Here's a Baniya advocating Brahmin hegemony on Indian culture.
http://www.news18.com/news/chhattis...-says-minister-brij-mohan-agrawal-648949.html
http://www.news18.com/news/chhattis...-says-minister-brij-mohan-agrawal-648949.html
When Will Bahman - Baniya Hegemony End ?
- Thread starter samarkadian
- Start date
samarkadian
Active member
Thats a funny one. Here is one where Rajdeep Sardesai at hypocritically best about flaunting his Gaud Saraswat Brahmin lineage along with Indira Nooyi and Nilkeni their South Indian Brahminism. Same Rajdeep Sardesai wont be the same when Jat would try to defend Khaps.
---
---
For the uninitiated, GSB stands for Gaud Saraswat Brahmin: a breed that believes its ‘history’ began with reciting the Rig Veda along the lost river, Saraswati; they believe that Parashu*rama, the sixth incarnation of Vishnu, having annihilated the Kshatriya race 21 times, oversaw the migration of the Saraswat Brahmins and got them settled in the ‘Pure Land’ along the Sahayadri mountains. As a GSB, Sardesai could not conceal his glee when Suresh Prabhu and Manohar Parrikar made it to Modi’s expanded cabinet. Would he, likewise, feel more pride when he sees a GSB like Deepika Padukone rat*her than watching Katrina Kaif? Would he feel more sad when a non-GSB breaks one of Sachin Tendulkar’s records? Would Sardesai’s judgement of Vijay Mallya be clouded by caste solidarity? Would a 2006 survey which pointed out that 49 per cent of decision-makers in the media are Brahmins, and that Dalits and Adivasis are almost absent, have ever worried Sardesai?
Being a proud Goan or Indian is not the same as being a proud GSB. Admission to categories like Goan or Indian is open to all. However, admission to the category Brahmin, that too of a specific jati such as GSB, is foreclosed. Brahmin, more than other jati identities, works on the principle of exclusion. Taking pride in one’s Brahmin jati is the same as believing in the ascending scale of reverence and descending scale of contempt that the caste system espouses. However, let it be said that a Dalit proud of Mayawati or of the achievements of Bezwada Wilson of Safai Karmachari Andolan is not the same as god-stingingly privileged Sardesai crowing about Parrikar and Prabhu.
Sardesai likely lost his job at CNN-IBN owing to his views critical of Modi’s role in the Gujarat 2002 carnage. Why, he even lost his cool when he got heckled by a section of the ‘Har Har Modi’ crowd at Madison Square Garden in NYC on September 28, 2014. Surely, Sardesai should count as a keen, principled anti-Hindutva voice. And he, like most lib-sec-dem Indians, sees no contradiction in opposing Bad Hin*dutva but taking pride in what is reckoned as Good Hinduism. In this popular and convenient narrative, all the ills of caste are said to owe to one thing—the antidote that Ambedkar introduced against the venom of caste, reservation.
Imagine a leading television journalist in the US priding over a couple of New England WASPs in the Obama administration, or, more realistically, expressing concern over the lack of them. While Ashis Nandy’s casual expression of prejudice at the Jaipur Literature Festival in 2013—“It is a fact that most of the corrupt come from the OBCs, and the Scheduled Castes and now increasingly Scheduled Tribes”—can be easily deplored (and yet had ardent defenders), Sardesai’s insouciant amour-propre does not upset the common sense and lazy consensus around caste. We are as inured to such impromptu averments of jati pride as we are to the sight of sewer workers who enter drains, and many times die. There’s no shame here.
Being a proud Goan or Indian isn't the same as being a proud GSB. Admission to the first two is open to all. But admission to the category Brahmin is foreclosed.
Let us turn to GSB Exhibit Two, Jnanpith awardee Girish Karnad. In an exhaustive interview with the Indian Express in September 2013, the litterateur was speaking on the controversial ban on the 1970 film, Samskara, based on fellow-Brahmin U.R. Ananthamurthy’s novel of the same name, translated lovingly into English by another Brahmin, A.K. Ramanujan, also a revered icon of the liberal-secular pantheon. On the “allegation” that such a collective effort could lead to an “anti-Brahmin” film, Karnad, who essayed the protagonist’s role in the film, says, with touching incredulousness: “The writer of the story was a Brahmin, the producer was a Brahmin, as were most people associated with the film. Then why would we put forth anti-Brahmin views?” In an unexceptional fashion, Karnad essentialises himself and an entire generation of Nehruvian secular Brahmins. That Brahmins, in general, are believed to be congenitally incapable of anti-Brahmin views is the reason why caste has been so resilient. This is the reason why the self-anointed Secular Brahmins of the Republic more easily gravitated towards Nehru (a Kashmiri Saraswat), with whom they shared their loathing for reservation, than towards a figure like Ambedkar who demanded that caste be annihilated, who found the Purusha Sukta hymn in the Rig Veda immo*ral, criminal in intent, and anti-social. At the core, the prototype Karnad or Sardesai represents has believed and continues to believe in the innate distinctness and superiority of Brahmins. They refuse to see that their pride is wrapped in the patina of prejudice.
