Reality Check India

Dravidian stratagems master list

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on November 17, 2019
  1. ஏன்டா எங்களை இந்து ஆக்கின ? ( pazhakarupiah)
  2. ஏன்டா எங்களை இந்தியனா ஆக்கின ? தமிழ்த்தாய் இருக்குறப்போ பாரத மாதா எந்திருந்து வந்தாள் – பாரதி செஞ்ச விஷமம் – ஒருத்தனுக்கு எப்படி இரண்டு தாய் இருக்க முடியும் – ஹெஹெஹெ (pk)
  3. சூத்திரனா இருந்த எங்களை தமிழனா மாற்றியவர பெரியார் (pk)
  4. அர்ஜுன் சம்பத் அர்ச்சகர் ஆக முடியுமா ? (sv)
  5. கோயில்கள் ஆபாச சிலைகள் இருக்குமிடம் – அகற்றவேண்டும் ™
  6. சிதம்பரத்தில் அர்ச்சகர் ஒரு பெண்ணை அடித்துள்ளாரே — பெண்கள் அர்ச்சகராக இருந்திருந்தால் இப்படி ஒரு அவமானம் நேர்ந்திருக்குமா (mathimaran)
  7. நாங்க மட்டும் இல்லேன்னா நீங்க இன்னிக்கி பாண்ட் – ஷர்ட் போட்டுக்கிட்டு எல்லாம் தெரிஞ்ச மாதிரி பேசியிருக்க முடியுமா ?
  8. பெரியார் இல்லையென்றால் தமிழ் பெண்கள் விடுதலை அடைத்திருப்பார்களா ? சொத்துரிமை கிடைத்திருக்குமா?
  9. மனிதர்களை கோயிலுக்குள் விடாத கும்பலிடம் உங்களை மீட்டெடுத்தவர் பெரியார்
  10. சமஸ்க்ரிதம் தெரிந்தால் மட்டுமே மெடிக்கல் சீட் என்று செக் வெச்ச்சு – பார்ப்பனர்கள் எல்லா மருத்தவ இடங்களையும் அபகரித்து விட்டனர் – நாங்க இதை திருத்தாவிட்டால் உங்க நிலைமையை நினைத்து பாருங்கள்
  11. திருவிளையாடல் புராணம் ஒரு கேவலமான ஆபாசமான நூல் – பார்ப்பனர் நக்கீரன் நமக்கு கொடுத்துள்ளார் (pk)
  12. “ஏன் இந்துக்களை மட்டும் கடுமையாக விமர்சிக்கிறீர் – கடவுள் இல்லை என்றால் ஜீசஸ் இல்லை என்று சொல்ல தில் இருக்கா ?”   சொந்த வீட்டுக்கு தானே ஒட்டடை அடிக்க முடியும் (sv, veeramani)
  13. பார்ப்பனர் சூத்திரர்களை தே** பசங்க என்று நினைக்கிறான்-etc  (EVR 1972 video)
  14. தமிழை வைத்து தமிழ் தேசியம் முன்வைத்தால் – அங்கு பார்ப்பனர்களும் வந்து விடுவார்கள். திராவிடம் என்றால் அவர்களுக்கு இடமில்லை (sv)
  15. தமிழ் பார்ப்பனர்கள் 2000 வருடமா உங்களுக்கு கல்வி மறுத்துவிட்டார்கள் (everyone)
  16. தமிழ் பார்ப்பனர்களை தவிர வேறு யாருக்கும் சமஸ்க்ரிதம் தெரிந்ததில்லை (everyone)
  17. இவர்களின் தாய் மொழி சமஸ்க்ரிதம் – தமிழுக்கும் இவர்களுக்கும் சம்மந்தம் இல்லை. இவர்கள் வீட்டில் “ப்ரக்ரிதம்” பேசுபவர்கள்.
  18. பண்டைய தமிழகத்தில் பார்ப்பனர்-அல்லாதோர் யாரேனும் பாடம் கேட்டுவிட்டால் அவர்கள் காதில் ஈயம் காச்சி ஊற்றப்படும் (ar)
  19. பைபிள் , குரான் போல மநுஸ்மிருதி தமிழகத்தில் பொது சட்ட ஒழுக்க வாழ்வியல் நூலாக விளங்கியது  (a.rasa)
  20. பழங்குடி போர்வீரனான எங்க முருகுணை பார்ப்பனர்கள் திருடி விட்டார்கள் – இப்போது இருக்குற முருகன் எங்கள் இழப்பின் அடையாளம்  (pk, many sm)
  21. தமிழ் வரலாற்றின் முதல் வில்லன் திருஞானசம்பந்தன் — சமுக நீதி மார்க்கமான சமணத்தை அழித்து , அவர்களை பயங்கரமா கழுவிலே ஏத்திவிட்டார் (everyone)
  22. பரிமேலழகர் அடுத்த வில்லன் – திருக்குறளை அபேஸ் பண்ணிவிட்டார் , எங்க தலைவர் உரை தான் சரியான உரை . (sv)
  23. சங்ககால பாண்டிய மன்னர்கள் தமிழ்-பார்ப்பனர் கைக்கூலி – நிலங்களும், மாடுகளும் வழங்கி குடி வைத்தார்கள் (sv)
  24. சோழ மன்னர்கள் அதை விட மோசம் – தஞ்சை நிலங்களை வாரி வழங்கினார்கள்.
  25. சமூக நீதி திட்டங்களில் கண்காணிப்போ , புள்ளி விவரங்களோ தேவையில்லை – பார்ப்பனர் அல்லாதோர் ஒரே குழு தான். பண்ணையாரும் பண்ணைக்காரனும் பார்ப்பனர்களால் ஒரே விதமா பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்கள்
  26. “நீ ஏன்டா நெற்றியிலே நாமம் போட்டிருக்கேன்னா – ‘அது பெருமாள் பாதமாம்’ என்றான் ; சேரி அப்டின்னா பெருமாள் நாமம் போட்டிருக்காரே “? அது  யார் பாதாம் ? வகை: மொக்க தனமா கிண்டல் அடித்தல் ; (என் 12 தலைப்பின் கீழ் , சொந்த வீட்டை தானே சுத்தம் செய்யமுடியும் )  (subavee)

 

 

உங்களுக்கு ஏதாவது தோன்றினால் கமெண்ட்ஸில் பதிவு செய்யவும் — பட்டியலில் சேர்த்து கொள்ளலாம் !

 

 

ஏன்டா எங்களை இந்துவாக ஆக்கினாய் ?

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on November 13, 2019

ஏன்டா எங்களை இந்துவாக ஆக்கினாய் ?

சில மாதங்களுக்கு முன் பழ கருப்பையா சொல்லி கொடுத்த வரிகளை இன்று பல திராவிட கிளை பேச்சாளர்கள் பரப்பி வருகிறார்கள் . விஷயம் தெரியாதவர்கள் கேட்டால் ஏதோ சூப்பர் பாயிண்ட் போல தோன்றும் — ஆனால் வெறும் சல்லித்தனமான பேச்சு. அலசலாம் வாங்க.
இவரு என்ன சொல்லவராரு என்றால் : சைவம், வைணவம், கௌமாரம் , வைதீகம் , .. இவைகள் தான் உண்மையான மதங்கள் — மதம் என்ற வரையறைக்குள் அடங்கக்கூடியவை.

எதற்காக இவ்வாறு தனி தனியாக இருந்த எங்களை ஒன்று கூட்டி ஒரு கூடாரத்தில் வைத்து ஹிந்து என்று அதற்கு பட்டம் அளித்தாய் .. வாங்க எல்லோரும் வெளியேறி விடலாம் , வாங்க தனி தனியாக முடிந்த வரையிலும் குறிகிய வட்டத்திற்குள் அடக்கிடோண்டு அடுத்த வட்டத்தில் இருக்கிறவனை தள்ளி வைத்து , சுவர் எழுப்பி அதனால் நம்மளுடைய தனித்துவதை காட்டலாம் .

