“When Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi does the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ of Shri Ram Lalla’s idol at Ayodhya, he would be representing every citizen of our great Bharat”.

“Shri Ram embodies the spirit of India. The true spirit of India and Indianness is discipline, truth, honesty, ethics, moral values, acceptance and celebration of diversity, respect for elders, strong family bonds and all such fine human values“

---

SHRI RAM MANDIR – Fulfilment of a divine dream
The Original Unedited Article by Shri Lal Krishan Advani

I am elated beyond words that we are on the verge of realising my most cherished dream of having a grand Shri Ram temple at Ramjanmabhoomi, the birthplace of Shri Ram. On 22nd January 2024, Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi will install the idol of Shri Ram at the beautiful temple in Ayodhya, and I feel blessed that I will witness this historic occasion in my lifetime.

I have always believed that ‘faith’ is the foundation on which rest both a meaningful life of a person and the whole society at large. Faith not only infuses energy and confidence into a person’s life, but also helps give it direction. For me and for crores of Indians, this faith has been our deep reverence for Shri Ram.

Shri Ram embodies the spirit of India. The true spirit of India and Indianness is discipline, truth, honesty, ethics, moral values, acceptance and celebration of diversity, respect for elders, strong family bonds and all such fine human values and Shri Ram is the epitome of all these impeccable human qualities. Hence the title ‘Maryada Purushottam’ (an exemplar among good human beings) by which he is known. He is an ideal for Indians’ aspiration to live a life of higher values.

Shri Ram was also an ideal king- the living embodiment of ‘Dharma’. Hence the concept of ‘Ram Rajya’, the epitome of good governance, was extolled as the ideal for India. Although Shri Ram is the holy religious figure worthy of worship for the Hindus, he is a pre-eminent symbol of India’s cultural heritage and national identity -which belong to all citizens alike.

The story of Shri Ram’s life, the Ramayana, is both a source and a carrier of the continuity of India’s cultural traditions and has greatly influenced the Indian mindset generation after generation, century after century. Therefore, for the last almost 500 years, the reconstruction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya has been a deep desire for countless Indians.

The Ramjanmabhoomi movement for the reconstruction of the temple at the Janmasthan of Shri Ram in Ayodhya proved to be a major watershed in the history of post-1947 India. Its impact on our society and polity, and on our sense of national identity has been tremendous.

In my own political journey, I have always said that the Ayodhya Movement was the most decisive transformational event, which gave me an opportunity to discover India anew, and in the process, rediscover myself.

I feel humbled that destiny made me perform a pivotal duty in the form of the Shri Ram Rath Yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya in 1990.

I believe that before any event finally occurs in reality, it takes shape and form in a person’s mind. At that time, I was feeling that a befitting temple for Shri Ram in Ayodhya would indeed be a certainty one day, and that it was only a matter of time.
A grand Mandir for Shri Ram at Ramjanmabhoomi had been a desire and mission for the Bharatiya Janata Party. When in the mid-1980s the Ayodhya issue rose to the centre-stage of national politics, I was reminded of the time how political stalwarts like Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel, Rajendra Prasad and K M Munshi had, against all odds, effectively steered the reconstruction of another landmark temple in independent India- the Somnath Temple at Prabhas Patan on the coast of Saurashtra in Gujarat.

Somnath was both a witness to, and a target of, multiple foreign invasions during the medieval period. And reconstructing the Somnath temple was a proud testimony of India’s determination to erase the history of bigoted alien attacks and regain its lost cultural treasure.

Sadly, as in the case of Somnath, the temple at the birthplace of Shri Ram in Ayodhya had also become a target of attack by an invader, Babar, who founded the Mughal empire. In 1528, Babar ordered his commander Mir Baqi to erect a mosque at Ayodhya to make the spot a ‘place for descent of angels’- hence the name Babri Masjid.
It is widely believed, and later even confirmed by compelling archeological evidences that there was a pre-existing temple at Ayodhya which was demolished for establishing the mosque.