Exhibit Three is a Tamil Brahmin, Ramachandra Guha. This writer of nationalist histories is as much an apologist for his own jati as Sardesai, who calls Guha “the closest I have had as a mentor”. In a 2004 essay on C. Rajagopala*chari, that was reissued recently on the centre-right webzine Swarajya, Guha parades his Brahmin pride. He begins: “The first and, as it happens, the last time I wept at the death of a political leader was on the 26th of December, 1972. Rajagopalachari died.” And, “the tears flowed more freely because the leader who had just died came from my own community of Tamil Brahmins.” Caste feeling and pride are once again naturalised and presented as normative. A year later when Periyar E.V. Ramasamy, a Naicker opponent of Brahminism, died, Guha likely was unmoved. Concomitan*tly, should we assume Guha’s heart would beat more for the travails of J. Jayalalitha than those of Mayawati?
Till such time that we do not see that it is caste pride that leads to caste hatred, till such time that we do not see that caste can never be, never was, and never is a good thing, we will continue to be haunted by its spectre.
It is in the same spirit that Exhibit Four, Indra Krishnamurthy Nooyi, flaunts her Brahmin pride during a formal conversation with fellow-Brahmin Nandan Nilekani (a GSB too, and good friend of Guha’s) in 2007. One anecdote from Nooyi’s past has been much analysed and discussed: of how on the day she returned home as PepsiCo CEO all her mother told Nooyi was to go buy milk. But what never came under scrutiny was the way Nooyi associated her ‘braininess’ with being Brahmin:
Nilekani: Your mother seems to be have been a huge influence on you, right from the days she prompted you to get 100% marks in Maths and all that...
Nooyi: That is typical southern Brahmin stuff. So there is nothing unique about that. I think that she was genetically programmed for that. The entire family focused on grades. When parents got together, they only compared the report cards of their kids.
South Indian Brahmins are genetically programmed to be good at math and be focused on grades. And we should be grateful the enlightened Nooyi family perhaps did not employ a domestic slave to go buy milk late in the evening.
The statements of Sardesai, Guha, Karnad and Nooyi are as despicable as that of any leader of a khap panchayat issuing dire diktats; they are as uncouth as the views of the Puri Shankaracharya, Nischalananda Saraswati, who last month justified the prevention of entry for Dalits into temples, saying this accorded with Hindu scriptures. In fact, these liberals being so comfortable in their caste skin ought to shock us more than those who strut their right-wing and Sanatanist proclivities. Sardesai’s comfort with the surface suaveness of Prabhu and Parrikar is more worrying than his discomfort with Modi being reassuring. After all, Hindutva, at least on paper, is a more inclusive and encompassing category than the exclusive GSB denomination.
We are still left with Ambedkar’s question: Why have the Brahmins not produced a Voltaire?