Response to Dravidian caste identification

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on October 31, 2019

முன்னணி திராவிட கருத்தியல் கொள்கையாளர் திரு சுபவீ அவர்கள் மிகவும் சுவாரசியமான பதிவு ஒன்றை முகநூலில் பதிவு செய்துள்ளார் — திராவிட உத்திகள் அனைத்தும் அதில் காணலாம்

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=773040743149179&id=296301810823077

என்னுடைய பதில்  கீழே..

1. சாதி பெயர்களை நீக்கியது திராவிடம் என்று பீத்திக்கிறீர்களே — பிறகு எதற்கு அவரை வைத்தியநாத அய்யர் அய்யர் என குறிப்பிடவேண்டும் — அவருடைய அதிகாரபூர்வமான பெயர் ஆர். வைத்தியநாதன் ; “அப்படி தாண்டா சொல்லுவேன்”  என்றால் உங்களையும் இனிமேல் சுபவீ செட்டியார் என்று தானே சொல்லிக்கொள்ளவேண்டும் ?

2. “அதே ஆங்கிலத்தில் உரையாடி திராவிடத்தை ஒழிக்கலாம் ‘ — பெரியார் தானேங்க எல்லோரையும் ஆங்கிலத்தில் உரையாட சொன்னார் . நீங்க அவர் சொன்னதை கேட்காமல் ஆங்கிலம் தெரிந்தும் மக்களை தமிழை வெச்சு ஏமாற்றுகிறீர்கள் .
ஏனென்றால் உங்களுக்கு நன்றாக தெரியும் ஆங்கிலத்தில் உரையாடினால் உங்களை எதிர்ப்பவர்கள் பல மடங்கு பெருகிவிடுவார்கள், வெளியாட்களும் இணைந்துவிடுவார்கள். அது மட்டும் அல்ல – ஆங்கிலத்தில் தர்க்க ரீதியாக பகுத்து ஆராயக்கூடிய (critical analysis tools) மொழி கருவிகள் மிகவும் கூர்மையானது — தமிழில் என்னை போன்ற துருபிடித்து அரைகுறை மொக்க கத்தி எதிரிகள் தான் அதிகம் , எளிதாக வீழ்த்திவிடலாம் ..   தாய்மொழி தமிழை கண்டால் எங்களுக்கு ஒன்றும் பயமில்லை — தூசி தட்டி செம்மை படுத்த கொஞ்சம் நேரம் ஆகும், ஆனால் கண்டிப்பாக தமிழிலேயே சந்திப்போம். ரொம்ப நாள் ஒளிய முடியாது..

3. திரு மணியரசன் அவர்களை கேலி செய்திருக்கீர் — ஏன் அவரு சுயசிந்தனை அற்றவரா , அவரு பின்னணியில் ஒரு வெங்கடராமன் இருந்தே ஆக வேண்டுமா .. பாப்பனர் அல்லாதோர் என்ற ஒரே அடையாளத்தை வைத்து அவரு  வாழ்நாள் முழுவதும்   திராவிடத்திற்கு சோம்பு தூக்கவேண்டுமா .. 🙂

4.  “பார்ப்பன பூச்சாண்டி உத்தி ” – அடையாள அரசியலின் (identity politics) உச்ச கட்டமே திராவிடம் தான் .. ராஜிவ் மல்ஹோத்ரா ஒரு பார்ப்பனர் அல்லர். சத்திரியர் — அவரை பார்ப்பான் என்று அடையாளம் காட்டி விட்டால் அதுவே உங்களுக்கு போதும் – அவர் சொல்லும் கருத்தை நீங்க அப்படியே கிடாசிவிடலாம் எதிர்கொள்ள தேவையில்லை. மல்ஹோத்ரா பேட்டிக்கு சம்மந்தமே இல்லாத சேகரையும் , ராஜாவையும் ஒரு பூச்சாண்டி கும்பல் போல கொக்கி போட்டு கோத்துவிட்டு மக்களை குழப்பி விடுகிறீர்கள்.

 

 

Political Tamil

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on October 22, 2019

PM Narendra Modi recently created a flutter with this tweet

 

First, it is never a good idea for a Prime Minister to mainstream such pseudo facts.   If you do it for one group, you must also do it for some other  group who may have a claim of their own.  Iterated enough times,  the bottom support structures such as respect for facts, evidence, counter claims, falsifiability  go out the window.  These are replaced by fantasy (like Lemuria),  feelings, faith, belief.  Initially whoever makes the most vehement claims will get that granted. Next, whoever can back up the vehemence with violence will get that granted.

If there are no external effects, then you just laugh it off or grant the recognition.  For example let me just pull out the absurdity to illustrate  : I insist Lex Luthor was not a villain  but tricked by the cunning  Superman.  You can just say “OK , Lex Luthor is the real hero” – matter ends there. I build a monument for Lex Luthor.  It has no external effects.

Now , say If  I can somehow mix that in with a #IOI political issue and then rally the people, then  it is a different game. You no  longer have an innocent single strand – you have an entire range of  strands. Some strands  just seek a recognition of Tamil , but there are hard core knights mixed in there too.  If you just let  the issue simmer , the knights can rally the other strands.   In normal societies, this issue would never rise to this level.  In Tamilnadu, the media power of the Dravidians is very deep and the masses are wide eyed and gullible.  There is really no one preventing Tamilians from innovating , researching, developing, creating in Tamil.   This entire issue is a creation of the knights who have a much deeper agenda.

Political Tamil is the utilization  of the  Tamil language as a source of political identity and action [1]  The powers use the language to imagine something , however absurd or extreme it may appear,  then use that to transform the society in line with that imagination.  They can revise history and even paint the entire arc of Tamil history as a period of shame and Tamil Brahmin hegemony.  Can you now insist on a fact check for  this?  When you have not fact checked the original claim?

Like all political ideologies, political Tamil concerns itself with the infidel more than itself. In this case the enemy is Sanskrit.   In fact, they really wanted Modi to say “Tamil is older than Sanskrit” rather than the more easily rebuttable   “Tamil is the oldest language in the world” .

So, Did Modi do the right thing ?

It depends, does he have the energy to go all the way. Here is how Political Tamil will respond in the coming days.

  1. Move to step 2 :   PM himself has said – put this in NCERT books
  2. Introduce Tamil as official language nationwide
  3. Dont merely say “Tamil is oldest language” also say “Sanskrit is dead”. This is the external effect that Modi must guard against. Remember the Tamil anthem’ original words “ஆரியம்போல் உலகவழக்கழிந் தொழிந்து சிதையாவுன் சீரிளமைத் திறம்வியந்து செயல்மறந்து…” (unlike Sanskrit which is Aryan language and is dead and not in use Tamil is in still fresh) This antipathy to Sanskrit has deep roots in Dravidian rhetoric for over 100 yrs.
  4. As a Political Action — there could be some agenda items like NEET , Sterlite,  Rajiv assassins release couched as Tamil items.   “If you say you love Tamizh, then how come you are imposing NEET on Tamizh people”.  The usage of first person plurals like “We Tamils ”   can be very effective. This can give the feeling that Tamils have a single view of every issue and that is the Dravidian view.  If not, they cannot be Tamils.
  5. Beyond this petty humiliation there is nothing really ..  no TN leader even sends their kids to Tamil medium.

You can hold the line by merely refusing to put these in text books unless more evidence is available. The other political items can be laughed at.   The key is to go this far but no further.

There are some advantages here

  1. You engage with the Political Tamil.  This was missing earlier. Hence they were able to use their deep propaganda networks to deeply communicate that  BJP as anti Tamil language itself. “Look they cant even say a nice word about Tamil”
  2. By acknowledging Tamil  – you have separated one strand at least.  Those who just seek a recognition.  Those who now seek to move to step 2 ; i.e disparage Sanskrit can be easily spotted.  The knights  will have to redo their approach without being spotted.

