Rama is a historic man and the Valmiki Ramayana is a true history.

It was painful to read the news on 13-9-2007 that the central Govt. of India submitted an affidavit in the Supreme court that there was no historical and scientific evidence to establish the existence of Rama and the Ramayana. The Archaeological survey of India stated that the contents of the Valimiki Ramayan cannot be a historical record, because there is no proof to the characters and events, depicted therein.

This statement is agonizing because there is ample evidence in the Valmiki Ramayana to prove that it is history. I say so because I have studied the Valmiki Ramayan for many years and have done lot of research on it.

Valmiki was contemporary to Rama and he wrote the history. He says at 1-3-9 that he searched for the information and then wrote the history. When Seeta was abandoned by Rama, she came to Valmiki’s hermitage. Therefore Valmiki could gather a lot of information from her. In spite of this statement, if the Govt. does not want to believe, then how could it believe in the existence of Jesus and Mohamad Paigambar? Why the Govt. declared holiday on the birth date of Mohamad, which is not known to any book, historical or other.

The Ramayana is a true history, therefore Valimiki has given 73 ancestors of Rama and recorded which Prince married which princess. The ancestry of Rama and Seeta both is recorded by Valmiki. It is not so in case of Jesus and Paigambar. Even then the Govt agrees with them and not with Rama. Why?

If Rama was an imaginary character how should he be referred to by hundreds of books for hundreds of years? The imaginary characters are not at all referred to by other books. For example, Tarzan and Sherlock Homes are not at all referred to by other authors. The generators of those characters have not mentioned even the father and mother of their heroes. It is not the case with Rama and Seeta.

Seeta is referred to again and again, place to place, even in Lanka, which is at least 1500 miles away from the residence of Rama and Valmiki. Many places in Shri Lanka bear the names connected to Seeta. There is a place called as ‘Diwurungaha’ in Lanka, which means the tree, where Seeta took an oath of chastity. Why all historical stories are told in Shri Lanka? Only because, they are true historical facts.

In search of Seeta, Vanaras went to the east. Sugreeve told them to search for Seeta to the end of the east, which is demarcated by a golden, three branched, Tala tree, which shines from the top to bottom, carved on Uday Mountain. Kishkindha 40/53,54 describes this Tala tree having three branches. Valmiki wrote this true fact around 7292 years BC, and after 1965 AD such a three branched tree is discovered in the South America, on an offshoot of Mount Andes, near the Bay of Pisco. It is 820 feet tall, has three branches and it glitters like gold, when seen from the sky. Does this discovery not prove the Ramayana, authored by Valmiki, as true history? This one evidence alone is sufficient to prove the Valmiki Ramayana as true history.

Tulasi Ramayana is not a history, it is written in devotion, 7700 years after Rama’s demise. I have proved by astronomical mathematics that Rama’s birth date is 4th December 7323 BC. He married to Seeta on 7th April 7307 BC. Rama was to be coroneted on Thursday, 29th November 7306 BC, but had to go in to exile. Rama fought with Ravana from 3rd November 7292 BC to 15th Nov. 7292 BC. On Phalgun Amavasya, on 15th Nov. 7292 Rama killed Ravana. Valmiki has recorded Thursday and calculations show that it was the Thursday on 29th Nov. 7306 BC. This proves the Valmiki Ramayana has a true history.

Hanuman entered Lanka on1st Sept. 7292 BC and returned with information of Seeta on 3rd Sept. Rama moved his army to the south on 2nd October, reached the south sea on 22nd Oct. Nala built a temporary bridge in 5 days from 26th to 30th Oct. 7292 BC. Rama-Ravana war took place from 3rd Nov. to 15th Nov. 7292 BC. On 15th Nov. Phalguna Amavasya Rama killed Ravana. I have discovered the dates of almost 45 incidents from the Valmiki Ramayana. I used astronomy, which is a science.