http://www.outlookindia.com/article/The-Persistence-Of-The-Brahmin/292640
समर ने जो लिंक दिया हैं इसमे , 9 नवंबर को राजदीप सारदेसाई ने दो गौड़ सारस्वत ब्राह्मणों सुरेश प्रभु व मनोहर पारिकर को कैबिनेट दर्जे का मंत्री बनाए जाने पर बधाई दी , इसे सारस्वतो का गर्व बताया |
यदि ऐसी ही बधाई हम अपने लोगो को मंत्री बनाए जाने पर दे देते हैं तो हम पर जातिवादी होने का , देश को जातिवाद के नाम से बांटने का , तालिबानी होने का और ना जाने क्या क्या इल्जाम लगा दिये जाते हैं | हमे जातिवाद से ऊपर उठने का ज्ञान देने वाले ये पढे लिखे समाज के लोग खुद ही जातिवाद मे उलझे हुए हैं | कुछ हमारे ही लोग जो ब्राह्मणों के शंख बन कर बजते रहते हैं वह इस पर कहेंगे की राजदीप तो कांग्रेसी हैं इसलिए ये ऐसी फूट डालने वाली बाते कर रहा हैं | राजदीप ने यह ट्वीट चाहे किसी भी मंशा से किया हो पर बात सोचने वाली हैं की मोदी सरकार के कैबिनेट मे सबसे ज्यादा मंत्री ब्राह्मण समाज से हैं | हमारे लोगो को मंत्री बनाने के लिए हमे संघर्ष करना पड़ता हैं जबकि इनको बैठे बैठाए मंत्री पद मिलते हैं | हमारे लोगो को मंत्री पद ऐसे दिये जाते हैं जैसे की खैरात में दे रहे हैं , कोई एहसान कर रहे हैं | हम लोग सिर्फ इस्तेमाल के लिए हैं , ये लोग हमे माहौल देख कर इस्तेमाल करते हैं जहां जिस राज्य मे चुनाव होते हैं उस हिसाब से हमारे लोगो को मंत्री पद की खैरात मिलती हैं | मुझे तो ऐसा लगता हैं की 1947 मे आज़ादी हमे नहीं सिर्फ इन्ही लोगो को मिली हैं थी और यहीं कारण हैं की 1987 की जनता दल सरकार को छोड़ कर चाहे कोई भी सरकार रही हों , कैबिनेट मे बहुमत सिर्फ इन्ही लोगो का रहा हैं जबकि इन लोगो की देश मे आबादी 3% के करीब हैं | पता नहीं इनको सबसे ज्यादा मंत्री पद देने की क्या मजबूरी हैं ? ऐसी कौन सी योग्यता हैं जो सिर्फ इनमे हैं हम में नहीं ?
Last edited:
samarkadian
Active member
The Other Backward Classes are a historically oppressed majority in India. All debates on “Hindu nationalism” initiated by the Brahminic forces assume that the Other Backward Classes, who constitute the largest social group in India are part of Hinduism.
The dalits, Muslims and Christians keep on protesting, but the OBCs do not protest, not even when a senior leader of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party said recently that the Bhagavad Gita should be made India’s “national scripture”, replacing the Indian Constitution.
The OBCs voted for Narendra Modi, India’s first OBC Prime Minister, in substantial numbers. But they have not got anything substantial from his elevation.
Instead, the upper castes particularly Brahmins and Baniyas have got very visible positions in his ministry, and the Baniya industry is booming ever since Mr Modi and Amit Shah took over the state apparatus and the BJP.
External affairs minister Sushma Swaraj’s attempt to bring an Act to declare the Bhagavad Gita as India’s national scripture, that is, the conscious keeper of India’s government and its people, has far more serious implications than Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti’s obnoxious statement.
Ms Swaraj is a seasoned politician with a solid support from her caste, Brahmin, whose strength in the Union Cabinet and state governments is increasing.
Most recently, Maharashtra and Haryana have been handed over to Brahmin Chief Ministers.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad seem to be working with a conscious agenda to bring the brahmin-baniya control back again.
The Gita debate helps that agenda. Along with the minority communities, the OBCs too would be big losers. Perhaps even more, since, unlike, Muslims and Christians, the OBCs do not have international recognition or backing.
A careful reading of the Gita would show anyone that it fully supports the enslavement of Shudras and OBCs, a process initiated by the Rig Veda itself. Rig Veda formulated the caste structure in Purusha Suktha and the Gita upheld it.
If the claim of the VHP is accepted (though there is no historical authenticity for that claim) that the Gita is 5,151 years old, it means that the enslavement of Shudras is more than 5,000 years old.
No Shudra-OBC can be a priest either in a Rama temple, a Krishna temple, or a Vishnu or Shiva temple. But he can be the Prime Minister of this country. Today, when a Shudra-OBC is Prime Minister, it’s not because of the Gita, but because of B.R. Ambedkar’s Constitution.
In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna declares:
“Chaaturvarnyam mayaa srishtam gunakarma vibhaagashah”
(“I have created four Varnas based on guna-karma”; guna means quality, karma means work.)
There are references to Brahmins in the Gita as the most revered social force created by Krishna to conduct spiritual affairs. The emphasis in the Gita on performing each section’s duty as assigned by the theory of Varna Dharma of Rig Veda is consistent. Krishna consciousness then is clearly caste consciousness.
Krishna also says:
Krishigaurakshyavaanijyam vaishyakarma swabhaavajam;
Paricharyaatmakam karma shoodrasyaapi swabhaavajam.