 

The final offensive move would be to turn the tables on the Dravidians and demand a Tamizh commitment check of their own. Demand that the entire Tamizh spectrum from Tevarams, Periyapuranam, Kamba Ramayanam, Tiruppukazh, Barathi,  be taught in schools and Tamil made compulsory till 8th.  Of course, Christians and Muslims can have their own options. This ironically is the demand of several  Tamilnadu  RSS and Hindu Munnani leaders for long.  Tamil is a natural language for Hindus (ok Saivites, Vaishnavites, Sittars,)   Sri Lanka does this with no problems.

Then , It will be game on

 

(PS: None of this is necessary is you simply do the #core agenda. Particularly #core3 in TN. I am writing this post as a non-core response)

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_Islam

 

How the Dravidian leader Suba Vee seeds ideas of harm

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on October 16, 2019

Mr Suba Veerapandian runs an outfit called Dravida Iyakka Tamilar Peravai which is dedicated to spreading the Dravidian ideology and Periyar-ism. He is a retired college professor who is a regular on  TV channels, active on Facebook, tours the state, talks in various college events. A communicator par excellence who specializes in getting his message of hate deep into the subconscious of the under-educated , underclass, and youth.  Suba Vee hails from the Chettiar caste, considered to be a cultured wealthy community. Many of the talking points he makes are  repeated  after a few days in the speeches of ministers, propagandists, and social media handles.  Today he is a fountainhead for much of the narrative from Tamilnadu.

Except –  he is a truckload of bad.  Embeds and incites feelings of caste ill will against the Tamizh Brahmin community which is already squeezed out of most public influence positions since the Dravidians swept into power 100 years ago.

The method

I am going to run you through this interview which aired on Sun TV in  2018.  His aim in this interview is to embed this :   Violence visited upon  innocent members of Tamil brahmins caste as a community  is  a legitimate  response to something Mr H.Raja said in a political context as an individual.

Watch how masterfully he weaves this  message using the prop who lobs him the questions.

 

The context here is the following  :  Post the Tripura Assembly victory, some people toppled the statue of Lenin.  In response to this, Mr H.Raja from BJP Tamilnadu said in Facebook post ,  ‘one day Mr EVRamasamy (Periyar) statue will also be toppled in Tamilnadu”.

I repeat,  this is a purely political statement from H.Raja. Mr Raja never mentioned any caste or religion.  Dravidians talk about uprooting and toppling so many things, hardly something they need to get wet over.

I am going to run through some examples where he seeds thoughts of violence against non-participants. See if you can spot the genius.

Q: “பெரியார் சிலை வெறும் காங்கிரீட் கலவை தானே ; அடிச்ச்சா உங்களுக்கென்ன”
A: ஆமாம் ஆமாம் ; கோயில் காங்கிரீட் கலவை தானே , அக்கிரகாரத்து வீடுகள் எல்லாம் காங்கிரீட் கலவை தானே.. இதெல்லாம் ஒடச்சுடலாமான்னு அவங்கள கேளுங்க , செரின்னா யோசித்து பார்க்கலாம்

English:

Q: Periyar statue is just concrete , why are you so angry ?

A: Yes, yes, so even Temple is concrete, even houses in Agraharams are concrete, can we break them?

Did you see what he did there?   So even assuming H.Raja carried out an actual dismantling –  that just means you carry out a tit-for-tat, dismantle a Savarkar statue for example. That is fair retribution.   But watch Suba Vee :  he seeds into the minds of Tamils   that ‘demolishing innocent Tamil Brahmins agraharam houses is an appropriate response“. You have to be of a #core mindset to say ‘whooaa … wait a minute…’ 🙂   Imagine if someone said that “uprooting of  Chettiar bungalows  would be an appropriate response..to something Suba Vee said about uprooting  Rama ”  ( Even writing this makes me cringe, but this usage of caste is normal for Subavee, it just does not seem pretty when used against the grain. On himself)

என்ன ஒரு வியப்பு என்றால் ப்ராமண சங்கம் வெளிப்படையாக கண்டித்திருக்கிறது ; ஏன் என்றால் இதனால் ‘தங்களுக்கு தான் ஒரு பாதிப்பு வரும் என்று அவர்கள் கருதியிருக்க கூடும் – மிக சரியாக கண்டித்திருக்கிறார்கள்

A: What is surprising is Tamil Brahmin Association has condemned H.Raja statement. Perhaps it is because they have calculated that this will cause in harm to their  community. They did right thing.

The correct response of any civilized political ideology in the world in 2019 would be :    The innocent non participants do not have to worry about these – we will ensure there will be no harm just because you are same caste as X. We will meet HRaja on political stage and not by veiled threats of harm to women and children.   Who is the coward here?  Will Suba Vee himself fight or use paid coolies or instigate  lower classes to carry out these ‘harm’ ?

வன்முறை தான் தீர்வு என்று அவர்கள் முடிவுக்கு வந்துவிட்டால் தர்ப்பை புல்லை எடுத்தவான்களே தடி எடுக்க தயார் என்று சொன்னால் ; தடியை கையில் வைத்திருக்கிறவர்கள் என்ன செய்வார்கள் என்று அவர்களே சிந்தித்து பார்க்கவேண்டும்

A: If violence is the solution , then remember this. If those who merely used to take Darba grass say they are ready ; imagine those who are having the Stick.  (Darba grass is a special type of grass used by Tamil brahmins for various rituals)

This exact dialog was repeated by many downstream speakers.  Firstly, this exposes , unknown to him, his own deep casteist mindset.  The right comeback is hard for decent people – but it would involve showing his own caste mirror. Unpleasant. But how else can this be checked, if the elites behave this way?  Secondly, such a mindset will , if the incentives are right, will be used  against other castes.  “today if servants are raising their voice, imagine how a zamindar with a whip will raise‘. This is caste stereotyping at its worst.  Responding with names of military  generals, martyrs, gallantry winners, and warriors is a losing strategy because you are answering a vile question.

இந்த பேட்டி மூலமா H ராஜாவுக்கு சுபவீ என்ன சார் சொல்ல நினைக்கிறீங்க :
..எங்களிடம் தொடர்ந்து குறுக்கீட்டு கொண்டிருந்தால் .. அதன் விளைவுகளை அவர் சந்திக்கவேண்டிருக்கும் ; அவரால் அவர் சார்ந்த சமூகமும் பல தொல்லைகளுக்கு ஆளாக வேண்டிருக்கும் ..  1000 பூக்கள் மலரட்டும்

Q: What message do you want to say to H.Raja

A: Dont mess with us , it will result in major grief for your community (Tamil brahmins)

This  direct warning should prove that Dravidian-ism is the real racist and totalitarian movement today.  There is no other party be it  BJP, Congress, TDP, CPI-M, TMC that seamlessly connects a political disagreement with a retribution  against innocent members of a community.

Dravidians are essentially using Police and State power to hold a hostage. Then threaten harm at first sign of a challenge. Hardly Alpha Male behaviour now , is it dravidian fellas  ??

What makes Suba Vee so potent are :

  1. His upper caste status as an Chettiar adds great credibility to his speech. They are assumed to have intimate social relations with Tamil Brahmins , therefore when he gives witness of their perfidy, it is seen to be believable by the lower classes ,many of whom never met a brahmin, let alone mingle socially.
  2. He has NO other grievance. Dravidian movement has always been led by the elite castes, who do not have any legitimate grievance to cloud their pristine agenda.   This is necessary because lower classes follow the top – they go “Iook if suba vee chettiar feel so threatened, violated,  and oppressed, despite the acres of bungalows , institutions, and crores, imagine how we should feel as farmers labors etc”.  This results in custody of trust flowing from below to him.
  3. He can easily stage any reform in his own caste and yet does not choose to do that.  Mr Suba Vee never mentions his caste – this is odd for a movement that spends about 99% of any speech talking about Brahmin,Nadars, etc.. If Suba Vee wants to hand over temples to all castes, all he has to do is petition his own community who run dozens of temples. No one will oppose.  There is no evidence I can find that he has done that.  Fix yourself before fixing others.
  4. His language and delivery style are very effective. Tamil language discourse today is totally devoid of critical thinking, spotting fallacies, arguments on logical and factual planes. Tamil is hijacked  and  optimized for  expressing grievance and hate messages in a vulgar idiom or at best a poetic manner.  He uses his command of a particular  Tamil style to couch harmful messages.  People get swayed by the language and let the message in without question.

