Who is a minority person?

Who is a minority person?

July 21, 2004

Another Orwellian word used by Nehruvian Stalinists is 'minority.' Once again this is a fascist European concept imported into India and used inappropriately. What is a 'minority' in Europe and America? The dictionary meaning is: 'an ethnic, racial, religious or other group having a distinctive presence within a society; a group having little power or representation relative to other groups within a society.'

In practice, 'minorities' are ethnic, religious or linguistic groups living among a 'majority' group in considerable and justified fear of persecution: examples include Jews and Gypsies in Europe, blacks and Asians in America. This is also the situation of non-Muslims living in any Muslim-majority country, such as Coptic Christians in Egypt, Druze and Maronite Christians in Lebanon, and Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan. And non-party appartchiks in the former Soviet Union or China.

These real 'minorities' have always been the target of ruffians from the 'majority' group. Some Joe Bob and his redneck pals would say for sport on a Saturday night, 'Let's go get ourselves some colored hide,' and off they would go and lynch some poor black kid or terrorise the neighborhood in their latest Ku Klux Klan robes. Some Heinrich and friends would say, 'Let's go bash some Jews, because they killed Jesus,' and off they would go and beat up some poor Perlmutter or Morgenstern.

A good test of a group's minority status is how the world, including the national media and international opinion, perceives their oppression. If they are brutalised, and nobody cares, then they are clearly a minority. This is what has happened, for instance, in the Sudan's Darfur region: blacks being terrorised by Arabs. This was also the case for a long time with South Africa's blacks under apartheid: they were really a 'minority' even though they were numerically a majority.

In Europe, America, the Muslim world, and Marxist lands, the 'minorities' know exactly who they are, and the 'majority' knows who they are. There is no confusion as to who is top dog.

But that is absolutely not the case in India. There are two reasons for this: one is the traditional Hindu acceptance of pluralism without any superiority complexes. The second is the fact that no Hindu feels himself to be part of the 'majority'. Startlingly, because each Hindu considers himself part of his caste, each and every Hindu is a 'minority' person. There is no monolithic pan-Hindu identity: each individual owes primary allegiance to his caste group. This is something Marxists continually accuse Hindus of, but they don't accept that, consequently, Hindus are fragmented.

Try this experiment. Ask any Hindu if they belong to a dominant group. You will find that they all, without fail, feel that they belong to an aggrieved group, one that is discriminated against. Lower-caste people have the historic baggage of oppression that they/their ancestors suffered and the glass ceilings they run up against. Upper-caste people feel they have been bad-mouthed and treated shoddily, and they resent reservations and concomitant loss of opportunity. Thus no Hindu struts around as a superior 'majority' person, looking to attack some poor 'minority' Muslim or Christian.

In fact, it is the exact opposite. It appears that it is the Muslims and Christians who deliberately attack Hindus. As far as I can tell, Hindu-Muslim communal riots generally appear to be started by Muslims. And even if not necessarily physically violent (although they are indeed violent in the Northeast), Christians attack Hindus, and their deeply held beliefs, all the time. The irony is that the myths of Jesus Christ's life, his virgin birth, etc. are also just fond beliefs with often demonstrable borrowings from older Hindu and Buddhist myths.

Thus, in India, Hindus are the 'minorities' needing protection. Every Hindu, by definition almost, is a 'minority' person. Yet, unbelievably, the Nehruvian Stalinists have arranged it so that even in areas where Hindus are in fact a numerical minority, such as in Muslim-dominated Jammu & Kashmir, Christian-dominated Mizoram and Nagaland, or Marxist-dominated West Bengal and Malabar, Hindus do not get the privileges so-called 'minority' Christians and Muslims get in other parts of India.

So in India, Hindus are attacked, murdered, whatever, and by the time they get organised and attempt to take revenge, the police are there to prevent any violence. An example is Marad. The Hindus end up silently nursing their wounds. They are just collateral damage, so the Nehruvian Stalinists and Marxists in the media do not pay any attention to them. No human rights person cares about them either.

But if you really want to know how a textbook 'majority' treats a 'minority,' just look at the following link to photographs from Bangladesh a few months ago. See the HRBCM report on this atrocity in Chittagong, one among many. The Shils were massacred, including four-day-old infant Kertik and 25-year-old Babuti, incinerated on her wedding day. This happened not long ago, just six months ago. Did you ever hear anything about this, gentle reader?