(Agriculture, cattle-rearing and trade are the duties of the Vaishya based on their own karma and nature; and serving other is the duty of the Shudras based on their karma and nature.)
With this divine dictum Krishna sealed the fate of the Shudra-OBCs. Till today the fundamental social location of the Shudras has not changed in Hinduism.
The Brahminic interpreters of the Gita say that the Varna system created by Krishna does not operate by birth, but is based on aptitude and skill. But for the last 5,000 years nobody’s caste status has changed.
The Indian Constitution began to effect that change. The present design to replace the Constitution with the Gita is to stop that.
On certain issues Gita appears to have taken a universalist position. Krishna’s discourse on truth, renunciation, salvation, devotion, consciousness, existence and so on is universal in nature.
But if the experience of the Shudra-OBCs and dalits (who do not figure in the Gita because they are out of the Varna/caste system) ever since the Gita was composed is considered, then it’s clear that the Gita is a text meant for only for the upper castes.
In fact, though Arjuna asks transformative questions, Krishna’s answers remain confined to assignment of caste based duties.
All those who interpret Gita from the point of view of karma yog try to give a positivist understanding of work ethics. But nowhere in the Gita does Krishna talk about productive work positively.
His stress is more on fighting by Arjuna, not as an individual soldier, but as a member of the Kshatriya caste, as part of Varna dharma.
From Vivekananda to Mahatma Gandhi to B.P. Mandal (who quoted extensively from the Gita in the Mandal Commission Report), all of them mistook Krishna’s reference to Varna duties to individual duties.
But there is no scope of “spiritual individualism” in the Gita as there is in the Vinaya Pitaka, Bible or Quran or the Guru Granth Sahib. The Gita only talks about caste moksha, not individual moksha.
Gita’s position on caste is a major problem for all those who have suffered oppression. The discrimination here is not individual discrimination; it is a discrimination based on caste. Though untouchables (dalits) were not mentioned in the Gita, they are now part of caste system.
The Yadavs in north India, a powerful OBC community, consider Krishna as their community god. But they go by the story that he was brought up by a Yadav family and became the ruler of Yadu Rajya.
Theirs is mainly physical worship of Krishna’s body. I have not known any Yadav scholar of the Gita telling the world that it is a liberative text for the Yadavs, leave alone other Shudras-OBCs and Dalits.
Yadav leaders like Mulayam Singh, Lalu Prasad, Sharad Yadav and so on should not be swayed by their admiration for Krishna and the simplistic understanding of the Gita. They must join hands with
M. Karunanidhi, Mamata Banerjee and the Left parties to stop all attempts at a Brahminic resurgence as is being insidiously suggested by Ms Swaraj.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/141220/commentary-op-ed/article/gita-and-obcs
The dalits, Muslims and Christians keep on protesting, but the OBCs do not protest, not even when a senior leader of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party said recently that the Bhagavad Gita should be made India’s “national scripture”, replacing the Indian Constitution.
The OBCs voted for Narendra Modi, India’s first OBC Prime Minister, in substantial numbers. But they have not got anything substantial from his elevation.
Instead, the upper castes particularly Brahmins and Baniyas have got very visible positions in his ministry, and the Baniya industry is booming ever since Mr Modi and Amit Shah took over the state apparatus and the BJP.
External affairs minister Sushma Swaraj’s attempt to bring an Act to declare the Bhagavad Gita as India’s national scripture, that is, the conscious keeper of India’s government and its people, has far more serious implications than Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti’s obnoxious statement.
Ms Swaraj is a seasoned politician with a solid support from her caste, Brahmin, whose strength in the Union Cabinet and state governments is increasing.
Most recently, Maharashtra and Haryana have been handed over to Brahmin Chief Ministers.
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad seem to be working with a conscious agenda to bring the brahmin-baniya control back again.
The Gita debate helps that agenda. Along with the minority communities, the OBCs too would be big losers. Perhaps even more, since, unlike, Muslims and Christians, the OBCs do not have international recognition or backing.
A careful reading of the Gita would show anyone that it fully supports the enslavement of Shudras and OBCs, a process initiated by the Rig Veda itself. Rig Veda formulated the caste structure in Purusha Suktha and the Gita upheld it.
If the claim of the VHP is accepted (though there is no historical authenticity for that claim) that the Gita is 5,151 years old, it means that the enslavement of Shudras is more than 5,000 years old.
No Shudra-OBC can be a priest either in a Rama temple, a Krishna temple, or a Vishnu or Shiva temple. But he can be the Prime Minister of this country. Today, when a Shudra-OBC is Prime Minister, it’s not because of the Gita, but because of B.R. Ambedkar’s Constitution.