So in many ways, the Ayodhya movement was the continuation of the spirit of Somnath.
When the BJP decided in 1990 that I, as its President, should lead the Shri Ram Rath Yatra to mobilise people’s support for the Ayodhya movement, it took no time for me to choose Somnath as the starting venue of this historic journey.

On 12th September, 1990, I called a press conference at the party office at 11 Ashoka Road, New Delhi and announced my decision to undertake a 10,000-kilometre-long Rath Yatra, starting from Somnath on 25th September and reaching Ayodhya on 30th October to join the kar seva in Ayodhya, planned by the saints associated with the movement. 25th September was special to me as it is Deendayal Upadhyaya ji’s birth anniversary.
In my autobiography- “My Country My Life”, I have extensively talked about the Ayodhya Movement and the Shri Ram Rath Yatra that I undertook in 1990. On this momentous occasion today, I would like to recall some significant portions from it.
On the morning of 25th September 1990, I offered prayers at the jyotirlingam in Somnath temple. I was accompanied by the present Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi (who was then a promising leader of the BJP), Shri Pramod Mahajan, (who was the General Secretary of the party) other senior functionaries of the party in Gujarat, and members of my family. Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia and Shri Sikander Bakht, both Party Vice-Presidents then, had come to flag off the Rath.

Before the Rath was flagged off, we all paid floral tribute to the imposing statue of Sardar Patel just outside the temple. In my mind, I thanked and drew inspiration from all the great men who had toiled for the reconstruction of the temple. Amidst a large crowd that had gathered to greet and bless us, we climbed the Shri Ram Rath which had been decorated with marigold flowers. Then, to the accompaniment of the sound of the ceremonial conches and full-throated slogans of ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Saugandh Ram ki khate hain mandir wahin banayenge’ (In the name of Ram, we resolve: We shall build the temple there—at Ramjanmabhoomi—itself), the Rath rolled on. In subsequent days, these slogans became identified with my yatra and a song-“Ram Naam Mein Jaadoo Aisa, Ram Naam Man Bhaaye, Man Ki Ayodhya Tab Tak Sooni, Jab Tak Ram Na Aayein…” sung by late Smt. Lata Mangeshkar, India’s Nightingale, became the signature tune of the Rath Yatra wherever it went.

I was truly overwhelmed by the response to the yatra within the first few days of our journey in Gujarat. The Rath was received by tumultuous crowds everywhere—in villages, towns and even along roads where people from nearby hamlets would gather under trees eagerly waiting for the Rath to arrive. The response reached a crescendo in bigger towns and cities, where it would take hours for us to reach the venue of our meetings.

This response was as big, even bigger, in Maharashtra as well as in all the subsequent states that we travelled through. People everywhere greeted the Rath by erecting ceremonial arches and showering flowers. The most astonishing sight for me was the manner in which people, especially women, would come forward and perform aarti and throw coins, as if they were praying in a temple. What I soon realized, was, that for many people, I was secondary and incidental to the campaign. I was only a sarathi or a charioteer; the principal messenger of the Rath Yatra was the Rath itself. And it was worthy of worship as it was headed for Ayodhya for the sacred mission of construction of the Shri Ram Temple at his birthplace.

At this point, I would like to talk a bit about the ‘Rath’ that I travelled in. It was a actually a mini truck that was redesigned to take the shape of a Rath and was provided with basic amenities.

Travelling in a ‘Rath’ was indeed a novel experience for me, but it presented its own set of challenges. For one, it had a small room-cum–washroom at the rear of the vehicle, which could only be used when the vehicle was not in motion, otherwise it was very bumpy. So I recall standing most times on the platform of the moving vehicle, holding on to the front and side grip bars in order to maintain my balance. Of course, this also meant being constantly subject to heat and dust as the platform was open from three sides.

Also while in motion, it was impossible for me to sip water, juice or tea without spilling. So a special sipper bottle was arranged to overcome this issue. As for food, although arrangements were made that the dinner would come from some party worker’s home in whichever city we were to reach for night halt, invariably the last public meeting would only end up close to midnight. So I would usually have just a glass of milk with marmalade on toast.