Here is a heart-breaking appeal from poor Bimal Shil:

Translated from Bengali:

Appeal

I the undersigned Bimal Kanti Shil, father late Tajendra Lal Shil, Village: South Sadanpur, P.O. Sadanpur, P.S. Banskhali, Dist: Chittagong, Bangladesh .. do hereby state that a gang of 25-30 terrorists broke into my house set the homestead on fire at 1:00 midnight on 17th November.
During that time the following members of my family were inside the house:
1) Tajendra Lal Shil
2) Bakul Shil (60)
3) Anil Shil (42)
4) Smriti Shil (30)
5) Rumi Shil (11)
6) Sonia Shil (7)
7) Kertik Shil (4 days) -Infant
8) Babuti Shil (25)
9) Prashadi Shil (17)
10) Any Shil (15)
11) Debenra Lal Shil (75)

My entire family and relatives were ruthlessly roasted alive in which flammable substances were used. This bloodbath was preplanned and I want unbiased justice in this regards. I have witnessed the whole barbaric massacre.
I have survived jumping out of the ablaze house. I am now under treatment at Mamoni hospital at Chittagong. HRCBM leader Rabindra Ghosh has visited my house and me in the hospital. He also promised for assistance.
I am feeling completely insecure here. I am hapless.
I want to live and do hereby appeal for your help in procuring justice.

(Signed by: Bimal Kanti Shil dated 11/21/03)

Nobody is appalled by this level of endemic violence. Therefore, Bangladeshi Hindus are clearly a minority. Amnesty International's Secretary General Irene Khan is a niece of the Bangladeshi ruler Khaleda Zia, so, of course, Amnesty keeps mum. Nehruvian Stalinists in India and the 'South Asians for Kerry' campaigners in the US are unconcerned. Their ire is reserved for the subcontinent's Hindus, and this is the moral equivalent of blaming a rape victim for the rape.

In particular, the 'South Asians for xyz' are especially meaningless. There is no such thing as 'South Asia:' it is as imaginary as the equator. No consistent opinion can be drawn from across the Indian subcontinent: it cannot speak with a single voice as it contains brutal Islamist theocracies such as Pakistan and Bangladesh, a nation under virulent Maoist attack such as Nepal, and other nations where life is more normal. How could they all possibly have the same opinion on Bush or Kerry?

Indians in the US should not be misled by those individuals, usually Indian Marxists with Hindu names, afflicted by 'South-Asian-itis.' They shouldn't waste their money on these efforts, which are generally intended to harm India. Here is an example of what their cohorts do in India where in power. I quote this from M V Kamath in the Afternoon Dispatch and Courier of June 18th ('The truth has to be faced')

The Statesman (May 24th, 2004) datelined Gopiballavpur, Midnapore West says: 'Adikanta Dolui (45), Satragram panchayat secretary and BJP loyalist was burnt alive by a mob allegedly backed by the CPI-M. Around 40 shops and houses were robbed and set ablaze following the murder. The rampage was reportedly the fallout of the murder of senior CPI-M leader Ardhendu Satpati.... An hour after Satpati's killing, about 1,000 men, armed with bows, arrows, tangi and knives raided homes and shops belonging to BJP supporters at Birsachowk Bazaar.... Dolui (the BJP loyalist) was dragged out, the men chopped off his limbs and set him on fire after sprinkling petrol on him from the tank of his two-wheeler parked nearby.... The mob then set fire to about 40 shops and houses after robbing them. Several two-wheelers and bicycles parked in the market were destroyed in the blaze. The police posted in the market reportedly watched in silence.'

And, by the way, Dolui or Daliya was a Dalit. But he had the misfortune to be a Hindu Dalit, and a BJP supporter at that. And therefore his incineration in Marxist-dominated West Bengal attracted absolutely no attention from the Indian media. Poor Dolui was burned to death in front of his wife and teenaged son and daughter. Some of you may recall the worldwide fuss when white missionary Graham Staines was burned to death.

Yet, nobody spoke about Dolui with the exception of S Gurumurthy in the Indian Express, July 12th ('Had Aadhikanta Daliya not been a Hindu') and Balbir Punj in the Asian Age, July 6th ('A freedom-starved people'). Not one of the 'secular' icons or human rights mavens raised an eyebrow. Why is there no CBI enquiry? Where are all the liberals who lambast the security forces and submit PILs to the Supreme Court?

They did nothing, because obviously the life of Hindu Dalit is worth nothing. Once again, given that nobody bothers about Dolui, he's clearly a minority person.

