Roots of Distortion
(by NS Rajaram, written in the late 90s)
"India gained independence from the British in 1947, or more than fifty years ago. But intellectually and educationally India continues to be a European colony.
(by NS Rajaram, written in the late 90s)
"India gained independence from the British in 1947, or more than fifty years ago. But intellectually and educationally India continues to be a European colony.
This is because, during the first forty years of her existence as a free nation, the Congress Party and the intellectual establishment, continued to encourage colonial institutions and thinking.
The result today is that there is an English educated elite that identifies itself more with the West than with India and her ancient civilization.
And the Congress Party, especially after the death of Sardar Patel, has identified itself more with foreign values rather than Indian values.
The Communists, who have always been hostile to Indian nationalism, have now joined hands with anti-national forces, which are fiercely anti-Hindu. This is reflected in the attitude and behavior of the English educated intellectuals, including the media.
The signs of this are everywhere — from hostility to Sarasvati Vandana and the Pokharan nuclear tests to begging a European woman of no experience or service to the nation, to rule the country.
As a result, this colonial holdover consisting of the Congress, the Communists and the Leftist intellectual class (including the media) have come together to perpetuate anti-national values and interests. This naturally makes them intensely anti-Hindu.
It views with fear anything that has even a suggestion of nationalism rooted in Indian history and tradition.
Since Indian nationalism can only exist as a product of the Hindu Civilization, these forces hostile to Hinduism have combined to oppose the rise of national awareness that is now sweeping the country.
The result is that they will go to any length to give a negative picture of India and her past. The first step in this is to distort Indian history.
Fortunately for them, most of the distortion had already been done for them by the British, and their successors during the Congress rule.
The goal of the British was to weaken the Indian spirit, particularly the Hindu spirit, because the nationalist movement in India was mainly a Hindu movement.
The nationalist movement, which rose to great heights during the Swadeshi Movement following the Partition of Bengal, lost its direction and focus in 1920 when Mahatma Gandhi sacrificed Swaraj for the sake of the Khilafat.
This in turn led to the anti-Hindu orientation of the Congress under Jawaharlal Nehru. This was soon joined by the Communists, who worked hand-in-glove with the Congress. The Communists now are little more than camp followers of Sonia Gandhi and her party.
So it is in the interests of these anti-national forces to keep alive the colonial version of Indian history. Thanks to the domination of the Indian political scene by the Congress, Communist intellectuals and fellow travelers were able to dominate the intellectual scene also.
As a result, the colonial version of history continues to be taught in Indian schools and colleges. This has led to gross distortions in the history being taught in Indian schools and colleges. These distortions may be classified as follows:
1) Distortion of ancient history through the ‘Aryan invasion’ and the Aryan-Dravidian wars, presenting the Vedic Age as an ‘age of conflict’
2) Distortion of the Medieval history, by whitewashing the Islamic record and presenting it as the 'age of synthesis'.
2) Distortion of the Medieval history, by whitewashing the Islamic record and presenting it as the 'age of synthesis'.
3) Distortion of the period of the Freedom Struggle, by whitewashing Congress blunders and suppressing the contribution of the revolutionaries, Sardar Patel and Subhas Bose.
4) Distortion of post-independent India, by whitewashing the monumental blunders of Pandit Nehru and his successors to bring about dynastic rule under the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty at the cost of national interest.
It is worth taking a brief look at each one of them, beginning with the ancient period. The first point to note that it was the ancient period that gave India both its unity and its sense of the nation.
The Medieval period was a Dark Age, during which the Hindu civilization was engaged in a desperate struggle for survival. In addition, the forces of medievalism contributed nothing to Indian nationalism.
They acted as a negative force and held back progress, taking the country into a Dark Age. They continue to act as a check against progress by holding on to medieval ideas and practices.
The important point to note is that the ancient period was an age of synthesis, when people of different viewpoints like the Vedic, Tantric, Buddhistic, Jain and other sects lived in relative harmony. There was also free exchange of ideas and unfettered debate.
The Medieval period was the age of conflict when Hindu society was engaged in a desperate struggle for survival against the onslaught of Jihad — something like what is happening in Kashmir today.
What the Congress sponsored Leftist (‘secularist’) historians have done is to exactly reverse this.
They have said that the ancient period was an age of conflict between Aryans and non-Aryans, while trying to portray the Medieval period — dominated by Jihad (or religious wars) — as a period of synthesis.
Ancient India: age of freedom and synthesis
History books today begin with the Aryan invasion of India, which is said to have taken place in 1500 BC.
History books today begin with the Aryan invasion of India, which is said to have taken place in 1500 BC.
Students are told that the ancient civilization of the Indus Valley or the Harappan Civilization was Dravidian that was destroyed by the invading Aryans.
According to this theory, the language of the Harappan seals, which contain a good deal of writing, is some form of Dravidian language, unrelated to Sanskrit.
The idea of Aryans and Dravidians as mutually hostile people was created during the colonial period, in which Christian missionaries played an active role. It was part of the British policy of divide and rule. Bishop Caldwell was probably the most influential Dravidian scholar.
When criticized for his theories, he defended them "as not only of considerable moment from a philological [linguistic] point of view but of vast moral and political importance." By ‘moral and political’, he meant Christian missionary and British colonial interests.
This shows that one of the main forces behind the Aryan invasion theory, and of education policy in general, was the conversion of Hindus to Christianity to make them accept British rule.
According to the Aryan invasion theory, the Vedas and Sanskrit language were brought by these Indo-European invaders and not native to India. (This is now demolished by science and also the decipherment of the Harappan writing.)
Using this false theory, the British could claim that India had always been ruled by foreign invaders — first the Vedic Aryans, and later the Muslims.