Another problem we often faced was due to the height of the Rath. Although the party officials had circulated the information about the height of the vehicle to various destinations along the route of the yatra, as we moved through small towns and cities, one of the frequent hold ups used to be the overhead hanging electrical wires. So party workers then arranged for extra long wooden poles to get the wires out of the way and also started moving along with the Rath. Well, all these were really miniscule issues which form just a small part of the beautiful memory of my Shri Ram Rath Ratra.
The most touching moments of the yatra were witnessed in villages and remote hamlets where the piety on the faces of the village folk was of a purer and deeper kind than what I saw in cities. Many of them were either illiterate or nominally educated. They had not learnt about Shri Ram by reading; it was as if the knowledge flowed through them, passed on from one generation to the other, through folk tales or word of mouth, as usually happens in the Indian society.

At many places, I found an odd villager who would come quietly, without shouting any slogans, perform a puja before the Rath, greet me and walk away. I was truly humbled by experiences like these as it gave me a first-hand insight into how deep-rooted religiosity is in the lives of the Indian people. It was the Rath Yatra that made me realise that if I were to communicate the message of nationalism through the religious idiom, I would be able to transmit it more effectively and to a wider audience.

My speeches, delivered mostly from the specially designed raised platform on the vehicle were just about five minutes long, because I had to address nearly twenty to twenty-five such roadside receptions each day. In most towns and cities, I had to get down and address public meetings attended by tens of thousands of people.

I would explain the purpose of the yatra and the circumstances that compelled the BJP to actively participate in the Ramjanmabhoomi movement. Although the people’s response to the Rath Yatra was mainly religious, the focus of my speeches was on nationalism, as I have always believed that the Shri Ram temple issue is intrinsically connected to our sense of Indianness.
A recurrent theme in my speeches was that the power of a positive approach to religious faith can contribute greatly to social transformation and nation-building. I stressed on the equal status that our Muslim brethren enjoyed in independent India as India chose to remain non-theocratic and secular. This, I added, was principally due to the age-old secular ethos of Hinduism. I also appealed to leaders of the Muslim community to respect the Hindu sentiments over Ayodhya.
My yatra was scheduled to enter Deoria in Uttar Pradesh on 24th October 1990. However, as I had anticipated, it was stopped at Samastipur in Bihar on 23rd October and I was arrested by the Janata Dal government in the state, then headed by Shri Laloo
Prasad Yadav. I was taken to an inspection bungalow of the irrigation department at a place called Massanjore near Dumka, on the Bihar-Bengal border.
This action invited angry and spontaneous protests all over the country.

This was a time when there were no mobile phones. The news of my arrest reached my daughter Pratibha, who was in Kolkatta then, in quite an interesting manner. She was looking to hire a cab on way back to her home when the taxi driver told her to hurry up. On her enquiring from him why he was saying so, the taxi driver told her that Advani “Baba” had been arrested and people were fearing a backlash in the form of riots in the city! Two days later, Pratibha spoke to Laloo Prasad Yadav ji, who facilitated her coming to meet me at Massanjore during my detention. I spent five weeks in detention before being released.

Thus ended my Shri Ram Rath Yatra, which was indeed an exhilarating episode in my political life. I felt happy that the Yatra helped in galvanising the aspirations, energies and passions of its countless participants.

A significant debate that started during the course of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was the difference between genuine secularism and pseudo-secularism. On the one hand, there was a groundswell of popular support for the movement. On the other hand, most political parties were shying away from supporting the movement as they feared losing Muslim votes. They succumbed to the lure of this vote-bank politics, and justified it in the name of secularism.

Thus, the Ayodhya issue, whose primary objective was the reconstruction of the Ramjanmabhoomi temple, also became a symbol of reclaiming the true meaning of secularism from the onslaught of pseudo-secularism.

It has been 33 long years since my Shri Ram Rath Yatra. A lot has happened since, including the legal battle which had implicated me and many of my colleagues from the VHP, RSS and the BJP.

However, after almost three decades, on September 30, 2020, the CBI’s special court acquitted me and others and released us from all charges.
It is pertinent to note that while on one hand the protracted legal battle was going on, on the other, not only I, but every karyakarta of the BJP and the Sangh Parivar continued working towards awakening the soul of Indians to realise this dream of restoring Ram Lalla at His rightful abode.