Meanwhile, a Hindu temple was attacked and the deity smashed to bits in Chennai and the report alleges that this is the act of fundamentalist Christians who have been menacingly active in the vicinity. Of course, there was no hue and cry anywhere. The US Council on International Religious Freedom was not at all perturbed by this.

Yet again, given that nobody bothers about Hindu religious sentiments, it's clear they are a minority.

Comments welcome at rajeev.srinivasan@gmail.com

The truth about Bangladesh's Hindus

The truth about Bangladesh's Hindus

March 22, 2006

Bangladesh: Citizens generally were free to practice the religion of their choice; however, police often were ineffective in upholding law and order and slow to assist members of religious minorities who were victims of crimes. Religiously motivated discrimination and violence -- including killings, rapes, attacks on places of worship, and forced evictions -- remained a problem.

-- From the International Religious Freedom Report for 2005, released by the United States State Department November 8, 2005.

Sanjay Chatterjee was barely 20 years old when he left Kolkata in 1988 in search of greener pastures. Family connections with Leftist politicians -- who in turn were linked to a minister in Bangladesh -- took him to Dhaka, where he set up a small garment business.

As his business grew, he acquired Bangladeshi citizenship and married a local Hindu girl. His parents and siblings live in Kolkata. That same year, military strongman and then Bangladesh president Hossain Mohammed Ershad amended the constitution of Bangladesh to make Islam the State religion. He also changed the State's weekly holiday from Sunday to Friday.

Eighteen years later, Chatterjee -- who now has a nine-year-old son and a three-year-old daughter, and routinely travels to China, Thailand and other East Asian nations on business -- wants to return to India.

We cannot be disconnected within SAARC: PM

"Things have become very difficult here after the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and its fundamentalist allies came to power in 2001," he says. "It has become increasingly difficult for a Hindu to walk the streets of Dhaka with his head held high."

The ruling coalition -- it includes the Jamaat-e-Islami, Islami Oikya Jote, and the Naziur faction of the Jatiya Party -- led by the BNP's Khaleda Zia won 209 of the 300 seats in the nation's single-House parliament. All three coalition partners advocate the imposition of Sharia, or Islamic law, in Bangladesh. The Jamaat reportedly endorses the activities of Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, and is know for its strident anti-Indian stand.

Immediately after the elections, there were massive, concerted attacks on Hindus -- known to be supporters of the Opposition Awami League led by Hasina Wajed -- by ruling party activists. Hundreds died, many were raped, forcibly converted or deprived of their property. Thousands fled to India, mostly the border states of West Bengal and Assam.

"Since then, Hindus who stayed on in Bangladesh even after the anti-Hindu -- and by extension, anti-India -- riots which followed the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya (in India) in 1992, have been facing a hard time," says Chatterjee. "Our women avoid wearing vermilion on their foreheads and clothes which identify them as Hindu."

As for the men, "we are routinely referred to as malaun (infidels) and kafirs by local Muslims, particularly the younger people," he says. "If we dare protest, we are harassed further."

Dhaka's Bengali intellectuals, however, assert that the violence against Hindus is mostly political, not religious, in nature. They also point out that almost all Muslim nations faced violent anti-Hindu demonstrations following the Ayodhya demolition.

SAARC summit concludes amidst pledges

"We are devout Muslims. But it is essentially a cultural, not a religious, identity," says former minister and member of parliament Shawfikul Ghaani. "Of course, such attacks have occurred, but perhaps not on the scale that the Hindus claim, and it would be wrong to classify all of them as religiously motivated. After all, Muslim supporters of the Awami league were also attacked by ruling party goons and leaders after the 2001 elections," he adds.

On November 14, a day after the The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation summit concluded amid very high security in Dhaka, two lower court judges died after their minibus was bombed by fundamentalists.

A youngster arrested for the bombing belonged to the outlawed Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh, said to be behind the August 17 serial blasts across the country and the recent threats and attacks on judges and other government officials. The JMB wants the imposition of Sharia rule in Bangladesh.

Among the thousands rounded up nationwide by the security agencies after the bomb attack were members of the students wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami and Islami Oikya Jote, members of the ruling coalition. Some media reports said many were subsequently released following 'government intervention.'

The fact that one of the judges killed in the bombing was a Hindu is cited by BNP supporters as evidence that Hindus can aspire to senior government positions in Bangladesh. The fact that the other judge was a Muslim proves that the attackers were not specifically targeting Hindus, they say.