I wrote this post because I watch a lot of abusive and low quality dialog in Tamil media.  Most of the anti-brahmin or anti-XYZ caste messaging is stupid , even kind of funny, at worst they amount to  name calling, vulgar bad words, or some other schoolyard type abuse.

But I keep a close watch for veiled threats of violence against innocent members of any group.  I saw this for the first time with Mr Suba Vee. Had to point this out.  The final decision of whether to accept this type of demagogue as someone who will lead the Tamil people to a glorious future — lies with the people.

/jaihind

Links to Manipur and Rajasthan – anti mob violence bills

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on July 31, 2019

Just sharing the copies of the two bills that define a new class of crime for ‘mob lynching’.

 

Hope citizens read and analyze these,  the governments are passing them fast without challenge or debate.

 

Manipur Protection from Mob Violence 2018  : mobviolence

 

Rajasthan Protection from Lynching Bill 2019 : Bill22-2019

 

Harsh Mander  (Karwan-e-Mohabbat) an activist working in this vertical of Communal Violence : Manipur shows the way on new Anti Lynching Law

The EWS quota wrench in the Idea of India process

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on July 7, 2019

In 2019, the Narendra Modi govt announced a 10% quota for “EWS – Economically weaker sections”  by passing the 103rd Constitution Amendment which introduced Art 15(6) education and Art 16(6) jobs into the Indian constitution.

‘15(6) Nothing in this article or sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 or clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making,— (a) any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than the classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5);

gazette notification dated 12-jan-2019

In my view, this is the standout accomplishment of Narendra Modi’s  first term because it is addressing a core agenda item no 3.   Like all core items, these may not create noise but permanently disrupt the earlier idea of India equilibrium.  Several controversies  have arisen in the wake of this EWS quota.  Here I try to answer them in a Q&A format rather than a long winded essay.   I believe it is the right format because the questions are as important as the answers to them.

Q1. Why are people opposing quota for all poor , since this is poor from Open Category?

Lets get this common misconception out of the way. The 10% EWS quota announced is only for those NOT covered under reservation.  Only those castes who are disqualified from availing OBC, SC,or ST status would be eligible.

On the other hand, since there is no list of Forward castes ,  in theory anyone can reject their birth caste group and avail of this quota instead. In practice however, this may not make unless there is advantage of doing this.

Q2. It is unconstitutional to give EWS quota 

A common strategem of Idea of India groups against #core3 is Justice O Chinnappa Reddy’s famous observation during Indira Sawhney case –  ‘reservation is not a poverty elimination program‘ .   Dravidian ideologues like the erudite Prof Suba Veerapandian have latched on to this for years justifying the inclusion of the creamy layer in Tamilnadu.  This has denied  benefits to millions of poor OBCs while enriching the already advanced groups.  The correct response to this is  :

While it may be true that reservation is not a poverty reduction program, it certainly does not  mean ‘reservation is an unjust enrichment program‘.

The Supreme Court is about to start hearing petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the 103rd Constitution Amend starting July 16 2019.   But keep in mind ,  this is a not a review of a law against the existing provisions of the constitution.  They are not bound by the usual core3 cases like Thakur (2007),  Sawhney (1992), MR Balaji (1962).   The upcoming judicial review will be a basic structure test. Think about it,  if the Supreme Court were to strike down the 103rd Amend it would be in effect be saying  “Helping the poor of the general category  is against the basic structure of the constitution” !!  This is an extremely bizarre position and would require significant literal obfuscation by the ecosystem to make palatable.  The expansion of #core elements across India will make this task much more difficult.

Q3. Do you support EWS quota ?

No.  It is crazy. I have already stated during the RTE case , EWS quota gives a permanent benefit on what is a temporary disadvantage.  Peoples fortunes change all the time.  You cant put a checkpoint at a particular instant and then give a permanent benefit based on that.  This is especially true of high echelon goods like MBBS admissions.  It is unacceptable that a student has to give up his MBBS seat which determines his entire life trajectory just because his dad committed a crime of owning a flat, or succeeded in a job.

But .. but.. but.. there is a gotcha.. see next question.

Q4.   So you dont support EWS, so why are you jumping ?

Well core analysis always look at the entirety of the picture and not unbundle and then pick and choose.  There are two issues in the current reservation regime which makes EWS a necessary check.

  1. The startling delinquency of the judiciary in monitoring of the OBC group.  This is the fundamental issue.  Until now the idea of India jurisprudence adopts a ‘rational basis’  standard to examine classification of groups.  In simple words,  it defers to the political players to select their groups for special treatment.  The jurisprudence also invidiously discriminates between the INSIDE and the OUTSIDE groups.  For example – in the Jat 2015 case the honorable court  put a very high evidence bar on entry of outside groups into the inside. But those already on the inside are permanently immune from that same level of scrutiny.  I recall blogging the KGB court with  much bombast in  2007 Thakur case announced a full monitoring of the OBC group in 5 years or 10 years. Both the deadlines have come and gone.
  2. There are some mechanics issues with the system that demand a separate quota for unreserved. An example is  the Roster System followed in promotions.  It can be mathematically proven that the roster system and the consequential seniority issue  can wipe out the unreserved , with enough turns of the roster.  The effects will be apparent as time goes by and the senior tier retires.

Seen in isolation,  the EWS quota is absurd. The full picture demands you have to account for the  Idea of India jurisprudence that defers to the political forces to reward the very groups that sustain them.    I believe this has major effects – groups like Marathas , Kapus, Patels cannot wait forever  biding their time  for #IOI jurisprudence to develop a spine , i.e develop a first principles position.  The spine.

Q4. What a joke – how is the the 8 Lakhs limit economically weaker ?  

In a Dravidian Kazhakam meeting last month, Prof Suba Veerapandian drove home this point to a gullible Tamil  audience who cheered –  rather mindlessly.  He called out “Not only was the EWS quota anti-social justice but the limit of 8Lakhs was a joke.” (paraphrased) 

There is some truth to it, how can you call someone who earns 5 times the per-capita as EWS?  But the issue is not that simple when you apply a core type analysis. This is going to be really counter intuitive .  Follow me, you will get the A-Ha! moment.

Will a 3 lakhs limit be better?

I am going to directly use Tamil Brahmin as a stand-in example to expressly answer the Dravidians. Stay with me.

Say the EWS quota were to be restricted to poor tamil brahmins who earn less than 3Lakh instead of the 8Lakhs. Would the DK then support it?  The lower level cadre will say yes. But the upper levels will be quite alarmed. Why? because you have to see all quotas as a state allocation program.

Every state program has a “social-impact-index” independent of the ecosystems efforts to hide it.   The poor among the  BC , SC,   do not get any benefits because the targeting is at the elite layer. The dravidian argument is that targeting the elite benefits the poor via trickledown. A highly specious claim, but be that as it may.  To this scheme lets assign  a social-impact-index=50,   if you introduce a program for poor tamil brahmins at 3L, then you directly and highly efficiently target the poor rather than the elite trickledown, so that has a social-impact-index=100.

Therefore instituting a 3Lakhs cutoff for poor tamil brahmins and having no such program for poor among BC/SC/MBC means the state gives  a high-social-impact  product to the brahmins and a low-social-impact  to the non-brahmins.  On the ground this will manifest as a son of a tamizh brahmin dosa master cook getting the benefit directly  but the son of a non brahmin parota master getting nothing and waiting for trickle down from the hotel owner.

This kind of anomaly will  expose and decimate an  elite targeting movement like Dravidianism.  Clearly Prof Suba Veerapandian has not really thought it through.  A hypothetical smarter BJP would counter this by reducing the income cutoff to 3L and then see how they respond.

