been continuously
used in the NEFA, Assam and East Punjab and now again in Kashmir. Based on historical
experiences, there may be some justification but do the Indians need such a large military
force with those highly modern and destructive weaponaries to keep in line the poorly
armed and organized rebels and dissidents? They must also know that such military
extravagance in the past cost the dynasties their empires! Secondly, they perceive
external threats to their national security. While claiming the status of a big power in the
region, do the Indians really believe that any country in South Asia could pose a serious
threat to them? Then what is this clamour of greatness about? They are quick to throw the
dart across the Great Himalayas to China. Surely they have a recent experience of bitter
humiliation though not new in their political history, but do they also imagine a naval
confrontation with the Chinese in the Indian Ocean? Or is it the fear of yet another
colonial invasion that forces them to maintain such a strong, high profile, blue water
navy? In the rapidly changing geo-political environment, with new developments
overtaking China and her dogmatic traditional attitude, the possibility of open war with
India has progressively receded. And despite their irresponsible and provocative
utterances, the Indians should thank the Chinese for it.

The third conclusion is both interesting as well as relevant to Pakistan. Indian leadership
has never given up their ultimate political objective unification (or subjugation) of the
entire sub-continent under the Hindu banner. It is built on the vengeful impulses and of
the fear of recurrent invasions, enslavement and domination by other races which through
the centuries has become a part of Hindu psyche. Not withstanding that these invasions
ended up in their assimilation into the Indian milieu, a few like the Huns even becoming
Hindus, Indians bitterness has remained deep and painful and their inferiority complex
permanent. There urge for prominence and recognition, their pretence to power and their
misrepresentation of historical facts to glorify themselves are basically the result of this
complex and soul sickness. Along with it, is also the stark awareness of their abject
inability to defend their kingdoms, their country and themselves from these invasions
through the millennia except with one solitary example of the First Battle of Tarain
against Ghori, which to their continuing misfortune was won in the following year and
became the landmark for the beginning of rule by the Muslim dynasties for the next
thousand years. Also for their tall claims to the entire sub-continent (an Akhand Bharat),
Indian historians know that never during the better known and recorded Indian history,
covering a period of nearly 2500 years, any of the major ruling Hindu dynasties could
unify or subjugate even one-third of the sub-continent. The Guptas and Harsha, the great
Hindu empire builders could not cross Bhagirthi in the east or extend beyond Ravi in the
west.

The Indians make a great deal of the Mauryas and their illustrious emperor Ashoka.
Despite Indian distortions of facts, the historical truth cannot be concealed.
Chandergupta, the first Mauryan king and truly a conqueror, was a son of the Potohar and
a prince of Taxila, who having defeated the Greek satrap in the Khyber mountains around
303 B.C. was crowned King at Taxila. It was from here that he assembled an army largely
constituted from the frontier hill tribes and those from the river valleys that he marched
into the Gangetic plains, defeated the Hindu Nanda ruler and established his empire in
Magadha (present Bihar). He was not a Gangetic Indian, nor a Brahmin and his conquest
of the seat of power in heartland India was indeed, after Alexander, the first invasion
from the north-west. Ashoka was his grandson and inherited Chanderguptas empire on
the north-west (much of it including portion of upper Kabul valleys were ceded by the
Greek satrap after his defeat and was never conquered by Ashoka). Ashokas edicts in the
north-western region of Mauryan empire reveal his continuing affection and link with
people of this region whom he always regarded as his own. Then what makes Ashoka so
different from Akbar, both grandsons of the great conquerors from the north-west and in
their own rights great empire builders? Besides that the Indians just dont have any
Ashoka in their entire history, there is one crucial difference. Akbar was a Muslim and
Ashokas religion is shrouded in mystery and, therefore, easy to manipulate. It was made
easier by Pakistans dogmatic fixation who would not go beyond the invasion of
Muhammad bin Qasim, although in their veneration of the young conqueror, they
continue to ignore the first Muslim invasion of India under Muhammad ibn Abu Suffrah,
whose army operating from Afghanistan had penetrated as deep as Bannu, more than half
a century before.