S Ganguly is an Indian working for a Japanese company in Dhaka for the past two years. His interactions with the Hindu community in Dhaka has left him somewhat disillusioned.

Agreeing with Ghaani that reports of religious discrimination were usually exaggerated by the Hindus, he says it is an attempt by the community to garner support in India, where many still have old ties and sympathies.

Look at these people," he says. "They earn in Bangladesh, but send their money to relatives in India. Many of them openly support India, for instance, during cricket matches. They teach their children to refer to India as 'my country.' As an Indian, how would you feel if Muslims in your neighbourhood openly supported Pakistan?" he asks.

"Of course, there have been cases of religious atrocities. No one can deny that. But sometimes I wonder whether they are asking for it," he says.

"Frankly, the anti-Hindu feeling has been there long before independence,' says Mushirul Haq, a history teacher at a primary school in Dhaka. "The hatred against them was fuelled by the leaders in West Pakistan, who branded anyone here who preached secularism as pro-Hindu and hence anti-Islam."

According to him, "Pakistan's military rulers like Ayub Khan and Yahya Khan promoted the radical Islamic parties in order to retain their power base, just like Zia and Ershad did here post independence."

"And we must remember that the Jaamat-e-Islami was originally a Pakistani theological party which preached jihad against the kafirs, or in other words, the non-believing Hindus. And these people, who opposed independence from Pakistan fearing a loss of their power here, and were at one time banned from entering politics, are now actually in power," he sighs.

"After the BNP came to power, the Jaamat revived its anti-Hindu programme, not officially, but by patronising and indirectly praising those who fuelled such hatred," he said. "Today, the police and even sections of the military have become party to this, because their civilian masters obviously encourage such feelings. And what's worse, many others support them for fear of being branded as Hindu lovers."

Moinuddin, a BNP student leader at Dhaka University who refuses to expand his name, says, "The BNP as a party is more secular and liberal than the Awami League. But this cannot be at the expense of nationalism. Hindus in Bangladesh are our brothers and sisters. But those who would rather live in India, let them leave now, or be identified as traitors and face the consequences."

"BNP or Awami League, they are the same," says Atiqur, a fruit seller at Dhaka's Kawran Bazaar, next to the plush Sonargaon hotel. "Our country has gone to the dogs ever since these two women (Khaleda Zia of the BNP and Hasina Wajed of the Awami League) decided that they were ordained to rule over this country. Until they go, things cannot improve. I think things are going to get a lot worse before it starts getting better. Today, you cannot cross the street without having to bribe someone. At least Ershad, despite all his flaws, did improve some of the infrastructure in the country."

"These two leaders and their slaves, who have no other agenda except to fight each other for the right to loot the nation, will drag this nation to hell. How will we explain that to our children?" he sighs.

Abdur Rahman, an activist of the Opposition Awami League, cites poverty and illiteracy as the prime causes for the growing anti-Hindu sentiments in Bangladesh. The BNP has compounded the mess by funding more madrasas than regular primary schools, he says.

"The people who graduate from these madrassas where they only learn the Koran and Islamic tenets by rote cannot get regular jobs. The only job they can get is that as head of a mosque, which perhaps explains the mushrooming number of mosques across the nation," he says. "Some small villages have as many as five."

"When people are poor, unemployed and frustrated, particularly the youngsters, it is easy to convince them that someone else -- in this case India and the Hindus -- is responsible for their problems," says Rahman, who was a supporter of Ershad's Jatiya Party before switching loyalties to the Awami League. "India's condescending attitude and its bullying tactics over river waters and trade does not help matters," he adds.

According to him, some 1,800 Bangladeshis who fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan returned home after the rout of the extremist outfit in 2001. "These youngsters, who trained in military camps in Pakistan, are now actively drumming up religious fervour and hatred for India across Bangladesh. And they have the protection of the Jamaat, a party which fought against our independence in 1971, and still maintains cordial ties with the Pakistani establishment," he says.

"However," he adds hopefully, "we Bengalis are essentially non-violent and secular. So, while these people are getting a few recruits, it is not the kind of overwhelming support they were hoping for. Very soon, they will be exposed and ostracised."

But for Sanjay Chatterjee, soon is not good enough.

"Hindus feel unsafe in India"

"Hindus feel unsafe in India"
By Shyam Khosla

How come, an anti-Bush rally was converted into an anti-Hindu riot in which four people were done to death.