Even a 8L cutoff in TN suffers from the issue , because BC/SC/ST students whose parents make less than 8L get no special treatment.   But the effects will be more muted than a much lower cutoff.  I am willing to bet, while hearing the case  the Supreme Court will get caught up in this paradox and miss the nuance completely. They simply have not evolved the  bedrock principles to analyze these things beyond superficial.

See this video of Prof Suba Veerapandian delivered to a packed Tamil audience.

Watch the cunning deception here : on one hand they say  “Reservation is not a poverty reduction scheme” while justifying the targeting of the elite.  But when cornered on that , they switch to economic grounds.  In the above clip he says in   Tamil ( மாடு மேய்கிறவர்கள் , கூலி தொழிலாளிகள், தன முதுகில் மூட்டை சுமந்து வேர்வை சிந்துபவர்கள் , துப்புரவு தொழிலாளிகள் – இவர்கள் எல்லாம் ஏழை இல்லயாம் , அனால் மாதம் 64கே சம்பாதிக்கறவர்கள் ஏழையாம் )  in English – (those who herd cows,   daily wage coolies,  those who lift gunny bags on back for a living, those sanitation workers, they are not poor. But Modi govt has announced that 65K per month is EWS.)

The  gullible and low info Tamil crowd laps it up and no one on stage has a proper response. Dravidians should not use the gunny back lifter  to justify their stand, they should use  doctors, professors, and govt servants in  defence of their stand.

 

Q5. Why is this such a hot issue in Tamilnadu  alone ? all states notified 

If you are a non Tamil, you can skip this section.

Most states across the country , Assam, MP, UP, even Momata’s  WB, GJ, MH,  have notified the quota or are will notify it next year.  What is surprising is even the Dravidian states – Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala , Telangana are implementing in various forms.  So the question for Prof Suba Vee is – how come your Racial dravidian brothers have no problem with this?

Upon deeper analysis you find the root of Dravidian exceptionalism lies in the numbers.  The annual  MBBS admission  numbers provide a rare peek into the statistics. I monitored the last 5 years and found that only between 4.5 to 7% of the candidate population is classified as Unreserved , i.e. Forward Caste.  The similar number for Andhra are roughly  42%, Telangana 47%,  Kerala 40%,  Karnataka 38 to 42%.

We can have many conversations about social justice and dravidians but the elephant in the room will always be the following. The  very real possibility that Dravidian movement at its core is not interested in social justice at all  but in outright discrimination against one group.  As one judge remarked , if a state scheme gives privileged treatment to 94% of the population then you have crossed the line into reverse discrimination. Unless of course you have data to show that the 6%  dominates to the extent that justifies it.

I used to wonder why Dravidian intellectuals Aasi K. Veeramani, Pera Suba Veerapandian,  and Dr Pazha Karuppiah never proposed an easy truce settlement.  You do not have to like the tamizhbrahmins – to say  ‘here take your share and fo’  this truce will leave the Suba Vees in peace  to build their glorious Dravidian society.  In one stroke you will silence all criticisms of the reservation.  After all,  Dravidians themselves gave 3.5% to Christians and Moslems.  If you do 69% , why not do 72% and in exchange buy complete peace and immunity?

One is helpless but to draw the correct inference from this strident stand.   If Dravidians concede the 3% , then they also concede their primary raison-d-etre , which is anti-tamil-brahminism.  Their top tier knows that if they give the share, then the thundering speeches of intellectuals like Pala Karuppiah will sound hollow and toothless.

A second , more dangerous issue, is if Tamil Brahmin get the 3%, then the focus will turn inwards into the vastly disparate  Dravidian group itself and demands from other castes to get a look into their share.  That is always the existential danger in TN politics.   Never look under the kimono.

Q5.  Is the 10% quota for EWS a ‘slow poison’ for social justice

Stalin thundered recently

Assailing the 10% quota for EWS, Mr. Stalin said it was not only against the Constitution but also detrimental to social justice. Pointing out a report in The Hindu that said that only 1% of the top teaching posts in Central universities were occupied by OBCs, he said while the AIADMK harped on former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa’s efforts in implementing the 69% reservation, the 10% quota would make her achievements go in vain. The present system of leaving 31% seats for open competition candidates was functioning well and there was no need for implementing 10% reservation for EWS, Mr. Stalin argued and charged that the Centre’s proposal was “slow poison” for social justice in Tamil Nadu.

Source : The Hindu

Is giving 10% quota for FC a slow poison for social justice?  Well, as per the Justice Party leaders including Mr EV Ramaswamy himself  – a complete communal quota is the correct model for social justice. Even Prof Suba Veerapandian announced recently that the ideal scheme is “Every community gets it share” .  Their own founders  notified the Madras Communal G.O and eventually lead to the Champakam Dorairajan case and the very 1st constitution amendment.

Regarding the statistic that 1% of teaching job in central universities is occupied by OBC,  it may  true or not.  It is not relevant at all. If  DMK wants this level of data, then it should constitute a proper  Backward Classes commission as instructed by the Supreme Court and demand a study the beneficiaries.  If there is backlog and scamming in Central Univ BC teaching spots, that must be fixed. No argument. there.

Q7. What do the results show in TN

The 2019 NEET results expose one of the foundation lies of the Dravidians. That non brahmin are somehow inferior in academics.  Year after year, I have proven that  brilliant students and toppers  come from the non-brahmin tamil community. EVen in 2009, 8 of the top 10 rankers are BC.  Merit is NOT the preserve of one group. You cannot allow  such a patently bogus and casteist stereotype as  the cornerstone of your ideology.

Q8. Any solutions for TN ?

This EWS is not an issue for rest of India or even the  Dravidian blood states KL/KA/AP. A solution can be a lower 4% and a lower limit of 3L, but see my previous point for the hazard in this.

 

In Tamilnadu, I feel this is an existential issue to the hardline anti-brahmin elements within the Dravidian group, while the social justice focused types might accede to it.  The hardline is always represented by the elite castes who do not have a social justice vision.  For these types – conceding  the quota has the effect of  immunizing against their  rhetorics. Of its  most vulgar, virulent,  and uncompromising elements like Dr Pala Karuppiah.  Their speeches will have no sting left.  Like rabid canines barking at passing vehicles as they get left behind in the march of civilization.

/jh

 

Initiating new members into a fold

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on June 18, 2019

I ran into this Tweet today on my Twitter TL.

this was in response to reports of  a Spanish woman who converted into Hinduism in the Srirangam Temple.

I feel this is an important frontline question that is not being adequately addressed.  At least not to the satisfaction of those raising this question.

Let me first distill out the  real question here to make it simpler.

Say I convert to Hinduism can I click on Brahmin caste.

In such a foolproof manner that others in that tribe will seek matrimonial alliances with me or that I can serve in sanctum of  major temples.

It is important to search and discover the actual question because otherwise you end up answering a strawman.   The Hindu framework can absorb any number of castes and tribes as long as the basic commitments to Dharmic principles and non hostility to rituals and nature worship are in place.  So our new Spanish Vaishnavite  can just start a new caste of Spanish Iyengar or join an existing one based on kinship or geography or race or occupation.  Caste is a kinship identity as well as a function.  Can she convert into Brahmin is like asking can she convert into Chettiar?  It can happen but  entering a kinship group is based on matrimonial alliances.  A different issue from  asking if her new found status  can enable her to  perform certain functions.

The functions today are not hotly contested. Most Brahmins do other functions like work in factory, army, finance and there is no real bar against others doing Brahmin functions.    There is no punishment of crossovers.

The political hot button issue here is that Brahmin kinship group in some key instances also have privileges – the most important one is in temple functions particularly in ancient agamic temples.  This is the single motivating factor behind these innocent questions. 

Based on my analysis of the Dravidian arguments , there are two flavors here

  • Marriage:  Can I convert to Hindu Brahmin and then will you marry  your daughter to me ?   Obviously the answer to that is YES, thousands of outsiders get married to Brahmin by “love marriage” . The real  question here is ; Can I convert and then get married to a Brahmin by Arranged Marriage?   While this is as absurd as asking, can I convert to Hindu and get married to Chettiar, Mudaliar, Thever etc by arranged marriage. This still needs a clear non-emotional answer.
  • Temple :   Can I take a 1yr  course in archana mantra and then become priest like the Brahmin sivacharyas in Madurai  or the Bhattars of Srirangam.  This angle is an institution question and is far reaching.