Around Delhi it is supposed that Rama killed Ravana on Vijaya Dashami; this is absolutely wrong. Valmiki has clearly stated that it was Amavasya. (Yudh 92/64)

The Govt. depended on Archaeology, which is not a perfect science. During 1971, when I showed that Dinosaurs were present around Dwaraka during the Mahabharata era, around 5561 BC., the Archaeologist laughed at me saying the Dinosaurs never existed in India. But now existence of dinosaurs is well proved near Ahemedabad. Archaeologists did not approve my date of 5561 BC for the Mahabharata and 7323 BC for the Ramayana. They opined that there was no culture in such a remote past. But now a well-developed city is found submerged under the sea, in the Bay of Cambay, near Gujarath, which has water and drainage systems. It proves that the opinions of the Archaeological Survey are not believable.

It is true that the Rama Setu never existed. Valmiki calls it Nala Setu, so also Vyasa in the Mahabharata calls it Nala Setu. It was erected by one engineer Nala. Valmiki has written in clear words that Nala erected the Setu using trees. Valmiki never says that the rocks floated on water. On the contrary he states that big rocks were cut with machines and thrown in to the sea, which sank and on that foundation a Setu of wood was built. Valmiki wrote a true history, but later it was perverted by devotional writings like that of Tulasidas, in the 15th century AD.

Valmiki is keen to state the sea, there, was shallow and so boats could not go in to the sea. Today it is proved that the sea is shallow, proving the Ramayana as true history. How could Valmiki at least 1500 miles distant from the south sea write so exactly? Because he wrote history after gathering information from Hanuman, Seeta, Rama etc. Those were true characters

The Govt should not say that the Ramayana is not a history and Rama never existed. There is no evidence to say that. BJP, VHP, and others should also not say anything untrue. Why should they say it as Rama Setu? Why should they hold that the Setu was built with stones? Why should they suppose that the stones floated on water? It is all false. Valmiki was a truth abiding sage. He wrote the truth and truth only. Hindu should stick up to the truth.

The true fact is that there was a row of rocks, which made the sea shallow. Nala intelligently filled up the gaps in that row, with wood and made a temporary bridge. It was prepared 9299 years ago. How can it be present now? What is present is a natural row of rocks, which can be safely broken to prepare a way for ships. That way will save lot of fuel, time and money. It should be done. Nobody should oppose it and obstruct the national benefit. The Govt. too should avoid talking nonsense. The Govt. should abide by the truth. Rama was a true historic person and Valmiki has written a true history, though he used the form of poetry.

I am ready to help the Supreme Court and the Govt. to show the truth. I have already published a book in Marathi, “Vastava Ramayana”, which shows the true historicity of the Ramayana, fixing the dates of almost 50 incidents in Rama’s life.

by Dr. Padmakar Vishnu Vartak, 
M.B.B.S., F.U.W.A.I., Ph.D. (Lit) [Washington DC]

Reference: Ramayana is a true history - VVMPUNE

Corruption in Indian Defence Procurements​

This is the Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) of India. Made exactly as per Indian Army (IA) requirements, it was ready for induction in late 1990’s, but IA suddenly changed its requirements and back to the drawing board it went. The IA wanted more heavy armor and much wider chassis, so the Indian defense research arm (Defense Research and Development Organization or DRDO) redesigned it and after several years gave it to the army to test. However, the army objected again, saying the tank was too wide and too heavy to be carried on railway wagons, despite the fact that the original requirements had come from the army itself.

With the former head of DRDO (Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam) as the President of India, IA was forced to test it and not reject it outright. However, quite cleverly, the bureaucrats managing the procurement of IA, forced the IA to modify the test and created a checklist to compare it with Russian T-90, that India was considering purchasing at that time. T-90 is a much lighter tank and served a different purpose. The checklist was clearly manipulated to favor the T90, and did not include features that were Arjun’s core strength like highly effective Kanchan armor, crew protection features including air-conditioned compartment and it’s highly accurate Fire Control System (FCS).

Obviously the Arjun did not look as good like the T-90 and deliberate news stories were planted in Indian media that Arjun tank is worthless and Indians are not capable of developing any weapons system. The news media was funded by several middlemen (Indian politicians, weapons dealers and Indian bureaucrats) who had a stake in IA purchasing the T-90 tanks. Arjun’s initial flaws, as with any newly introduced system, were overly exaggerated, in spite of DRDOs excellent work in quick turnaround with issues reported by IA.