The attack on the famous Sankatmochan temple at Varanasi on the eve of Holy festival is the culmination of the Muslim passions aroused by Jehadi elements in recent weeks and months with not so covert support from the “secularists”, particularly Mulayam Singh´s Samajwadi Party and the Congress. The bomb blasts at the temple and the Varanasi Cantonment railway station that claimed a large number of innocent lives are the latest in a distressing series of violence perpetrated by Islamists in recent weeks and months. The attacks on Hindu property and innocent citizens under the garb of protest against the publication of cartoons lampooning Prophet Mohammad by a Danish daily in Hyderabad and other places are symptoms of the same mindset. No Hindu organisation or leader had provoked the Muslims on the issue. On the contrary, Hindu religious leaders and the political class across the board condemned the cartoons saying no one should hurt the religious sentiments of any section of the society. Why did the Muslim crowd coming out of a mosque after the friday prayers attack Hindu properties and innocent citizens in Lucknow? How come, an anti-Bush rally was converted into an anti-Hindu riot in which four people were done to death.

The mindless pandering to Muslims in search of votes has encouraged Muslim fundamentalists to believe that they can get away with any crime. The response of the “secularists” to the made-to-order report by U.C. Bannerjee Committee on the burning alive of 69 Hindus in Sabarmati Express at Godhra is a case in point. The Committee lacked credibility from day one. The entire exercise, including the choice of the former judge, the timings of its constitution and its terms of reference, was politically motivated. No one expected the committee to try to unearth the truth, as the very purpose behind its constitution was to exonerate the Jehadis and their supporters. The Committee´s report confirmed our worst apprehensions. The shameless manner in which the former judge went ahead with addressing a press conference about his “finding” that it was an accident that has shocked and outraged not only relatives of victims but also the entire nation barring the “secular” brigade. “Accident” it was that a several thousand strong Muslim mob had assembled about 700 metres from the platform. “Accident” it was that the conspirators had procured and stored petrol near the place of action. “Accident” it was that the chain was pulled to stop the train near Signal Falia - a Muslim area and burning missiles and acid bulbs were thrown in the coaches. “Accident” it was that the mob resorted to stoning the survivors to prevent them from coming out of the burning coach. And an “accident” it was that vacuum pipe was cut to prevent the driver to move the train out of the trouble spot.

Enquiries conducted by several independent bodies into the Godhra massacre proved beyond a shadow of doubt that it was a pre-planned attack on pilgrims returning from Ayodhya. A five member non-official commission headed by Justice D S Tewatia, former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court, that conducted a detailed enquiry into the gory incident on behalf of the Council for International Affairs and Human Rights, came to the firm conclusion that burning alive of 59 Hindu pilgrims at Godhra was an act of “international terrorism”.

The mindless pandering to Muslims in search of votes has encouraged Muslim fundamentalists to believe that they can get away with any crime. The response of the “secularists” to the made-to-order report by U.C. Bannerjee Committee on the burning alive of 69 Hindus in Sabarmati Express at Godhra is a case in point.

It was disgusting to see members belonging to the Congress, SP, Communist parties and their allies rushing to the well of the Lok Sabha and disrupting its proceedings to demand action on the Bannerjee Committee report. They were competing with one another to prove that they were more aggressive practitioner of minorityism. This despite Gujrat High Court´s stay on publication and any action on the controversial report. It is these and such other acts - like amendment to the Foreigners´ Act to help Bangladeshi infiltrators, making reservations for Muslims in Government jobs in Andhra, declaring Aligarh Muslim University a minority institution - of the Congress-led Government that must take the blame for strengthening Muslim fundamentalists and encouraging them to arouse communal passions and indulge in violence on any pretext. No one resents Muslims´ right to peacefully protest if their religious sentiments are hurt. But they have tarnished the image of their own community by indulging in violence over issues like vote on Iran and US role in Iraq. Muslim support to countries like Iran and Iraq, merely because they are Muslim countries, has strengthened the widely held perception that they have extraterritorial loyalties. They have brought the situation to such an intolerable level that that the world-renowned spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has expressed his anguish in the following words, “Today, Hindus feel completely unsafe in India. Terrorists are attacking the Hindu community. First it was Diwali, now it is on the eve of Holi”. It is the holy man´s way of cautioning the minorities not to test Hindu tolerance beyond a limit. Will the Muslims listen to this wise advice and more importantly, when will Hindus rise to the occasion?