So, where lie the glories and greatness of Hindu India that the Indians talk so much
about? A Hindu India, mostly fragmented and fighting for petty gains through the first
millennium! It was brought to a semblance of unification by the Mauryans, the Muslim
dynasties and the British with the imperial sword. What is their historical contribution in
the making of India that they inherited on partition? Then what is the actual purpose of all
the military buildup and overbearance? Do they really perceive a recontinuation of
invasion from the north-west? It seems absurd but the simple reason is too obvious
their deep hatred for the Muslims of the north-west; Pakistan and Afghanistan whom they
consider as the sole cause of all degradation and soul sickness. Remember Indira
Gandhis emotion choked exultation before the combined Indian Parliament thumping
their hearts out in joy after the surrender of Pakistani forces in former East Pakistan in
December 1971, Today we have avenged the thousand years of our dark history. But in
her haste, Indira, so typical of Hindu Brahmins could not help herself to empty boasting
on self-assumed victory which could have never come by without the support and
immense sacrifices of the Muslim Bengali fighters. Would some India lovers amongst us
analyse Indiras statement in a different light? Today we have a far more rabid Hindu
government in India.

Hindu Indias Muslim hating emanates from bitterness of the past as well as a persisting
fear complex. All their connivance to enslave this region at the time of partition failed but
the efforts have continued and Kashmir is vital to these efforts. During his recent visit to
Laddakh, Vajpayee in a rare display of compassion scooped water from the Indus and
throwing it back shouted, Here, we give water to Pakistan. In an apparently simple
gesture he revealed the key and sent the subtle warning water, and the control of all its
sources. Did someone in Pakistan take notice of it?

In the partition of Punjab we lost two rivers Sutlej and Beas. The manipulated
Boundary Commission Award gave India control of Ravi and in the illegal occupation of
Kashmir, the headwaters of Chenab and Jhelum have come under her possession.
Subsequent developments to control these rivers clearly indicate the long-term Indian
intentions. And now the Indus has been inducted into the project. Our existence is so
completely dependent on the waters of these rivers that a mere threat, leave alone their
control in the hands of an avowed enemy should jolt us into action. Would the
international laws on the subject help? We have concluded an Indus Basin Water Treaty
with India but did it stop the Indians from constructing the Salal Dam on the Chenab or
could prevent them from constructing a barrage on the Jhelum? And Farrakha Barrage
continues to haunt the Bangladeshis even with an India-friendly government. This is
precisely where the Indians are at their best. Having lost the control of the five rivers, the
age-old identity of Punjab seems so hollow and empty. If our lack of interest persists in
the prevailing wilderness of ignorance, the Punjab could assume a new identity
Beyaab. Would our Moulanas and self-styled religious leaders care to understand a few
basic imperatives of territorial security of the state?

Since partition Indias deep concern over what happened in the past echoes in every
national undertaking (in contrast to our dogmatic fixations and progressive decline in
research and inquiry). Their slogan is, Never Again. Against their persistent aggressive
posturing, it is Pakistan who has maintained a positive attitude for peaceful coexistence
and has never taken advantage of Indias predicament, whether during the closing bouts
in the First Kashmir War, Indian debacle in 1962 or more recently Kargil. Pakistan has
never threatened to recapture Delhi but Indias declared intentions and continuous efforts
to subjugate Pakistan are too loud to miss. They never get tired of Pakistan bashing.
Indias continuing interest in Afghanistan first through the decadent ruling elite and now
the renegade Northern Alliance is also a corollary to their animosity with Pakistan and a
futile effort to assert the colonial claims with British air and pretence but without their
wisdom.