The propaganda of the middlemen was so effective that even today well-meaning Indians and military enthusiasts believe Arjun is a crap tank. Needless to say, the IA went ahead and ordered 2000+ T-90s (a phased order totaling $3+ billion). Some percentage of this order, guessed around $350-500 million, went to several middlemen who brokered the deal. To compensate and console the ‘Made in India’ crowd a small order of 124 Arjun MBTs was made.

Then there is this:

The Indian New Small Arms System or INSAS rifle.

This much maligned weapons system is the backbone of IA, Navy and Air force as well all para-militaries serving in India. Since INSAS is made in India, by the government, it implies a loss of $100-200 million dollars to middlemen as no order is made for a foreign weapons system.

The middlemen with IA’s help tried their best to discredit the rifle initially, but IA and others were forced to buy it due to obsolesce of its FN-FAL rifles. After successive tries, the middlemen launched a massive media campaign with planted stories of how barrels cracked in Siachen (a common problem with any new high end rifle - later fixed by Ordinance Factory Board (OFB) by change in metallurgy), and how rifles jammed when firing. The news item did not contain information that even the most modern field rifles jam if not properly maintained. Even some ex-IA officers were roped in to discredit this weapons system.

Another problem cited for INSAS was that it performs badly in Close Quarter Battles (CQBs) for which the forces preferred AK47. However, INSAS was a field weapon and its 5.56mm ammo (designed to injure, not kill) was not suited for CQB, very much like the any 5.56mm weapon with NATO ( e.g. M16) ,is not suited for CQB. However, the media kept on harping this to the naïve Indian public who did not know any better.

Fortunately, orders kept coming. OFB even released a LMG version of INSAS which was loved by the infantry. INSAS also became the favorite rifle of Maoists and Islamic terrorists who will steal the weapons from police and para-militaries they ambushed. Lately all major ambushes on Indian para-militaries (mainly CRPF) by maoists have been carried with stolen INSAS rifles and some AK-47s. No one asked the question, that if INSAS was so bad why do Maoists prefer it in spite of AK47s and other weapons being more readily available in the black market ?

The same stories and negative media stories were planted for the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) and other weapons. It is likely that the Indian Air Force (IAF) will send the LCA Tejas, to the same death spiral as it did to the HAL Marut (after ordering a few token squadrons, of course).

And here is a catch, that no one in the public asked:

Why are there no negative stories on India’s nuclear weapons, its ballistic missiles and its SSBN’s (nuclear ballistic) submarines. For example, any coverage on LCA starts with:

“The LCA project which has been going on for over 30 years and has sucked more than $2 billion over budget, is still far from deployment…”.

However, a story on the Agni IRBM/ICBM does not start with:

“The Agni missile which has been under development for over 35 years and has failed multiple times (in the past)… “.

The story for Agni starts with:

“The Agni V missile which can reach all parts of China was successively tested…”. No negativity, only pride and positive feelings.

Ever wondered why this is the case?

This is because no other country will ever sell strategic weapons like nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and SSBN’s to India. The middlemen will never ever get to make a single penny from selling these weapons system to India, hence they never spend money on influencing the media on these weapons. Reporters have a free hand on reporting these news, unlike news for Arjun,INSAS etc where they are instructed by their bosses to report everything negatively, as the news media owners have been well paid to do that.

No one asks another question: if India can developed ballistic missiles, nuclear weapons and SSBNs why can’t it develop a tank or a simple rifle. Is development of a tank more complex than an ICBM ? Only a fool will think it takes more research & development and manufacturing ability to build a tank than an ICBM. The answer lies is in the deep rooted corruption in defense procurement of India.

India builds its own cars, trucks, two wheelers, heavy vehicles, ICBM’s, nuclear weapons and SSBN’s but somehow, magically, India can’t build a tank and a rifle ? When you ask this question only then one realizes the deep rooted and massive degree of systematic corruption in defense procurement of India. Several generations of politicians, IAS officers and some military officers have become millionaires and even billionaires through defense deals done by India with foreign companies.

Defense procurement in India is the goose that lays multiple golden eggs a year, and the stakeholders who get the golden egg will never let their goose being killed. Hence Indian developed and manufactured weapons will never be accepted and will always be viewed negatively.