The marriage question is a specious one because at the root of it is the assumption that  there is some privilege to getting married to a Brahmin women over others.  This indicates a hypergamy desire (marrying a richer higher status)  rather than any social goal.  Marrying into any kinship group needs proof of non-hostility to their customs, rituals , eating habits, lifestyle, and belief systems.  These commitments are demonstrated over multiple group interactions.  Otherwise you end up with importing outside strife into your homes.  There is no further institutional issue involved so we can stop here.

The second one involves an institutional (#core4) question.   Say I am able to perform the basic rituals after a 1 year course  – can I convert to a Siva temple priest class (Adi Sivacarya) ?   The answer to that is NO.

The element that is missing is : degree of commitment.

Unlike prayer houses of Abrahamic religions , temples  in  Hindu fold have incredible diversity of practice, history,  and rituals.  None of them have any central sanction or enforcement wing.  These rituals  survive to this day only because of a multi generational commitment by a tightly knit group.  These sivacharyas / bhattars are not like your secular variety Brahmins.  Over two three thousand years, they have withstood famines, floods, invasions, change of rules, imperial rule,  hostile politics – yet they have not skipped a single day of ritual. Never late, never absent, never less.   They have not succumbed to the IT or modern economy boom – even though they are of the same stock and could have  easily excelled  in these lucrative fields.   This is the level of commitment that has given the Tamil hindus continuity into the past.  Even when others  have lost their moorings and have drifted this group is unshaken and unwavering to their divine purpose.

Impostor threat

Like any tribe, this group too  is vulnerable to impostors infiltrating.   Think about how you enter the Freemasons. The initiation is not a trivial task.  You have to be introduced by a multiple senior  member of the Lodge.  This is an act of vetting  by someone high up in the system as being a non hostile. Then the rituals and the ceremonies which may look nutty to outsider but tie the community together to a high level of commitment. Those longer in the system, more involved,  move up the hierarchy.   I am not suggesting Temple priests are like this rather showing the importance of detecting impostors.

Detection of impostors is far easier  in  Islam and Christianity because a pledge on the book and the prophets itself is a test covering about 99% of the cases.  There  is also  a strict regime for initiation and enforcement of diktats.  Novices  are initially placed in subordinate positions and have to prove themselves  over long periods to a higher ranking clergy.   In Islam the fear of being outed as an imposter is an automatic check due to the death punishment for apostasy.

I have showed how the Sivacharyas have insane level of commitment test that secular brahmins do not possess.  Hence the secular brahmins are not allowed any of the temple privileges either for the same reasons.  They can be impostors too. Imagine Mt Road brahmins  getting into these clans.

Now back to the question. How does one just convert into this group?  In my view,  the 1 year courses to induct new entrants is insufficient commitment.  This sets up a great incentive for an impostor to invest 1 or 2yrs  and then gain  a great strategic foothold into these institutions.   Remember that I am focusing on impostor detection and not on friendlies. The system may select 10 really committed students but it is the 1 hostile that will take you down. Same logic as airport security.

If a hostile impostor gains access, what is the fear?  The following can happen :   Giving false evidence against the insiders,  reconstructing the nature of the deity,  disrupting  the existing rituals using modern arguments,  defamation of devotees,  splitting the erstwhile tightly knit group into political factions,  and so forth.  There is no limit.  Unlike Catholics who have a very strong clergy who can detect and expel these, the Hindu priest order which is based only on long term unquestioning commitment , will be totally exposed to this person.

So does this mean outsiders can never be allowed ?

My take is that there is  merit in the first level rhetoric of Dravidians that all castes should get a shot.  I fully understand those who choose to contest this first level argument itself and eject the debate.  But you have to understand the inherent appeal of this demand, it evokes images of ancient saivaite adiyars like  Nandanar and Kannapan –  very highly committed devotees denied access. Even though the historical  Nandanar was admitted after a  trial by fire — metaphor for a commitment check   If you eject at this first level itself, you cede that space.  What is the strategic value of that space ?  I think  the opponents will park all the guns in that space and shoot at you.

A better way is to respond to this by drawing them into a second level check. A commitment test that only the truly inspired will venture into. A start can be opening up the entry level  as children into vedic / agamic schools perhaps  with recommendations from higher commitment religious personalities from all castes.   Once initiated in this manner along with their families, they will in effect be indistinguishable from other Brahmins.  This would be a win-win.

The bad news is these  kinds of responses need a very strong institutional layer to stage these from. Hence the #core1 ( freedom of education institutions)  is a necessary agenda item.

 

Who can calm the turbulent waters of India’s edu law?

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on April 6, 2019

So there is this bizarre case of Delhi Private Schools being forced to implement the 7th Pay Commission intended  for Govt employees in its institutions.  Then not being allowed to raise the tuition to match the increased wage bill.

This went up to the Delhi HIgh Court and was rightfully struck down.  What we call as #core1  is the most vexatious class of litigation in India because the entire body of India edu law is built on layers of anomalies. Many Judges appear to have resigned to the intractability of these.  What stood out is this brilliant postscript of the Single Judge of the Delhi High Court.

A Postscript

202. It is, probably, too much to expect that the omega to the controversy in this case will stand written with this pronouncement. If eleven Hon’ble Judges of the highest court of the land, the exercise of their collective wisdom, and the classic exposition of the law, as it emerged therefrom in the form of T. M. A. Pai (supra), could not still the waters, my humble effort is hardly likely to do so. I can only, therefore, close with the fond – perhaps too fond? – hope that, some day, calm would descend on the issue, and the educational edifice of our country would get down to doing what it was created, and intended, to do from the beginning – which is the dissemination of education, and the bringing forth, for the eons to come, of a generation enlightened and illumined with the light of knowledge and learning.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J MARCH 15, 2019/HJ

ref: last para  of  https://indiankanoon.org/doc/159433210/

 

Within a week this judgement was stayed by a two judge bench, flinging the whole issue back into the chaos.  Unable to settle any ground principle in this all important sector.

 

 

The Sabarimala judgment and its impact on Hindus

Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on October 2, 2018

Lets start with this. Imagine if the Sabarimala temple put up this notice in approaches to the temple.

Dear Sabarimala Devotees 

As you are aware, we the devotees of  Swamy Ayyappa ardently  believe that in Sabarimala he is manifest as a Naishtika Brahmachari. Furthermore, we believe  that when a male deity is worshipped as a naishtika brahmachari, the specific agamas of the temple — based on the injunction in Yajnavalkya Smriti — impose the condition that he not be subjected to the company of women aged 10 to 50 — in any way.

Recently the judges of the  Supreme Court of the secular state of India  have ruled that this Naistika Brahmachari  format  is  “unconstitutional”.  True women devotees of Swamy Ayyappa by very definition subscribe to the same faith that is shared by all of us and they would never act in a destructive manner for self, fellow believers, and for the deity. Lakhs of women devotees have taken to the streets in protests against this outside interference.

 Hinduism offers a marketplace of paths, there are other forms of Swamy Ayyappa or countless other deities.   Therefore, we kindly request women non-devotees to respect our faith that forms an integral part of this particular shrine. Thank you.

This is a direct statement of the deepest beliefs held by the body of devotees – whether some court calls this body a legal denomination or not. The net effect after reading this notice is –  only the truly hostile woman would venture into the shrine to show defiance or make a political statement.