Back to the days of religious frenzy?

Back to the days of religious frenzy?
By M.S.N. Menon

Is the world going out of control? Is terrorism gaining the upper hand? Holding the world in a state of paroxysm? Are we going back to the days of religious frenzy?

We thought that the age of religious bigotry was over. We were wrong. New bigotries are breaking out like plague—fundamentalism, Talibanism, terrorism. All of them have to do with radical Islam—the new threat to peace. It is said, Islam has a grievance against the world. Which is what Hitler and the communists used to say.

But Hitler and the communists had no God to support them. Not so with the Islamists. Their God is ever the patron of all their enterprises. In fact, He “loves” their work, we are told. Of killing?Yes.

No, protest the Muslim intellectuals. They are the perennial apologists. But what have they done to prevent the present killings? This question can no more be evaded. Silence is not an answer.

Murder is a serious offence. It is an offence against our right to life. Only the law can deny life. No one can assume the right to take away the life of another. This principle has to be established. The Nuremburg courts must be universalised against those who believe in murder to change the way of the world.

Today, Islam has come to be identified with the mullah, the bearded young men, the Taliban, the burqua clad women, madrasas and frenzied mobs. The image is rather frightening. It is like a world in decay and out of control.

Terror has no place in Islam—this is the usual refrain. Yet jehad is a central principle of Islam and it is all about the use of terror.

Islam had one advantage in the past. The world knew almost nothing of what it was all about. This changed with 9/11. The world is now awash with unfavourable questions. Is Islam a religion of violence? Is it democratic? Why are Muslim countries ruled by despots? More questions will be asked. Which is why Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister was forced to say that it is time for Muslims to have a close look at their religion. They have refused to do so in 1,400 years! Their plea? That Islam is the only perfect religion!

The Muslim world has not produced a great thinker or statesman in the last 1000 years. Why? Because, it is said, its feudal rulers do not permit them to grow. That may well be so. But the question remains: Can the civilised world respect a religion which continues to suppress thinkers and statesmen? In any case, when others have overthrown their feudal rulers, why can´t Muslims do the same? It is for them to answer this question.

The Taliban shocked the world by destroying the 1,500-year-old Bamiyan Buddhas. The Muslim world failed to stop them. Behind that vandalism is the outrageous belief that Muslims must destroy everything pre-Islamic in their midst. Can humanity allow such pernicious doctrines to float around?

The Taliban called themselves “soldiers of Allah”. But they lived by selling narcotics, which killed millions of innocent people, including Muslims. And yet they were called “soldiers of Allah”!

Eric Hobsbaum, the historian, says: “We do not know where we are going. We only know that history has brought us to this point.” No much modesty in Islam. Ask a Muslim theologian. He knows where he is going. He knows everything. Here is a religion which suffers from want to modesty.

Semitic religions cannot do without Satan. They also need pagans and infidels. Octavio Paz writes: “Tyrannies and despotisms need the threat of an out-side enemy to justify their rule. When such an enemy does not exist, they invent one. “The Jews invented Satan. The Muslims invented the kafir. And the communists invented the “bourgeoisie.”

The Jewish and Islamic gods are punishing gods. Einstein says: A punishing and rewarding god is no God. Although Jesus made his God a loving and caring one, the Church found a punishing God useful to terrorise the Christian flock into submission. The inquisition perfected torture.

The Islam world is restive. It wants to go back to the desert from where it came and to the ways of the Prophet of Islam. The desert is symbolic. Of nothingness! They call it Nizam-e-Mustafa.

If Muslims prefer the desert life, it is up to them. But they have no business to turn the world into a desert. We have no desire for a desert life.

The universality of Sanskrit

The universality of Sanskrit
By Sudhakar Raje

About 70 purely Sanskrit words have also been included in the Concise Oxford Dictionary with the same meaning. Additionally, there are more than 80 prefixes/suffixes in English that are Sanskrit-based. These are used to form at least one thousand words given in COD. The Sanskrit-based prefix “over” is used in 170 English words according to the Navneet Advanced Dictionary, and in 270, according to COD.

Concerted and continuing research in various fields of scholarship like archaeology, mythology, linguistics, history of religion and so on has conclusively proved that Hindu civilisation had once pervaded the whole ancient world. And as the one vehicle for the worldwide spread of Hindu religion and culture, Hindu science and art, Hindu medicine and mathematics was the Sanskrit language, it also spread internationally. Right from Rigvedic times Sanskrit-speaking emigrants from India had settled in various parts of Asia and Europe, eventually reaching even the so-called New World, the Americas, millenniums ago. This resulted in Sanskrit influence on the local languages of the contemporary world. Conversely, Sanskrit became, in a way, the language of the world.