Later Edit:

Thank you all for the good feedback. Based on some of the excellent points raised by others here are some additions:

1. It is indeed a sad fact that several labs of DRDO are gradually becoming defunct. It wont be far stretched to say that 50% of the DRDO employees are deadbeats, who are unemployable outside DRDO. These deadbeats are only interested in a secure government job. However, rather than being the source of the problem, this is another manifestation of the corruption in defense procurement. DRDO's research labs working on strategic projects (Ballistic missiles, rocket propulsion, MIRVs etc) are well funded , well managed and have highly capable people. Rest of the labs working on armored vehicles, explosives etc are rotting away, with very incapable management and high attrition. However, in spite of such adverse environments, these labs still posses some 5–10% high caliber and motivated people who carry forward all the work and are responsible for all notable achievements.

The government is not doing anything to make the labs more potent fix the problems, but remember that inaction is another form of deliberate action. These labs, which are allowed to rot, produce weapons systems that directly compete with weapons peddled by the arms suppliers. If these labs become effective, several $$$s lining the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats will go away. If the government wants, it can fix the issue in these labs by appointing a solid leadership team (like government has done in several PSU's, ISRO and other high performing government organizations), but that will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. The only hope for DRDO to become even better than ISRO, is if all countries sanction India and refuse to sell it any weapons for at least 10 years, which is unlikely to happen (even in 1998 sanctions, after India’s nuclear tests, there was no major ban on weapons sales - subtly other countries also know that it is better to feed the fish, else Indians will learn how to fish)

2. The arrival of private sector in defense production is good news, and the only hope for ramping up defense capability in India. The thirst of Indian politicians, IAS officers and military leadership for easy $$$s and other perks will not go away. However, the Indian private companies can also provide the $$s and assorted perks like call girls, foreign trips etc to the people involved in defense procurement. These $$s and perks will of course be less than those provided by international arm suppliers, which implies that expensive weapons systems like fighter aircraft, submarines, tanks etc will still go to foreign companies. However, lesser expensive weapons system like heavy vehicles, towed artillery, helicopters may go to Indian companies, if they play the game right.

3. (Updated based on inputs from Pratesh Gandhi) The final say in procurement of defense system rests with Defense Minister (Raksha Mantri or RM) and finance ministry. The military leadership recommends which systems to evaluate and then buy. IAS and politicians (apart from RM) still have a huge say in deciding which companies are in running for selecting the defense system, by indirect influence and control over the defense setup. Importantly, the final price negotiations, for purchase and spare parts, is done by the bureaucracy. Across the world, it is usual practice to ‘bump’ the price in government contracts to allow for kickbacks.

4. As per new NATO doctrine in the late 80s it was analyzed that injuring a soldier is more lethal to the enemy than killing one, as you have to expend other soldiers to carry the injured soldier. As per this doctrine, NATO moved to 5.56mm ammo, which have higher chances of injuring someone than killing. Indian Army, wanted to follow the same doctrine hence it asked INSAS to be a 5.56mm weapon, unlike AK 47 or FN FAL which are 7.62 mm weapons. Chances of survival from a 7.62mm ammo, especially at close range are low or nil.

Credits:

[1] All Image Credits, Wikipedia

[2] Indian military information: The Consortium of Indian Military and Defence Websites :

[3] Information on past defense scams: Various archives in the web, including india-today.com, timesofindia.com,

Indian history books are grave injustice to India's rich Heritage

I am an avid reader of history and have answered a few questions on this topic to the best of my ability. Recently, I wrote about why the British rule wasn’t all that good for India - I thought, a few Britishers might come and show their disagreement, but I was up for an unpleasant surprise.

While a few Britishers messaged me about their support - it was actually a few Indians who came forth to justify and defend the British Empire and explain how they were just doing what was right and how we Indians deserved it.

Every society reserves the right to interpret its history in a way that helps instill pride in the hearts of its young and impressionable.

The Greeks wrote the history of Alexander, 300 years after his death, on the basis of the thinnest of evidence, most of which consisted of indirect accounts and unreliable hearsay, and still managed to convince the world that he was great.

Americans spawned the story of George Washington and the Cherry tree, conveniently whitewashing the fact that he was a famous Slave Owner of his time. who didn’t believe in giving voting rights to the women.

While it is not a great example, even Pakistan teaches its kids that they have ruled over India for 600 years (in a way teaching the kids that they actually belong to the Turk, Persian, Arab and Afghan cultures and have nothing in common with the Subcontinent).