In their present mental and emotional state, the Indians are highly prone to vindictive and
mean behaviour. Their threat does not lie as much in their military might which has a
dismal record of successes and glories in the past but in their cunning and deception
which work like a hydra-headed monster. They are masters in this field and have the best
traditions and records. From the old vedic legends to less mythical historical events, the
proverbial Hindu deceit runs like a scarlet thread as the most preferred strategy and
tradecraft. Recall Shivaji, the most revered of the Hindu military leaders and how he
earned his name and laurels. For their excellence in deception and lies they have
frequently made gains through bluff and propaganda. We are often bombarded with all
kinds of falsities and distortions to cause confusion and doubts and simple and poorly
educated minds are easily affected. It is mainly through bluff, boasting and display that
they spread fear of their military might but only a fool will believe their threat of using
nuclear weapons, which they know would end in mutual annihilation. But unfortunately
their bluff and propaganda have brought them success in the field of diplomacy, not so
much due to their brilliance but rather for want of effective counter responses. Our
internal chaos, lack of national confidence and faith, incompetence and ignorance and
greed for monetary gains have been their main targets for exploitation and results are
visible. This is the most dangerous threat that the Indians pose to Pakistan and it is here
that we need to concentrate all our energies to counter and defeat it.

In the final analysis, however, India has learnt no lesson from history. Her past bitterness
and persisting complexes have become an obsessive delusion for recognition and power.
Although, she has cleverly managed to create an image of some importance, she must
know that deceit cannot endure. The greatness that she seeks cannot be bought through
bluffs and deceptions, show of force, advertisements or lobbying. One can understand the
Jewish influence in moulding American policy in their favour but it would be wiser for
the Americans not to get jaded by the false lure of economic benefits. They should take a
lesson or two from their British kins who have a better knowledge and experience of the
Hindu banias and see through the charade of this largest democracy and how it
oppresses the Christians and deprives the Muslim minority of its representation rights
even from areas where it has proven majority, the massive brutalities and human rights
violations it perpetrates in Kashmir and the unscrupulous means it employs to denigrate
Pakistan. Economic greed must not stain American greatness with dishonour. The present
Indians need to reflect on what Panini said a long time ago and must not exult on
temporary gains. Indias Hindu elite would do better to overcome their futile soul
sickness as a part of karma which they so wisely apply to their poor and unprivileged.
Reconciliation and adjustment to the reality had been a known attribute of Hindu
character which helped the Indian Hindus to survive their thousand years of dark period
and ignominy. They should rather rely on it than chase the dark shapeless shadows of
the past.

By Rafiuddin Ahmed

The Post-1947 Brahmanist Order and its Ideological Foundation

by Dr. Singh

Hindu nationalism and the founding ideology of the post-1947 Poorbia Brahmanist Order are derived
from
historical fraud spun by late 19th-20th century Brahmanist idealogues and organizations (e.g.
Vivekananda,
Dayananda, Gowalker; Brahmo Samaj, Arya Samaj, Hindu-Maha-Saba, RSS, VHP, etc.) from the
eastern
subcontinent. A new supremacist identity and history (neo-Brahmanism) was invented for the
Brahmanist
community (the twice born Brahmin/Bania orthodox castes - 7% of "Hindus") by making wild,
hegemonic
and fraudulent claims over the history, religions and civilizations of historically separate southasian
regions,
nations and peoples. Under neo-Brahmanist ideology, all of southasia under British imperial rule was
fantasized as their 10,000 year old One Hindu Nation" (Hindusthan) in which the 7% Brahmanists,
the
self-styled "superior Aryans", should be the "rightful ruling class".

With the westward expansion of the British Raj, historical propaganda and claims designed to float the
Brahmanists' One Hindu Nation ambitions (really a Poorbia Brahmanist fantasy of empire - "Hindu,
Hindi,
Hindustan") were exported to newly annexed regions by Brahmanist ideologues, politicians, socio-
political
organizations and schools during the late 19th and early 20th century (e.g. Arya Samaj founded in
1877, RSS
formed in 1925). The pre/post independence national politics of Brahmanist dominated political
organizations, regardless of party or political affiliation, is rooted in the historical consciousness and
hegemonic "One Hindu Nation" ideology and doctrines spawned by Neo-Brahmanism.