The British claimed to be Aryans (as Indo-Europeans) and therefore only the latest rulers of India, but related to their own ancient Aryans who also were foreign invaders! Christian missionaries took advantage of this by enjoying the patronage of colonial rulers.
The presented the Bible as ‘Yesurveda’ — or the Veda of Yesu (Jesus).
Many influential British officials felt that the conversion of Hindus to Christianity would make them readily accept British rule.
Many influential British officials felt that the conversion of Hindus to Christianity would make them readily accept British rule.
The most influential of these was Thomas Babbington Macaulay who introduced the English education system in India. He made no secret of his goal of conversion of India to Christianity.
So religious conversion and colonialism were to go hand in hand. Christian missions always supported the colonial government, with missionaries working hand in glove with the British government.
They supported the Jallianwallah Bagh Massacre also, even though many Englishmen were ashamed of it. In a real sense Christian missions were not religious organizations at all but an unofficial arm of the British Administration.
(The same is true of many Catholic missions in Central American countries. Many of them are in the pay of the American CIA. This was admitted by a CIA director, testifying before the Congress.)
Corruption of national institutions
As I just noted, even some documents in the National Archives are not available to scholars if the Nehru family members feel that they might contain any damaging information.
As I just noted, even some documents in the National Archives are not available to scholars if the Nehru family members feel that they might contain any damaging information.
But the Congress, joined by the Communists, went much further, especially when Indira Gandhi became Prime Minister.
Just as Nehru sought control of the 'commanding heights of the economy' with his socialistic planning, he and his successors built a centralized educational establishment that would perpetuate his anti-Hindu view of Indian history and civilization.
This led to anti-Hindu forces dominating education for nearly fifty years.
The first minister of education was Maulana Azad — said to be a 'nationalist' Muslim and a close friend and open admirer of Nehru — at least in public.
The first minister of education was Maulana Azad — said to be a 'nationalist' Muslim and a close friend and open admirer of Nehru — at least in public.
Azad was an indolent man and an ineffective administrator, but with a strong commitment to exalting the glory of Islamic rule in India.
(He had also a hand in sabotaging R.C. Majumdar’s multi-volume work on the Indian Freedom Movement, which at times was critical of the Congress.)
So the official rewriting of Indian history had begun — with its whitewashing of the horrors of Islamic rule accompanied by the introduction of anti-Hindu propaganda — describing Hinduism as full of inequities and Islam as egalitarian.
Nehru himself had set the trend with his glorification of Muhammad of Ghazni and Babar.
Under this program of de-Hinduisation, vandals and terrorists like Ghazni, Babar and Aurangazeb were treated as bringers of civilization and equality,1+
Under this program of de-Hinduisation, vandals and terrorists like Ghazni, Babar and Aurangazeb were treated as bringers of civilization and equality,1+
while portraying such freedom fighters as Shivaji, Rana Pratap, Chandrashekar Azad and others as obstructionists standing in the way of progress.
But thanks to the official hospitality extended to such historical revisions, the influential National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) came to be dominated by scholars who pursued the Nehruvian agenda or were willing to cater to it.
The same was true of another influential educational body — National Institute for Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA). Independent minded historians and other scholars who were not prepared to toe this official line were removed or made ineffective.
A fateful event that played into the hands of the Secularists was the appointment of Nurul Hassan as education minister in the Indira Gandhi regime. He claimed to be a Marxist, but he pursued an anti-Hindu agenda like a Muslim Fundamentalist.
(After the creation of Pakistan, many Muslim Fundamentalists pretended to be Marxists, and kept attacking Hinduism for its ‘inequality’.)
As a result, anti-Hinduism acquired a stranglehold on education. NIEPA is a particularly influential body that administers and oversees educational policy in India. NCERT controls textbooks and other materials that are used in schools and colleges in India.
Both were now under the firm control of anti-Hindu forces.
Through his control of these two powerful bodies, Nurul Hassan became education Czar in India. He extended patronage to the Marxist dominated Jawaharlal Nehru University and Muslim separatist Aligarh Muslim University.
Through his control of these two powerful bodies, Nurul Hassan became education Czar in India. He extended patronage to the Marxist dominated Jawaharlal Nehru University and Muslim separatist Aligarh Muslim University.
They were allowed to provide consultants and experts on all educational matters. As a result, these two academically undistinguished but politically opportunistic universities have come to command resources and influence out of all proportion to their merit.
A single example should help give an idea of the dangers of this centralized feudal educational policy. For over 20 years, H.S. Khan headed the history and sociology division of the NCERT.
He is known to hold the view that India became civilized only through the introduction of Islam. This incidentally is also the official Pakistani line.
This was also the view of Nurul Hassan who was of course the patron of H.S. Khan. This is taking the Aryan invasion idea a giant step forward (or backward).
In 1986, on Khan's initiative, textbook writers in all the states were directed to change the version of history to accord with the anti-Hindu model.
Specific guidelines were issued to all the states instructing them not to glorify any period of history — meaning any Hindu period — as a Golden Age; the Gupta period therefore was not to be glorified despite its great achievements.
As a further step in de-Hinduisation and rehabilitation of tyrannical Muslim rulers, Hindu leaders like Shivaji, Chandrashekara Azad and Rana Pratap were not to be described as freedom fighters against alien rule, but treated as terrorists1+
who opposed 'civilized and civilizing' rulers like Aurangazeb. As a result, the anti-Hindu agenda, which had been gaining strength since the early 1950s, accelerated dramatically under the feudal regime of Nurul Hassan.
Only now, following the rout of the Congress party in the 1999 elections, their monopoly has come under threat. This has made these men and women resort to desperate measures like what is coming out in the ICHR scandals.
/end
/end