The Indian historians on the other hand have interpreted the History of India as the History of Delhi and have primarily focussed on how invaders came in and took our pants down.

Now I as a layman, have a question - If we were such a bunch of non-manly nincompoops and disjoint sissies, how come we are still here? - Still intact? - While all these invaders, their empires, their history and their cultures have no trace left whatsoever - except off course for a mention in our own text books?

We’ve got full chapters dedicated to smaller and insignificant dynasties of Delhi like Lodhis and Mamluks (Razia Sultana) but are not taught more than a few lines about the Ahoms, The Odiyas-Kalingans, the Nagas, the Chalukyas, The Cholas, The Cheras, the Vangas, The Khasis, Pandyas, Pallavas, Marathas, The Vijaynagar Empire, The Sikh Empire, The Karkotas of Kashmir, Kanishka, Suhaldev and many others.

Even the proven and internationally acclaimed achievements of our forefathers are looked down upon as something of a right wing propaganda which we should be ashamed about.

We are not even told properly about our ancient achievements in Medicine, Philosophy, Astronomy, Mathematics, Clothing, Metallurgy and Chemistry, just to name a few.

Shouldn’t our children deserve to know about the Ujjain and the Kerala school of Mathematics - something which often finds a mention even in the acceptance speeches of Nobel laureates?

Shouldn’t our children atleast learn about the Indian Nobel laureate Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, on who’s name, NASA launched the world only X Ray telescope, ‘Chandra’ in space?

Our children today, call Chanakya, the author of Arthashastra, as the Machiavelli of East, and Kalidasa, the author of Abhigyanam Shakuntalam, as the Shakespeare of India. Some of them say that Kashmir was never a part of India - some say, the North Eastern states have no historic connection to the rest of the country - They may as well call our former president Dr. Kalam, the Abdul Qadeer Khan of India.

And to top it over - we are also taught the British propagandas like the Aryan Invasion theory which not just has no evidence to support its claim - but is detrimental to the Idea of India itself.

We Indians are in a desperate need to rewrite our history - a history which is factual - a history which represents the whole of our country - a history that inspires pride.

We are not ashamed of our past at all - we want our future generations and the world to take pride in it.

https://www.quora.com/Are-Indians-ashamed-of-their-history/answer/Naman-Chakraborty-1?share=98caa126&srid=ndBp

Indian part of the genuinely independent Kashmir.

There is no need to compare - India has better infrastructure as compared to any part of Pakistan. The truth is that POK and Northern Areas, Gilgit, Baltistan, etc., under illegal occupation of Pakistan, are neglected places and are mostly underdeveloped.

Presently, Pakistan has unauthorisedly allowed China to make highways in the parts that are under its illegal occupation, and the local people are opposing this intrusion.

The genuinely independent part of Jammu And Kashmir State in India has seen tremendous level of development and the evidence thereof is open for anyone to see.

Look at these images and judge for yourself.

This is Chenani Nasari Tunnel in Jammu And Kashmir - and see below the railways.

The propagandists should know that the people of Kashmir are wise enough to see the truth. The people of Kashmir can see through the blatant lies spread by their enemies.

Edit : POK has nothing that may be seen as comparable to the above. Now, the civil govt and military of Pakistan are hoping (against hope) that China will develop their country. This is a decision that may cost heavily to the residents of POK, the people of Northern Areas, Gilgit, Baltistan, and to Pakistan as a nation.

Early human fossils found in South African cave system

Kim Eckart

News and Information

This skull, part of a skeleton that scientists have named Neo, was found in the Lesedi Chamber of the Rising Star Cave system in South Africa.John Hawks, the University of Wisconsin

 

An international team of scientists, including one from the University of Washington, has announced the discovery of additional remains of a new human species, Homo naledi, in a series of caves northwest of Johannesburg, South Africa.

The find includes the remains of two adults and a child in the Lesedi Chamber of the Rising Star Cave system, expanding the fossil record originally reported from a different chamber of the cave in 2015.

Details of the latest discovery are published May 9 in two papers in eLife, along with another paper from the research team that pinpoints an age range of the original Rising Star fossils, which comprised 15 different individuals. Those remains of a primitive, small-brained human ancestor that scientists dubbed Homo naledi were found in Rising Star’s Dinaledi Chamber and are believed to be between 236,000 and 335,000 years old. This means that Homo naledi may have coexisted, for a period of time, with Homo sapiens, the species of modern humans.