The post-1947 India Union is in reality a "Casteocracy" run by the supremacist Orthodox Brahmanical
Castes
(OCs: Brahmins, Banias; 7% of "Hindus") or Brahmanists who came to hijack the largest chunk of the
former
British Indian Empire in 1947. It has been cleverly run under the ruse of "world's biggest democracy"
for the
past 50 years. The supremacist and hegemonic minded Brahmanist cliques completely control the
circles of
power and policy of the Indian state. Post 1947, almost all (95%) of the top decision-making and
managerial
positions in the country's administration, bureaucracy, state-run media, press, huge state-run
economic
sector, universities, army, police, etc. were stacked by Brahmanists who form 7% of Hindus.
Intriguingly,
Brahmanists did not have ruling class status or political dominance in any significant country/region
of
southasia before the British began creating their empire ("India") during the 19th century.

According to statistics published by reputed Indian journalist and historian Kushwant Singh, the
Brahmins
alone (3.5% of "Hindus") control over 70% of the top decision-making and managerial posts of the
Indian
State. In 1935, the 3.5% Brahmins held around 4% of the officer positions among Indians in the
government.
By 1985, one finds that out of 3,300 Indian Administrative Officers (IAS), 2,376 are Brahmins; from
the rank ofdeputy secretaries upwards, out of 500, 310 are Brahmins; of the 26 state chief secretaries,
19 are Brahmins;
of the 16 Supreme Court judges, 9 are Brahmins; of 438 district magistrates, 250 are Brahmins; and so
on in
other circles of power and policy in the Indian state. Their state power jumps from 70% to over 90%
upon
including the remaining "twice born" Brahmanists.

The facts show that the 7% Brahmanists monopolize the top positions of the Indian state and
determine its
policies and actions (e.g. Swadeshi Permit Raj Economics, nuclear testing, police/army rule and
oppression
in all majority non-Hindu states, systemic human right abuses of majority "lower castes" and
minorities).
Under "Permit Raj" and "Swadeshi" economic policies, only the Brahmanist cliques have been
allowed to
invest and enter the new modern and profitable industrial and manufacturing sectors while the rest of
Indians
(93%) are tied to the plough, dwindling lands and the unskilled labor market. The country was
converted into a
huge "Brahmanist milking cow" through Brahmanist monopoly over the corrupted, rent-seeking and
criminalized beaurocracy, political system and state-run industries while the wealth generated in the
private
economy is cornered through Swadeshi Permit Raj Economics. Genocidal state terror and violence
has been
unleashed on the populations of every non-Hindu majority state in the Indian Union (e.g. Kashmir,
Punjab,
Assam, Manipur, Mizoland, Nagaland, etc.) and communal rioting against religious minorities is an
integral
part of statecraft and politics by the Indian Government and Brahmanist-lead political parties (1984
Sikh
riots, Ayodhya, 1991Bombay Muslim riots, etc.). The Brahmanists despised majority (80%)
"lower castes"
and Dalits (untouchables) live under constant threat of random police/army violence and torture to
keep them
under submission and to discourage them from mobilizing politically.

This is the true hideous, criminal and genocidal nature of the 50 year Casteocracy, imperialistically
running
the old British empire and motivated by the hegemonic, supremacist and racist socio-political
ideology of
neo-Brahmanism. Unfortunately, Western opinion on events in India has been largely shaped by the
viewpoint of Brahmanist propagandists who control the governmental machinery/political
system/academics/state-run mass media/press/etc. Brahmanists have been extremely effective in
propagating their historical and political mithya and propaganda and hiding, deflecting and
scapegoating
India's gruesome realities and the Brahmanist regimes abysmal failures and tyranny on their victims,
lower
castes and religious minorities. Brahmanist emigrees to the west have very zealously adopted the role
of
Indian Ambassadors and guardians of the honor of their dishonorable Casteocracy and perpetually
cover-up
its criminal, corrupted and genocidal nature and spread neo-Brahmanist doctrines and historical fraud
to the
outside world.
Propagating the Fradulent "Hindu" Identity - the Chief Weapon of
Poorbia Brahmanist Imperialism
The Brahmanists came to power on the Congress elephant by deviously converting the pre-
independence
political debate and struggle into a communal Hindu-Muslim religious struggle and propagating their
fradulent "Hindu" identity/nationalism to construct their majority Hindu flock - naturally to be lead,
lorded and
ruled by the "superior" 7% Brahmanists (i.e. the Brahmins/Banias clique)! This was made possible by
the
master stroke of Mahatama Gandhi - the Hindu nationalist cum holy sadhu - who made "Hindus" a
55%
majority on paper in the 1920s upon getting the Dalits or "untouchables" (20%) dubbed as "Hindus"
by the
British. This coup moved the "Hindus" from 35% to a 55% majority in British India. In pre-
independence India, Muslims were 25%; Sikhs/Christians/Buddhists/tribals/etc. formed the remaining
20%.