In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna declares:
“Chaaturvarnyam mayaa srishtam gunakarma vibhaagashah”
(“I have created four Varnas based on guna-karma”; guna means quality, karma means work.)
There are references to Brahmins in the Gita as the most revered social force created by Krishna to conduct spiritual affairs. The emphasis in the Gita on performing each section’s duty as assigned by the theory of Varna Dharma of Rig Veda is consistent. Krishna consciousness then is clearly caste consciousness.
Krishna also says:
Krishigaurakshyavaanijyam vaishyakarma swabhaavajam;
Paricharyaatmakam karma shoodrasyaapi swabhaavajam.
(Agriculture, cattle-rearing and trade are the duties of the Vaishya based on their own karma and nature; and serving other is the duty of the Shudras based on their karma and nature.)
With this divine dictum Krishna sealed the fate of the Shudra-OBCs. Till today the fundamental social location of the Shudras has not changed in Hinduism.
The Brahminic interpreters of the Gita say that the Varna system created by Krishna does not operate by birth, but is based on aptitude and skill. But for the last 5,000 years nobody’s caste status has changed.
The Indian Constitution began to effect that change. The present design to replace the Constitution with the Gita is to stop that.
On certain issues Gita appears to have taken a universalist position. Krishna’s discourse on truth, renunciation, salvation, devotion, consciousness, existence and so on is universal in nature.
But if the experience of the Shudra-OBCs and dalits (who do not figure in the Gita because they are out of the Varna/caste system) ever since the Gita was composed is considered, then it’s clear that the Gita is a text meant for only for the upper castes.
In fact, though Arjuna asks transformative questions, Krishna’s answers remain confined to assignment of caste based duties.
All those who interpret Gita from the point of view of karma yog try to give a positivist understanding of work ethics. But nowhere in the Gita does Krishna talk about productive work positively.
His stress is more on fighting by Arjuna, not as an individual soldier, but as a member of the Kshatriya caste, as part of Varna dharma.
From Vivekananda to Mahatma Gandhi to B.P. Mandal (who quoted extensively from the Gita in the Mandal Commission Report), all of them mistook Krishna’s reference to Varna duties to individual duties.
But there is no scope of “spiritual individualism” in the Gita as there is in the Vinaya Pitaka, Bible or Quran or the Guru Granth Sahib. The Gita only talks about caste moksha, not individual moksha.
Gita’s position on caste is a major problem for all those who have suffered oppression. The discrimination here is not individual discrimination; it is a discrimination based on caste. Though untouchables (dalits) were not mentioned in the Gita, they are now part of caste system.
The Yadavs in north India, a powerful OBC community, consider Krishna as their community god. But they go by the story that he was brought up by a Yadav family and became the ruler of Yadu Rajya.
Theirs is mainly physical worship of Krishna’s body. I have not known any Yadav scholar of the Gita telling the world that it is a liberative text for the Yadavs, leave alone other Shudras-OBCs and Dalits.
Yadav leaders like Mulayam Singh, Lalu Prasad, Sharad Yadav and so on should not be swayed by their admiration for Krishna and the simplistic understanding of the Gita. They must join hands with
M. Karunanidhi, Mamata Banerjee and the Left parties to stop all attempts at a Brahminic resurgence as is being insidiously suggested by Ms Swaraj.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/141220/commentary-op-ed/article/gita-and-obcs
When the Hindu and Muslim rulers came under the Europeans, the Brahmins collaborated with them and emerged as greatest beneficiaries. Like the previous Hindu and Muslim rulers, the East India Company derived large annual profits from the management of Hindu temples. The English emerged as patrons of Brahminical priestcraft and idolatry and of temple-girls to satiate their carnal requirements in the absence of English women from home. The First Governor General, Warren Hastings’, established Caste Courts, to excommunicate any Hindu who resisted writing of their caste along with their names. Sir William Jones, was appointed Judge of Supreme Court in 1784. He emerged as the foremost Orientalist and founder of the Asiatic Society. Sir William Jones in collaboration with the Brahmins, resurrected the archaic Manu Smriti and other spurious and unjust Shastras, and enforced them as authoritative texts of Hindu law, on all non-Muslims and non-Christians. When the British divested themselves of the management of Hindu religious endowments in 1863; the Brahmin’s triumph was complete in taking over the management of Hindu temples, and enforcing a graded iniquitous caste and entry system in to the temples.
http://www.sikharchives.com/?p=10444
http://www.sikharchives.com/?p=10444
Last edited:
prashantacmet
New member
Bharat ratna for two baahmans again. more than 50% awardees of bharat ratna are baahman and I don't see a end!