“We can no longer assume that we know which species made tools, or even assume that it was modern humans that were the innovators of some of these critical technological and behavioral breakthroughs in the archaeological record of Africa,” said Professor Lee Berger of the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa, who assembled the team that first explored the Rising Star system in 2013 and is an author on the latest papers. “If there is one other species out there that shared the world with ‘modern humans’ in Africa, it is very likely there are others. We just need to find them.”

The research involved 52 scientists from nearly three dozen institutions, led by the University of the Witwatersrand, James Cook University in Australia and the University of Wisconsin, Madison. The University of Washington’s Elen Feuerriegel, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Anthropology, was one of the members of the team that excavated both Dinaledi and Lesedi.

Researchers haven’t yet been able to date the fossils from the Lesedi Chamber, which include one of the most complete skeletons of an early human found to date. The excavation of that chamber, researchers believe, provides further evidence that this early human species deliberately disposed of its dead in these remote, hard-to-reach caves.

University of Washington postdoctoral researcher Elen Feuerriegel scrapes away sediment inside the Lesedi Chamber of the Rising Star Cave system.Elen Feuerriegel

That hypothesis generated criticism when the Dinaledi discovery was first reported, with some scientists pointing to other potential causes and timelines for the deposition of the bones. The Rising Star team maintains that the lack of animal remains found at the site, and the absence of injury to or erosion of the human fossils, rules out predatory or natural causes of accumulation.

The Lesedi fossils also shed light on the physical capabilities of Homo naledi, said Feuerriegel. The finds so far indicate a species that walked upright and used its hands for complex grasping — like Homo sapiens — but also had an upper limb structure that was built for climbing, like more primitive humans.

“What we’re seeing is the importance of compromise in our own genus,” said Feuerriegel. “The fact that Homo naledihas a similar hand and wrist to Homo sapiens, but a brain one-third the size of ours, shows that they may not have needed as much brainpower to do complex things. The process of human evolution is more complicated than we thought.”

Further excavation of the cave system is planned, an undertaking that requires excavators who can squeeze through passages as narrow as 7 ½ inches and spend hours 100 feet underground. The original excavation team assembled for the Dinaledi Chamber in 2013 was made up of Feuerriegel and five other women, all of whom had paleoanthropology or archaeology backgrounds — and the caving skills critical to such an endeavor. Since then Feuerriegel, a caver who studies the upper limb structures of early humans, and other members of the team have returned for excavation of the Lesedi Chamber.

The new Lesedi fossils include the skull of an adult male that is more complete than one found in Dinaledi. The team has named the Lesedi skeleton Neo, and consider it more complete, too, than that of Lucy, the remains of an earlier species known as Australopithecus afarensis that were found in Ethiopia in 1974.

The specimens from Lesedi are similar to those from Dinaledi and are undoubtedly from the same species, said John Hawks, an associate professor of anthropology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and an author on all three papers. Because determining the age of the Lesedi fossils could cause some damage to the Lesedi remains, researchers expect to begin that process after more fossils are collected. But team members believe that, based on the appearance and condition of the Lesedi fossils, that they fall within the same general time period as those of Dinaledi.

To establish an age of the Dinaledi fossils, scientists used a combination of techniques for both the bones and the surrounding sediments, including uranium series and electron spin resonance dating to examine teeth. Since other Australopithecus fossils have been found not far from the Rising Star Cave system, researchers had initially expected the Dinaledi fossils to be closer in age to those older ancestors — not from as recently as 236,000 to 335,000 years ago.

The age indicates that Homo naledi may have survived for as long as 2 million years alongside other species of early humans in Africa. In the period in which Homo naledi is believed to have lived, known as the Middle Pleistocene, it was previously thought that only Homo sapiens existed in Africa. That time is also characterized by the rise of what is considered “modern” human behavior in southern Africa, such as the use of complex tools and burial of the dead.

The Lesedi fossils will join those from the original Rising Star Cave expedition in a public display beginning May 25 at the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site near Johannesburg.