This action, along with recognition of Congress as the sole political representative of all Indians in
national
matters, was a payoff by the British colonial authorities to the Brahmanist lead Congress and Gandhi
for loyal
services rendered to Queen and empire in supporting their WWI war effort; recruiting the "martial"
communities (e.g. Sikhs, Jats, Rajputs, Gujars of Saka-origin) of the northwest and Muslims to go
fight for the
British Empire in Europe/middle east; subduing, opposing, infiltrating and sabotaging other
non-Congress/non-Brahmanist lead political parties and independence movements organized at home
(who
saw British weakness during the war as an ideal opportunity).

The 55% fraudulent "Hindu pile" was little more than a political game of Brahmanist politicians and
political
parties in Delhi while orthodox caste Hindus (7%) would not eat/touch/marry/socialize or even
worship with
their "polluted" Dalits (20% untouchables) in the 1920s. After this "victory on paper", Brahmanist
politicians,
political parties, and organizations totally communalized pre-independence politics along
"Hindu/Muslim"
religious lines of "nationhood" to get on the road to empire and Delhi. Under the historical
propaganda
campaign launched by Poorbia Brahmanist ideologues, organizations and schools since the late 19-
20th
century (e.g. "Arya" Samaj, HinduMahaSaba, RSS, etc.), the majority Saka-Vedic people of the
northwest has
been largely brainwashed into becoming the loyal and obedient inferior "Hindu" flock of their
Brahmanist
(Brahmins, Banias - 7%) masters, overlords and "Netajis".

Ironically, despite all the Poorbia Brahmanist historical mithya and fantasy, the self-proclaimed
"highest
caste" Brahmanists cannot name and date even one ruler of the northwest over its 3500 year known
history
since the start of the Vedic period (1500 BC); in the 50 years since 1947, there have been 6 Brahmin
Rulers!
Prior to annexation by the British in the 19th century, the Sakas had regained their historical power
(500
BC-1200AD) and the entire northwest and west was under Saka rule and political domination: Sikhs
(Lahore,
Patiala, Nabha, Kashmir), Jats (Bharatpur, Dholpur, Agra, Bhawalpur), Rajputs (Rajputana), Gujars
(Gujarat,
western MP), Marathas (Maharashtra). Further, the terms "Hindu" and "Hindusthan" were first
imposed on
southasian nations and regions by the Afghan dynasty of Ghori in the 12th century; these terms were
never
used in southasia prior to the Muslim era and are not even found in early (pre-12th century AD)
Brahmanical
or Buddhist texts. These terms and concepts have no "historical depth" in any social, religious, ethnic
or
national sense past the 12th century when Mohammed Ghori for the first time named his conquered
domains
in northern southasia "Hindusthan" and his subjects "Hindus".

What did Ghori's "Hindus" call themselves prior to the 12th century? The chatur-varna ideology
found in
gangetic Brahmanical texts only views society in terms of "inferior and superior" castes (jatis) with
separate
religious, social and legal rights/privledges; there is no notion of a common religious community,
nation or
people in Brahmanical holy texts! According to Brahmin Law Givers, the "lower caste" Sudras (80%)
were "too
polluted" to be seen fit to even enter their temples, worship their devtas, and learn their religious
scriptures.
Their holy texts repeatedly forbid Brahmins from travelling to the northwest Vedic-Saka country.
The region
was independent from the rest of southasia over 90% of its 3500 year verifiable history and pursued its
own
unique and separate ethnic, historical, political, religious, linguistic, and cultural evolution.