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/b...ohan-malaviya-639131?pfrom=home-lateststories
May I ask to "thekedaars of Hinduism" of this site that our bhagat, mahendra pratap, choturam and charan singh don't deserve it? Our history is being destroyed again....our heroes are being ignored..no one is going to remember bhagat after 300 years but Rajiv Gandhi....shame!!...and jaichands of jats are still licking the foots of baahmans..and they have turned a blind eye from the truth in the disguise of their "fake proud"..and these morons think that baahman are not enjoying the special status in Hinduism..:tongue:
bhagat - most pious figure of freedom struggle
mahendra pratap- nominated for bharat ratna even before Gandhi
choturam and charan singh- who changed the fortune of farmers-labours of this country..
how these personality fall short of anyone in bharat ratna list.....almost half of bharat rattna awardees are baahman!
Baahman awardees of bharat ratna:
Pandurang Vaman Kane - Sanskrit Scholar
Maharshi Dhondo Keshav Karve - Social Service
Acharya Vinoba Bhave - Social Service (Bhudan Movement)
Varahagiri Venkata Giri- civilian decoration, Indian fourth President
Sachin Tendulkar-Indian Cricketer
Lata Mangeshkar - Famous Playback singer
Pandit Ravi Shankar - Famous Sitar player
Chakravarti Rajgopalachari - Independence Activist
C. V. Raman - Physicist
Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan - Philosopher
Bhagwan Das - Author
Mokshagundam Visvesvarayya - Civil Engineer
Gopinath Bordoloi - Former Assam Chief Minister
Pandit Bhimsen Joshi - Hindustani Classical Music Vocalist
Jawahar lal Nehru
Indira Gandhi
Rajiv Gandhi
Govind vallabh pant
Lal bahadur shastri
Atal bihari Vajpayee
Madan mohan malviya
C N R Rao - scientist
morarji Desai
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/b...ohan-malaviya-639131?pfrom=home-lateststories
May I ask to "thekedaars of Hinduism" of this site that our bhagat, mahendra pratap, choturam and charan singh don't deserve it? Our history is being destroyed again....our heroes are being ignored..no one is going to remember bhagat after 300 years but Rajiv Gandhi....shame!!...and jaichands of jats are still licking the foots of baahmans..and they have turned a blind eye from the truth in the disguise of their "fake proud"..and these morons think that baahman are not enjoying the special status in Hinduism..:tongue:
bhagat - most pious figure of freedom struggle
mahendra pratap- nominated for bharat ratna even before Gandhi
choturam and charan singh- who changed the fortune of farmers-labours of this country..
how these personality fall short of anyone in bharat ratna list.....almost half of bharat rattna awardees are baahman!
Baahman awardees of bharat ratna:
Pandurang Vaman Kane - Sanskrit Scholar
Maharshi Dhondo Keshav Karve - Social Service
Acharya Vinoba Bhave - Social Service (Bhudan Movement)
Varahagiri Venkata Giri- civilian decoration, Indian fourth President
Sachin Tendulkar-Indian Cricketer
Lata Mangeshkar - Famous Playback singer
Pandit Ravi Shankar - Famous Sitar player
Chakravarti Rajgopalachari - Independence Activist
C. V. Raman - Physicist
Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan - Philosopher
Bhagwan Das - Author
Mokshagundam Visvesvarayya - Civil Engineer
Gopinath Bordoloi - Former Assam Chief Minister
Pandit Bhimsen Joshi - Hindustani Classical Music Vocalist
Jawahar lal Nehru
Indira Gandhi
Rajiv Gandhi
Govind vallabh pant
Lal bahadur shastri
Atal bihari Vajpayee
Madan mohan malviya
C N R Rao - scientist
morarji Desai
Last edited:
Bharat Ratna may be awarded on some qualities which your mentioned Jat personalities might not possessed. Wait till those qualities are developed by the Class.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdlguBBQcK8
Last edited:
drrajpalsingh
New member
The readers, perhaps, may like to read an old thread on the topic in this very site with somewhat related theme.
If so, kindly log :Brahmans !!!! Some Historic facts (Must read)
If so, kindly log :Brahmans !!!! Some Historic facts (Must read)
prashantacmet
New member
Are you not being the devil's advocate, sir?