###

This was adapted from a release from the University of Witwatersrand. For more information on the UW’s involvement in this discovery, contact Feuerriegel at 206-388-6997 or efeuer@uw.edu.

 

 

 

This diagram shows the narrow twists and openings of the Lesedi Chamber, along with labels where some remains were found.

Source: http://www.washington.edu/news/2017/05/09/early-human-fossils-found-in-south-african-cave-system/

Jawaharlal Nehru - the Brown Britisher

Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru.

A law student who returned from London after completing his studies to India. After struggling for couple of year as he was not offered a single legal case, his father Motilal Nehru pushed him into politics and made him a member of Congress.

His birthday is celebrated every year as Children's day but no such evidence had been recorded where his affection was shown towards children except his own. Once in a party meeting when he was about to retire, he proposed the name of his only daughter, Indira as his nominee, who had very​ less experience, despite presence of few veterans in the meeting. Such a decision was criticized by other members. On which he said, “Indu is more capable than any of us”.

Another event, when Cripps Mission came to India to check the scenario of India after the second world war. On a report submitted to British Parliament there was statement which roughly confirmed that Mr. Nehru was a brown britisher and pursued similar thoughts and policies like them.

When we got independence, once he proposed and asked to give the defence authority and power to Britain. When he was asked for a valid reason he said it must be implemented as India had no experience regarding defence force. On which a commander named Nathu Singh said, “yes you're right our country has no experience to lead a defence force and also running any government so why should not we make a Britisher as our Prime Minister ”. Then Nehru took back his proposal.

On another event, in the Indian Parliament during dispute with China, he stood and said we should let them take our occupied land because they were barren and unfit for any cultivation and make friendship with China. Then a MP present there condemn his idea and said that his bald head was also barren and couldn't grow hair anymore, so why shouldn't​ he give his head to China.

He was a mediocre leader and one of few who promoted partition of India. He wanted to rule the nation by hook or crook. During independence during vote cast, he stood against Sardar Vallabhai Patel and could get only single vote over 13 favouring Sardarji for the post of prime minister.

Sorry state of education in Pakistan - by Sankalp Tripathi

i.e. Pakistan's education system. 

Above is a passage from a Physics book in Pakistan’s upper-elementary school. It is really very sad to see religious theocracy mixed with actual scientific facts and truths in these school books. Pakistan faces too many internal threats today but it turns blind eye towards false scientific facts and distorted history - the basis of tomorrow's future, being taught in its schools.

In 2008 an Indian Oscar-winning documentary filmmaker, Hemal Trivedi, after losing her friend in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, documented some shocking revelations on Pakistan's current education system in her 2015 film, Among the Believers (2015) . Below is a small clip of the film.

The film encompasses the conflict between two schools of thoughts prevalent in Pakistan’s educational system today - liberalism and extremism, and shows how innocent young minds are poisoned by the religious fanatics at a very early age during their childhood. Such a sorry state of affairs presents very grim picture of the future Pakistan where seeds of future generation of terrorists have been sown at an early stage and this crop is being nurtured with full fanatic belief to destroy in the name of Jihad. Today Pakistan’s internal military operation against home-grown terrorism, Zarb-e-azab, seeks to hunt down the present terrorists but what about future generation of extremists being raised in Pakistan? It's quite surprising to see that all Pakistan does is ban movies like Among the believers instead of being more proactive towards reforming its education system in order to destroy the roots of future terrorism.

Big lies about Hinduism: The practice of Sati - by Vineet Menon

Delhi University professor, Meenakshi Jain in her book Sati: Evangelicals, Baptist Missionaries, and the Changing Colonial Discourse. The book in its back cover explains,

Its (The book’s) primary focus is on the colonial debate on sati, particularly the role of Evangelicals and Baptist missionaries. It argues that sati was an "exceptional act," performed by a miniscule number of Hindu widows over the centuries. Its occurrence was, however, exaggerated in the nineteenth century by Evangelicals and Baptist missionaries eager to Anglicize and Christianize India.

The book explains how,

THere are no description of Sati in Ancient Sanskrit texts notably dharmashastra (or rule books), including Manusmriti, Yagyavalkasmriti etc.

The Mahabharata has only scattered references to sati, but none of the wives of soldiers who died in the great war did Sati nor the wives of Dasharatha in Ramayana.The incidence of sati seems to have been the highest in Rajasthan as a defiance to the Islamic invaders. In Bengal, on the other hand, no “sati inscriptions from that period have so far been discovered.”