Credible Claim
Is this much too sweeping a claim to be credible, or does it have a basis in fact? In search of an honest answer to this question this writer waded through about 60 sources, including around 30 standard works in various aspects of ancient history plus more than a dozen dictionaries. On collating the collected information language-wise as well as region-wise he found that the claim of Sanskrit having been the whole ancient world´s language can certainly be sustained, albeit in varying degrees.

This writer found that words based on, or derived from, Sanskrit are present, in one form or another, in 80 languages of the world, from the Far East to the Far West.

Among them four languages, for obvious reasons, need to be mentioned separately—English, Greek, Latin and Arabic.

English
The English language has a Vedic ancestry. In the aftermath of the Rigvedic Dasharajnya war, the Druhyu community, which had taken part in it and had been defeated, migrated westward, eventually reaching parts of Western Europe. There “Druhyu” became “Druid”, and the Druids later came to be called Celts. Their language was Celtic, which was spoken in large parts of Western Europe, including Britain, during the centuries preceding the Christian era. Modern lexicographers of English admit that some Celtic languages are still spoken in Britain, though they maintain that English falls in the “Germanic”, and not “Celtic”, branch of “Proto-Indo-European” languages. Suffice it to say here that no credible evidence exists of an Indo-European language or language-group.

So far as current English is concerned, according to Dr N.R.Waradpande one-fourth of the total English vocabulary is Sanskritic. Webster´s, the world´s biggest (18-volume) English dictionary, is said to have as many as 40,000 words described as “akin to Sanskrit”. Even in the “Concise” edition of the Oxford Dictionary this writer identified around 400 Sanskrit-based words. About 70 purely Sanskrit words have also been included in the Concise Oxford Dictionary with the same meaning. Additionally, there are more than 80 prefixes/suffixes in English that are Sanskrit-based. These are used to form at least one thousand words given in COD. The Sanskrit-based prefix “over” is used in 170 English words, according to the Navneet Advanced Dictionary, and in 270, according to COD. In the case of the Sanskrit-derived prefix “non” COD says the number of English words using it is “unlimited”. Many Sanskrit-based prefixes are also used in half a dozen languages like Greek, Latin, French and Gothic.

Greek
According to the Mahabharat, the descendents of ancient king Yayati´s son Turvasu were called the Yavanas. From Yavana originated the name Ionia. Ionia is a region in Asia Minor, and there is evidence showing that Vedic peoples migrated to Asia Minor after they established themselves in Iran. As Asian Minor is contiguous to Iran the Iranians seemed to have owed their language and culture to a two-fold influence—Indian and Iranian. Greeks from the north-west also came to Ionia, but his was after Vedic influence was well-established and the Ionian Greeks were linguistically and culturally absorbed by the Vedics from India.

The most ancient Greek work, Homer´s Illiad (about 900 to 800 BC) is in the Ionian language, which is influenced by the language of Turvasu, that is Sanskrit, and Avestan, the language of the Zoroastrian scriptures, which is only a phonetic variant of Sanskrit. This Ionian Sanskritic language was the mother of the Greek language.

This writer has identified about 100 Greek words in COD that are derived from Sanskrit. In addition, as mentioned earlier, many Greek prefixes are also Sanskrit-based.

Some Greek words not only have a Sanskrit derivation, they also have a Hindu history. A couple of examples:

Allopathy: Allopathy is an allied development as a branch of ancient Indian medicine, which prevailed in Europe and other parts of the world till about the end of the 18th century. The Greek prefix allos means “other”. So “allo-pathy” is borrowed from “the other”, that is, from the ancient Indian system of medicine—Ayurveda.

Indigo: The English word “Indigo” is derived from the Greek word Indigon, which means “from India”. Proof exits that Indigo was made and used to dye cloth in ancient India.

Prometheus: According to Greek mythology Prometheus was the first fire-giver. He is Pra-manth of the Rig Veda. In the Greek language Prometheus means “fore-sight”. The Vedic Atharvan fire was conceived in the brain (intellect) and actually produced by rubbing (manthana) together two hard substances.