I don't have issues if it is given to baahmans but why to ignore others likewise?
they can give it to politicians like jawahar laal Nehru, Indira , Rajiv, morarzi desai, atal bihari, lal bahadur shastri..?
they can give it to khan Abdul gaffar khan and Nelson mandela?
they change the rule and give it to "Sachin Tendulkar"?
are these cases being fitted in your "possession of special qualities" frame? how, bother to elaborate?
Last edited:
In India doing Business with ethics is very tough. Jats believe too much in social ethics that is why they may not grow much here . In Europe and America I think it is more hard work and quality.
भारत रत्न की फेहरिश्त मे दो ब्राह्मणो का इजाफा होने जा रहा हैं | भारत में दलित-पिछड़ों कि आबादी 85 % हैं और स्वर्णों कि आबादी 15 % के करीब हैं | और इस 15 % स्वर्ण जातियों मे एक जाति ऐसी हैं जिसकी आबादी देश मे 3% के करीब हैं परंतु देश के हर अहम पदों पर इन 3% का कब्जा हैं | अब तक जिनको भारत रत्न से नवाजा गया हैं उनमे 95 % स्वर्ण जाति से हैं और इन 95% स्वर्णों में भी 90% सिर्फ ब्राह्मण जाति से हैं | क्या देश मे काबिल लोग सिर्फ इसी जाति मे हैं ? दरअसल काबिल लोग दूसरी जातियों मे भी हैं परंतु उनकी काबिलयत को आगे आने ही नहीं दिया जाता | 14 मई 2013 के दैनिक ट्रिब्यून के संपादकीय मे शम्भूनाथ शुक्ल का " ब्राह्मणवादी राजनीति की तुरुप चाल " लेख छपा था जिसमे लेखक ने बड़ी सही बात लिखी थी की ब्राह्मण जाति उन स्रोतो पर काबिज हो गई जो नीति निर्धारक का काम करते हैं | और एक माहौल बनाने मे सक्षम होती हैं | जैसे की अध्यापकी का पेशा तथा मीडिया व कारपोरेट घराने | कोई भी कैसा भी माहौल बनाने के लिए ये तीन स्रोत सबसे जरूरी होते हैं और इन स्रोतो का सहारा ले कर ही यह लोग अपने लोगो के लिए हर प्रकार का माहौल तैयार करते हैं , जैसे की जुलाई के महीने से इन लोगो ने पूर्व प्रधानमंत्री अटल बिहारी वाजपाई के लिए माहौल तैयार करना शुरू कर दिया था |
बड़े ताज्जुब की बात हैं कि जब हम लोग जाति की बात करते हैं तो हम पर राष्ट्र को तोड़ने का आरोप लगाया जाता हैं परंतु इनके जातिवाद से राष्ट्रवाद को कोई खतरा नहीं ! यह लोग नीचे नीचे पूरा जातिवाद फैला रहे हैं परंतु कोई चूँ तक नहीं करता , यदि कोई तकरार करे भी तो कुछ हमारे ही लोग जो इनके शंख का काम करते हैं उल्टा हम ही पर जातिवादी सोच कि तोहमत लगाने लग जाते हैं ! किसान-कमेरो का ध्यान भटकाने के लिए यह लोग उनके धर्म का नश्तर लगा देते हैं , उस नश्तर के नशे मे किसान-कमेरे इनके शंख बन कर बजते रहते हैं और इनके असली मंसूबे को कभी समझ ही नहीं पाते |
इन लोगो की इस षड्यंत्रकारी मीडिया से तंग आ कर ही किसान नेता चौधरी चरण सिंह को एक बार कहना पड़ा था " काश ! मैं ब्राह्मण होता "
' जय योद्धेय '
बड़े ताज्जुब की बात हैं कि जब हम लोग जाति की बात करते हैं तो हम पर राष्ट्र को तोड़ने का आरोप लगाया जाता हैं परंतु इनके जातिवाद से राष्ट्रवाद को कोई खतरा नहीं ! यह लोग नीचे नीचे पूरा जातिवाद फैला रहे हैं परंतु कोई चूँ तक नहीं करता , यदि कोई तकरार करे भी तो कुछ हमारे ही लोग जो इनके शंख का काम करते हैं उल्टा हम ही पर जातिवादी सोच कि तोहमत लगाने लग जाते हैं ! किसान-कमेरो का ध्यान भटकाने के लिए यह लोग उनके धर्म का नश्तर लगा देते हैं , उस नश्तर के नशे मे किसान-कमेरे इनके शंख बन कर बजते रहते हैं और इनके असली मंसूबे को कभी समझ ही नहीं पाते |
इन लोगो की इस षड्यंत्रकारी मीडिया से तंग आ कर ही किसान नेता चौधरी चरण सिंह को एक बार कहना पड़ा था " काश ! मैं ब्राह्मण होता "
' जय योद्धेय '
Never… Never, Dear Vaidwan, never I can be so.