As far as cases of unwilling satis are concerned, including that of two queens of Kashmir, and some accounts by foreign travellers who wrote of both unwilling immolations as well as cases where the women displayed a marked “aversion to intervention.” But many foreign narratives and accounts however have been dismissed as “highly exaggerated“, “formulaic“, and “replete with generalizations.”

Till 1813, the East India Company “did not permit missionaries to operate in its territories in India.” as they considered that natives should be left alone in their customs, religion and traditions for their business to function without any problem.

The leader of the missionary enterprise in the Indian empire was Charles Grant. It was he, who, in collaboration with Rev. David Brown, William Chambers, and George Udny, drafted the plan for a “Mission to Bengal” that “envisioned the division of the province [of Bengal] into eight missionary circles, each with a clergyman of the Church of England.” This was in 1786-87. But churches were only the second step. The first was the “idea of native schools as prepatory to the main business of giving Christian light to this land sitting in heathen darkness.”.

Soon two clergymen were sent to Benares to study “Hindoos” where “they will spend about three years in study, and furnish themselves with languages. After which they may begin their glorious work of giving light to the heathen with every probability of success.”

In 1790, after 20 years of stay in India, Grant published Observations, in which he summarized, “the moral character and condition of the native … is extremely depraved, and that the state of society among that people is, in consequence, wretched. These evils … have been traced to their civil and religious institutions; … in the false, corrupt, impure, extravagant, and ridiculous principles and tenets of their religion…”.

East India Company’s charter came up for renewal in 1813 where Hindu atrocities and their “evil practices” were manufactured, reached a frenzied pace. Even the rath yatra at the Temple of Jagannath was not spared. William Carey estimated that every year 120,000 pilgrims perished at the rath yatra. Even today, a massively crushing force is called Jaggernaut which originates from Jagannath. Wilberforce estimated that every year there were an estimated 10,000 “annual sacrifices of women” (sati) in the Bengal province alone.William Ward calculated, with a breakup, the total number of people sacrificed annually to the Hindu gods as 10,500! “However, on the very next page, he doubled the number of satis from five to ten thousand”. Rev. David Brown cited William Chambers in estimating the number of sati incidents to be “about 50,000.” Charles Grant hypothesized a number of 33,000.

The British government started maintaining a registry of sati cases between 1815 and 1828 in the three Presidencies of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay. In Bengal, a region not associated with sati, these government figures recorded 5,997 of 6,632 cases of sati – i.e., 90% of all sati cases from the three Presidencies were recorded in Bengal – which “raises uncertainties about the reliability of the data.” It is pertinent to note that it was Bengal where the missionaries were focusing on, and therefore unsurprisingly, from other places, sati was almost non-existent.

“The Judge of Malabar notified that the practice was entirely absent in his area. ,,, The Judge of Trichinopoly informed around the same time that he could trace no instance of widow immolation for the previous ten years in the district.” But not one to let facts deter propaganda, Baptists kept up their campaign of calumny with frenzied vigour. “In 1819, Friend of India cited the figure of 100,000 satis per year. In 1829, the journal claimed that the custom had claimed over one million lives in Bengal alone!”

Sati was abolished in December 1829.

Interestingly, Meenakshi writes,

Once the ban was announced, Company officials stopped their surveillance of sati, and the allegedly rampant practice seemed to have abruptly ceased. It was a truly unique case of prompt universal compliance of a government diktat.

TLDR: How Sati, a relatively scare phenomenon, with no scriptural reference and voluntary in most cases and even more so in Bengal, was pumped up by missionaries to discredit the native religion as a bunch of superstitious bullshit. They used Ram Mohan Roy, who was heavily influenced by Unitary Church. Sati, had now become a moral black chapter in the history of Hinduism even though it was scarcer than philandering Christian Priests or the witch burning ceremony of Europe.

Further reads:

The Sati strategy. Review of Meenakshi Jain’s book SatiBook Review: Sati by Meenakshi Jain | IndiaFacts

EDIT1:

Readers might be interested in this recent conversation Meenakshi Jain had with Rajiv Malhotra on his YouTube Channel.