How will the secular state deal with the situation caused by this notice?  The answer – I am afraid can be very alarming.  The notice discourages women by citing the shared faith.  The state can only respond to  this by  committing even bigger constitutional crimes of curtailing Freedom of Speech or even Forced speech.  For instance, a  court can rule that such a direct expression of your faith is itself against constitutional values and hence is unprotected.  You may even be asked to put a humiliating reverse notice repudiating your own previously held  faith and and creating a conducive messaging for women. Or the Communist government of Kerala can use tax money to do it for you.  They can issue a notice in papers discrediting the faith system, announcing the new faith and inviting women to visit. There are already reports of such notices planned.  In the USA, they have an explicit “Lemon Test” that exists to prevent exactly this type of bizarre and endless state entanglement with religion.  Just how far will the Idea of India judicial system go?

Such judicial adventure raids put the pagan polytheists at a distinct disadvantage compared to the Christians and Muslims. This is due to three things

  1. dramatically larger surface area of Hindu practices versus the tight and solemn Christian and Muslim.
  2. the courts have formulated an Essential Practices Test –  which demand evidence of particular faiths.   This fits is easily with the Abrahamic religions where revelation is the central category of knowledge. God has revealed himself and expressed his purpose and clear instructions. They have been recorded in a book. How can you argue with that?
  3. a political price – assaulting Christians or Muslims will invite retribution from international community. hence there is a practical political cost.  The counter needs to be mentioned. Taking down Hindu practices can also  have a political cost because in theory Pagans can also consolidate,  Governments can be voted out,  and the constitution changed. One wonders if is what we are expected to do?

This disadvantage can be trivially  weaponized by strategic players.  Can a “transformative document” view of the constitution  be used to “deconstruct” , “reform”,  or “transform” the heathens  and their the vibrant hindu practices into a easier to legally defend  monochrome  ?  These are not flights of fantasy, we already know strategic  PIL litigation is real due to the absence of standing requirements. Is it really believable that they could not find a single woman devotee of Sabarimala to bring this suit forward?  Particularly when apostasy and rebellion has zero cost for Hindus.

In her dissent Judge Indu Malhotra  rightfully concludes this PIL should never have been admitted.  Even in terms of examining religious practices,  this is an outside deconstruction rather than a court unwillingly dragged into a  schism between believers themselves.   An example of the latter would be the famously comical case of Vadakalai and Thenkalai  Tamizh Iyengar factions whose squabbles over anointing the Kanchipuram temple elephant reached the Privy Council !!  Even though that case had no business reaching the courts  , but at least it was a dispute created by the believers,hence can be analyzed as a civil dispute – i.e, say who has property rights.

Now lets unpack some of the reasoning in the judgment itself.

Religious versus secular aspect

First a little note about the honorable justices, I am leaving Judge Indu Malhotra alone because she has wisely dissented – recognizing the landmines that exist in the new territory the other four pioneers have cleared up.  The four male judges  are not from the catchment area of Sabarimala devotees and do not record any personal association with this or similar pilgrimages. The schooling background of the judges are also relevant because here they are not looking at the secular aspect but opening up the religious. What’s the difference ?

I illustrated this on twitter with an example : Imagine if  Hindus had #core1 (Edu Rights at par with minorities) and Sabarimala ran a chain of secular CBSE schools.  In that chain of schools, imagine if they did not allow girl students.  Then if a case came in front of the judges, you dont have to worry about the background of the judges because they are called upon to rule on a secular matter  – a general education exclusion.

Denial of Right to Practice Religion

Judges Misra and Kanwalikar base their opinion : that the Sabarimala rule is unconstitutional because if offends a womens right to practice religion under Art 25(1)

The exclusionary practice being followed at the Sabrimala temple by virtue of Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules violates the right of Hindu women to freely practise their religion and exhibit their devotion towards Lord Ayyappa. This denial denudes them of their right to worship. The right to practise religion under Article 25(1) is equally available to both men and women of all age groups professing the same religion.

J. Misra, J.Kanwalikar

There are quite obviously situations where  exclusion is valid  – for example I cannot barge into your house and demand to worship Shivan in your pooja room.  So quite obviously there are some overriding private exceptions to the unfettered right of worship.  A very real test is  “how substantially is the right to practice religion”  harmed by this exclusion.  The judgment completely skips that part because that is where the petitioners will lose badly.

The Hindu women right to practice of religion is only negligibly affected  due to the following reasons.

  1. Sabarimala is only one thread in the fabric of Hindu / Pagans.  Women who dont buy into the whole belief system can and DO thrive – they simply select another thread. The evidence of that is the PIL petitioners themselves who seem to be quite content and spirited.
  2. The Sabarimala thread is not sufficiently dominant  that there will be collateral damage to women due to the exclusion. They are not losing out on Sabarimala Trust medical college seats or otherwise suffer any real world disability, or economic or social boycott.
  3. The urge to worship “Ayyappa at Sabarimala” itself is a bogus construct and  Misra and Kanwalikar should not have papered over that.  There is no evidence that women devotees of that age group of Ayyappa want to worship exactly at Sabarimala in total defiance of the faith system.  As mentioned previously, such a scenario would have been a different case. That women group would have constituted an internal schismatic within the Sabarimala fold. Nothing of that sort here.

Biological exclusion and impurity

Judge RF Nariman says

Also, the argument that such women can worship at the other Ayyappa temples is no answer to the denial of their fundamental right to practice religion as they see it, which includes their right to worship at any temple of their choice. On this ground also, the right to practice religion, as claimed by the Thanthris and worshippers, must be balanced with and must yield to the fundamental right of women between the ages of 10 and 50, who are completely barred from entering the temple at Sabarimala, based on the biological ground of menstruation.

Again the conception of “worship” itself is being used here in a Abrahamic sense.   “Worship”  here  is not the same as Mass or Baptism or other sacraments in Christianity or Islam.  In our pagan Hindu system, we are not mindless people worshiping stones. We worship the “faith, the accumulated history, legacy, past, divinity,ancestors,heroes” that manifests itself through the stone. Over here , the faith is that this is  a Naistika Brahmachari we are dealing with.   Nariman shows little understanding of the disqualification  – it is not because of biological ground of menstruation but because of the unique nature of the deity.  Look at it in the reverse – are Hindu deities allowed to be even endowed with different ‘natures’ ?  In Tamizhnadu, there are deities that we believe are propitiated by walking on hot coals, sacrificing roosters, and rams,  catching a bull.  Other practices involve beliefs arising from taking a dip in Kumbhs and Pushkars in certain holy locations.  Should they just take a shower instead ?  Do we want the court to get entangled at this level and play referee?

This impurity angle can be indiscriminately used to drive stakes into pagan practices, particularly the elevated status of vegetarianism in most public temples. Is the Sabarimala rule of veggie an assault of right of meat eaters to worship Sabarimala at Ayyappa?

 

A form of untouchability – the Art 17 angle

(The Indian Constitution bans “untouchability in all forms” in Art 17)

Honorable Justice Chandrachud’s opinion should be immune from commentary.  His main yardsticks can be bracketed under the “constitutional morality and transformative project” .I feel they are so outlandish that is impossible for any practice to be protected from judicial takedown along any axis.   However , he does use one argument that needs comment. That the Sabarimala exclusion is a form of Untouchability – which is commonly understood to refer to a very specific caste practice.

This is from an article by Dr Tarun Khaitan from July who predicted to a dot in July !?

In the final analysis, what probably tips the balance in favour of the claimants seeking the right to entry is our unique constitutional treatment of Hinduism, especially in relation to temple entry in Article 25(2)(b), and the additional weight to their argument supplied by Article 17’s prohibition on Untouchability.

Source : http://abclive.in/analysis-of-essential-practices-test-in-sabrimala-entry-case/

 

First it is grotesque to compare a permanent inheritable social disprivilege affecting man,woman,child of particular castes versus a temporary, isolated, and totally unimpactful exclusion of women from a single shrine. This is also not a case of post-modern  “intersectionality” – where multiple oppression axis combine. Sabarimala is a uniform exclusion of women – brahmin women, nair women, nadar women, SC women.

I feel it is important to point out the bad faith in the Article 17 argument of Justice Chandrachud and his legion of “liberal fans”. He says

Article 17 is a reflection of the transformative ideal of the Constitution, which gives expression to the aspirations of socially disempowered individuals and communities, and provides a moral framework for radical social transformation.