I wanted readers to listen the whole attachment video carefully, I think you have not gone through this video; it changed my thinking for the personality elaborated by Mr Dixit.
[Published on Mar 8, 2013
According to Rajiv Dixit , "Rabindranath Tagore was traitor of India because because this song was sung by Rabindranath Tagore for King George V. It was a homage to the emperor of India who made as slave country.........lateron recomended and got NOBLE Prize as per attached Video]
My feeling are clear:
…..some qualities which your mentioned Jat personalities might not possessed. Wait till those (as in video) qualities are developed by the Class (jats).
Sorry for the inconvenience
Thanks
धर्म (ब्राह्मणवाद) क्या हैं ?
* ब्राह्मणवाद सिर्फ मन की उड़ान , मन की कलाबाजी हैं |
* ब्राह्मणवादी इतने मूर्ख नहीं हैं कि अकेले-दुकेले अपने प्राणों को संकट में डालते फिरे |
* धर्म राज-सत्ता और ब्राह्मण-सत्ता को दृढ़ करने का भारी साधन हैं |
* धर्म वस्तुतः भोग-अर्जन का एक बड़ा रास्ता हैं |
* इस जन्म में परिश्रम बिना अर्जित धन को हम (ब्राह्मण) पहले देवताओ की कृप्या से प्राप्त बतलाते थे ; किन्तु जब देवताओं और उनकी कृप्या पर संदेह किया जाने लगा , तो हमने पुनर्जन्म या पिछले जन्मो के कर्मों का सबसे भारी जाल बिछाया |
* धर्म प्रजा की मशक्कत कि कमाई को मुफ्त में खाने का तरीका हैं ,यह राजवाद , ब्राह्मणवाद , यज्ञवाद , प्रजा को कोई इस जाल से नहीं बचा सकता , जब तक कि वह खुद सचेत न हो , और उसे सचेत होने देना इन स्वार्थियों को पसंद नहीं हैं |
* यह ऐसा व्यापार हैं जिसमे हानि का भय नहीं |
{ स्रोत - राहुल सांकृत्यायन कि पुस्तक ' वोल्गा से गंगा ' }
:- ब्राह्मणवाद को लोग सिर्फ हिन्दू धर्म से ही जोड़ कर न देखे , ब्राह्मणवाद का अभिप्राय सभी धर्मों के ठेकेदारों से हैं और यह ब्राह्मणवाद हर धर्म मे हैं |
* ब्राह्मणवाद सिर्फ मन की उड़ान , मन की कलाबाजी हैं |
* ब्राह्मणवादी इतने मूर्ख नहीं हैं कि अकेले-दुकेले अपने प्राणों को संकट में डालते फिरे |
* धर्म राज-सत्ता और ब्राह्मण-सत्ता को दृढ़ करने का भारी साधन हैं |
* धर्म वस्तुतः भोग-अर्जन का एक बड़ा रास्ता हैं |
* इस जन्म में परिश्रम बिना अर्जित धन को हम (ब्राह्मण) पहले देवताओ की कृप्या से प्राप्त बतलाते थे ; किन्तु जब देवताओं और उनकी कृप्या पर संदेह किया जाने लगा , तो हमने पुनर्जन्म या पिछले जन्मो के कर्मों का सबसे भारी जाल बिछाया |
* धर्म प्रजा की मशक्कत कि कमाई को मुफ्त में खाने का तरीका हैं ,यह राजवाद , ब्राह्मणवाद , यज्ञवाद , प्रजा को कोई इस जाल से नहीं बचा सकता , जब तक कि वह खुद सचेत न हो , और उसे सचेत होने देना इन स्वार्थियों को पसंद नहीं हैं |
* यह ऐसा व्यापार हैं जिसमे हानि का भय नहीं |
{ स्रोत - राहुल सांकृत्यायन कि पुस्तक ' वोल्गा से गंगा ' }
:- ब्राह्मणवाद को लोग सिर्फ हिन्दू धर्म से ही जोड़ कर न देखे , ब्राह्मणवाद का अभिप्राय सभी धर्मों के ठेकेदारों से हैं और यह ब्राह्मणवाद हर धर्म मे हैं |