Latin
Along with Greek, Vedic Asia Minor was also the cradle of Latin. Probably as a result of the break-up of the Vedic Hittite empire in Mesopotamia, a people later known as Etruscans first appeared in the Etruria region of Italy around 900 BC, from where, during succeeding centuries, they spread to other Italian areas including Latium, the birth-place of Latin. Later, because of the political dominance of the Roman Empire, Latin became the common language for centuries. This in turn spread Sanskrit roots to languages of Europe.

This writer has identified 130 Latin words in the COD that have a Sanskrit base. Also, as pointed out previously, a number of Latin prefixes are derived from Sanskrit.

Arabic
There is a clear presence of Sanskrit in the Arabic language, albeit in Arabicised forms. This writer has identified 40 such words.

Dr Waradpande says there would be more Sanskrit words in Arabic than in English. In his opinion, there is a close connection between Arabic and Zend, the language of Avesta, which signifies that Arabic should contain more Sanskrit words than English does, as Zend/Avestan is only a phonetic variant of Sanskrit.

Other Languages
Now about the other languages of the world. This writer divided the words he identified into the following global regions: South East, Far East, Middle East, Central Asia, Africa, Europe, South America, North America. Then in each region he subdivided the languages into two broad categories—old and current. On so doing, his findings were as follows:

South East
Current languages: Indonesian (number of words 2), Burmese (3), Balinese (4), Javanese (5), Malaysian (16), Thai (51).

Old languages: Busang (Borneo) (5), Lava (Laos) (10).

Far East
Current languages: Mongolian (3), Japanese (8), Chinese (10).

Old languages: Tagalog (Philippines) (2), Maori (New Zealand) (16).

Middle East
Current languages: Pushtu (Afghanistan) (1), Hebrew (4), Khowari (Afghan region) (15), Kafiri (North Afghanistan) (18), Persian (38).

Old languages: Aramaic (Mesopotamia), Assyrian, Babylonian, Mitanni (Mesopotamia) (1 each), Akkadian (Mesopotamia), Khwarezmian (Iran) (2 each), Sumerian (3), Kashshi (Mesopotamia) (4), Hittite (Mesopotamia) (9), Avesta (18).

Central Asia
Current languages: Armenian (1), Khotanese (2), Tibetan (2).

Old languages: Tungus (Siberia), Phrygian (Asia Minor), (1 each), Tocharian (Region north of Black Sea) (3), Parya (Oxus region) (68), Niya Prakrit (Chinese Turkestan) (71).

Africa
Current languages: Swanili (East Africa), Amharic (Ethiopia) (2 each).

Old languages: Yoruba (Nigeria) (1), Egyptian (5).

Europe
Current languages: Basque (France/ Spain border region), Finnish (Finland) (1 each), Albanian, Lettic (Baltic country Latvia), Maltese (Mediterranean island Malta), Polynesian (Pacific island group), Portuguese (2 each), Danish (Denmark), Rumanian (4 each), Czech, Polish (Poland) (5 each), Dutch (Holland), Lithuanian (Baltic country Lithuania) (6 each), Norse (Norway) (7), Irish (9), Spanish (12), Romany (Roma gypsies of Europe) (23), German (33), Italian, Russian (34 each), French (46).

Old languages: Cornish (Celtic language of Cornwall in Britain), Gaulish (France), Umbrian (Italian region) (1 each), Welsh (Celtic language of Wales in Britain) (4), Gaelic (Scotland) (5), Gothic (Western Europe) (14).

South America
Old languages: Nahautl (1), Qechua (36).

North America
Old languages: Iroquois (1), O´odham (2).

Names
Names of persons, peoples, deities, rivers, mountains, regions and even whole countries that were derived from Sanskrit (some of which are still in use) can also be found all over the world. This writer has identified the following numbers of such names:

South East (92), Far East (24), Middle East (130), Central Asia (15), Africa (22), Europe (58), South America (24), North America (21).

These numerically meagre identifications in this article are clearly inadequate for qualifying it as serious research. However, even this preliminary collation of available information does indicate the global presence of Sanskrit—at times just a trace, at times quite clear. So perhaps some Sanskritists and linguists could team up to establish beyond doubt the truth of a quote with which the writer would like to conclude:

“Sanskrit was the original language of the earth.”

—Hallhead
(Quoted in Indian antiquities, Vol. IV; Ed. Thomas Maurice)
(Digest of Sanskrit Abroad! An International Glossary of Sanskrit-based Words in 80 Languages around the World, compiled and edited by the author, and currently under print.)