First of all the constitutional mandate of “transformation” is alarming – we are going to have to insist on the specifics. Does this mean transform pagans into believers? Or believers into atheists? or everyone into fools? What is point-A and what is point-B.  How can a country function if such a secretive and incomplete contract is going to be the basis of our relationship with the law?

The bad faith argument is not recognizing the caste-neutrality –  a central aspect of the pilgrimage.

If Article 17 (Untouchability) is your main concern , then the Sabarimala custom must be given the maximum freedom possible.  Judge Chandrachud did not even give it a passing mention.  The pilgrimage  is a glorious coming together of castes  unlike any other denomination.  I recall my own childhood experiences in city buses where all pilgrims irrespective of background used to be called “Saami”. The Sabarimala movement also has spurred a large Guruswami , a special elder priest cadre that is caste neutral. The Gurusamis are the men who initiate others.  There are several instances of so-called  upper castes getting the initiation of the 41-day penance period from so called backward castes.  This should be a matter of great amazement and pride  that such a denomination has developed.    In our #core vision, such a group should be the vector for social change and not some distant rootless judges pontificating on things they cannot comprehend.

Now the response to this will be ; “allowing women does not change any of this”. But it does.  First, It is much easier for men to bond across caste boundaries than if you add women to the mix it gets complicated.   Second, it inserts judges into the bonds  devotees have created among themselves for no “government purpose” whatsoever. Article 17 arguments are hence founded on ignorance and must be rejected.

Denomination and Essential Practices Test

Therefore, the devotees of Lord Ayyappa are just Hindus and do not constitute a separate religious denomination. For a religious denomination, there must be new methodology provided for a religion. Mere observance of certain practices, even though from a long time, does not make it a distinct religion on that account.

Judge Misra quoting Supreme Court In Aurobindo Society – denying them denomination status holding them to be Hindus!

The Quakers in the colony of Virginia said  they would not be able to take Oath of allegiance to the newly independent colony and in addition they wont send their men to the monthly arms training for the militia. They said they are a separate christian denomination and their faith does not permit Oaths and to Bear Arms.  They were allowed. The  Amish of Wisconsin a separate Christian denomination which descended from the Swiss Anabaptists claimed they wont send their kids to the mandatory public schooling.  They were allowed in Wisconsin v Yoder. In all these cases, it is trivial to establish they are a separate denomination because they trace their origin to a founder – George Fox for the Quakers and Jakob for the Amish. These founders established a specific set of principles and rules of conduct that formed the basis of the schism from the mainline Catholics.  How on earth are the Sabarimala devotees going to match this level of documentation ? Or the Dahi Handi ? or the Shani Singapur ? or Chidambaram ?   Perhaps a few founded denominations like Lingayath , perhaps some Iyengars can prove they are a denomination but only to a limited extent.

This is the so called denomination test

(1) It must be a collection of individuals who have a system of beliefs or doctrines which
they regard as conducive to their spiritual well-being, that is, a common faith;
(2) common organisation, and
(3) designation by a distinctive name.”

As mentioned above, pagan denomination cannot be modeled as  a total schism like the Abrahamics.  A denomination in those cases are a result from a mainline splitting  into separate collections.  In Hindus it can be about adopting a unique practice at one time but in other times merging with others.  A Brahmin sabarimala devotee and a vannier devotee for the purpose of the pilgrimage are identical – they follow the same penance, take the same paths, look identical, carry the same irumudi,  faith in the same thing, sing the same devotional songs, chant the same marching tune, etc.  But in other times, they go back to other forms of worship as per their preferences. This does not mean the Sabarimala cannot be a denomination because the followers do not practice the same things 100% of the time.

The test can quite reversed be passed by a different judge – look

  1. collection of invididuals ?  Check. The devotees
  2. common organization ?  Check, the sabarimala kosthis all over town. they are distinctive and easy to spot. the guruswamis are elder priests who initiate others. No other sect has these gurusamis. Isnt this enough?
  3. name ? Check – see these names. swamy sharanam,  sabarimalai , or simply malai, or saamy.  why is this important. should the name be registered ?

There are finer legal points on which the Denominational Test fails.  We will put them out in the coming days.

Essential Practices

As I have analysed in another #core5 case – the egregiously overreaching Jallikattu Judgement. The Essential Practices of a Hindu cannot be ascertained, what can be checked is the essential element of a particular practice.  The goal of that would be to detect a mischief hiding under an essential shield and nothing more. However, all four of the judges in the Sabarimala case try to extract essence of Hindu  “exclusion of women is an essential practice of HInduism”

See this by Misra/Kanwalikar

it has to be determined whether the practice of exclusion of women of the age group of 10 to 50 years is equivalent to a doctrine of Hindu religion or a practice that could be regarded as an essential part of the Hindu religion and whether the nature of Hindu religion would be altered without the said exclusionary practice. The answer to these questions, in our considered opinion, is in the firm negative. In no scenario, it can be said

Misra p78 emp added

What is happening here is the following. The most honourable judges might know that they are on thin ice on the  denominational aspect and Sabarimala probably is a denomination. Hence they say “listen even if you are a denomination – your practice isn’t essential”.  That is in line with precedents in the the Shiroor Mutt and Devaru cases.

The problem here is that they are making an inexcusable leap – from examining whether the practice is essential to the Sabarimala tradition, they have widened it to examining if the practice is essential to Hindu.  The set up a strawman in the form of  a hypothetical generalized “practice of exclusion of Hindu women” . The wide question of whether this exclusion is essential to Hindu  is not even part of the case.  This is where judicial indiscipline will hurt the pagans because our fate turns on such fine distinctions and switches.  Is Sabarimala itself an essential part of Hinduism? A judge tomorrow can ask ,after all  80% havent heard of it – they are pious Hindus. This is unlike the abrahamics, if you havent heard of Jesus or Mathew or Mohamed – you cant be a member.

To conclude,  this judgment represents a singling out of a thriving religious practice grounded in faith. No women devotees complained. An activist court should have taken care not to be seen as a hostile court. Particularly when it is striking down on a pilgrimiage that transcends caste and brings all Hindu together.  It must be immediately reviewed , an ordinance passed , or a constitutional amendment bill introduced.

In our #core vision no 5, we have long recommended a constitution amendment which insulates these varied practices from PIL process. We now foresee an endless stream of attacks exploiting this new found vulnerability, These attacks can be led by both stupid and strategic forces – may well result in death of our colorful and inclusive religion.

What can be done?

The ideal situation is a responsive legislature at centre. One which sees where this activism is headed and responds to these things before they get out of hand.  But even without legislative support, we can spread the message deep to the people and build a vanguard which can fight the future battles.

In the short term, this judgment will have no impact on believers faith other than to inconvenience them.  An already jam-packed temple will now have to make arrangements for separate women’s queues , the feminist irony!  and what not.  This will be used by both hostile men and women who are not believers but will be there just to show their defiance and hostility.

What can be done by the board to protect the interest of their believers : declare a special day where women are allowed, then do whatever ritual is needed to protect the deity in the background.  This makes sense for administrative convenience. Can the court get entangled if a repentance Mantra invocation is chanted ?

Another option, is to file court cases against exclusion in other religions. This is unfortunately required because the Idea of India jurisprudence does not focus on uniform application and principles. They take things apart on an ad-hoc basis. By challenging the exclusion of women from Christian and Moslem clergy. Remember  that the Indian state actually funds those sites of exclusion and have a real world secular impact. Unfortunately, such  belligerence maybe the only way we can hope to hammer out  a principle.  Contrast with core societies like USA , where Uniform application is the basis of these laws. In the Smith Standard in the USA, the test is that any rule that is enforced impacting Free Exercise of Religion must be uniform. We fumble the basics.

The ultimate and foundation protection is however – what we call as #core1. The very real legal disadvantages Hindus face in the Education Sector.  A ticking time bomb.  Without #core1 , whatever gains we make in Sabarimala will be ephemeral. Your date of execution has already been set.

/jh