I am very happy that due to the decisive verdict of the Supreme Court in November 2019, the reconstruction of Shri Ram Mandir has happened in an environment of tranquility.

And now that the magnificent Shri Ram Temple is in its final stages of completion, I am filled with a sense of deep gratitude towards the present Government headed by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, all organisations, particularly the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Bharatiya Janata Party, the countless people associated with my yatra, saints, leaders, kar Sevaks and all the people from India and the world, who made valuable contributions and sacrifices in the Ayodhya movement over many decades.

There are two persons who I am missing immensely today. The first one is late Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who had been an integral part of my life- both political and personal, and with whom I shared an unbreakable and everlasting bond of mutual trust, affection and respect.

The second person is my late wife Kamla, who had been the mainstay of stability and a source of unparalleled strength to me, not only during the Shri Ram Rath Yatra, but throughout my long stint in public life.

In the run-up to the upcoming special occasion of 22nd January 2024, the atmosphere in the entire country has truly become ‘Ram-maya’. This is a moment of fulfilment for me, not just as a proud member of the RSS and the BJP, but as a proud citizen of our glorious motherland. My greetings to all my countrymen!

When Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi does the ‘Pran Pratishtha’ of Shri Ram Lalla’s idol at Ayodhya, he would be representing every citizen of our great Bharat. It is my belief and my hope that this temple will inspire all Indians to imbibe Shri Ram’s virtues. I also pray that our great country not only continues to accelerate on the path of becoming a global power, but also presents itself as a sterling example of dignity and decorum in all walks of life.

I bow at the lotus feet of Shri Ram. May He keep everyone blessed.
JAI SHRI RAM!

Watch a documentary on LK Advani’s “Fulfillment of a Divine Dream”

War helps no one on this planet – specially not the people, plants and all living beings who inhabit it. One Vorld One Universe One Mankind is the guiding principle, which will help resolve all issues. One would like to promote world peace, but with dignity for all and without compromise to extremism. There are hardly any who talk about peace in the present scenario in Europe. However two leaders who stand out and are proactive about peace are undoubtedly Modi and Macron. PM Modi’s role came into limelight during SCO summit, but ever since war began he has been talking about peace privately to Putin and also Zelensky. On the other hand President Macron met President Putin in Moscow, way back in February 2022 aiming for a de-escalation.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s advice to Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine war during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit at Samarkand in Uzbekistan has created hopes that perhaps it might be a catalyst to the end of Russia-Ukraine war. While his intervention has received approval from the world leaders, it has also grabbed the attention of leading international press and media

Japanese publication, NHK headlined “Indian PM Modi tells Putin to pursue peace”, Even Chinese media approved of it as the Hong Kong-based l South China Morning Post reported: Now is ‘not a time for war’, India’s Modi tells Russia’s Putin who agrees to ‘end this as soon as possible.’

Politico from US reported; “India’s Modi tells Putin: This is ‘not the era for war” and US News headlines was “Indian PM Modi Tells Russia’s Putin Now ‘Is Not an Era of War”.

On Internationally telecast media, while expressing his concerns about the impact of the war on food and energy security, PM Modi told Putin, “Today’s era is not of war and I have spoken to you about it on the call. Today we will get the opportunity to talk about how we can progress on the path of peace. India and Russia have stayed together with each other for several decades,”

“We spoke several times on the phone about India-Russia bilateral relations and various issues. We should find ways to address the problems of food, fuel security and fertilizers. I want to thank Russia and Ukraine for helping us to evacuate our students from Ukraine,” the Prime Minister added.

International media appreciated PM Modi’s diplomatic tact, who in a friendly manner pushed the concerns of the world at large to its long-standing friend Russia.

CNN appreciated PM Modi’s understanding of the situation and reported ” Indian leader Narendra Modi tells Putin: Now is not the time for war”

Washington Post, headlined “Modi rebukes Putin over war in Ukraine”.

“India’s Leader Tells Putin That Now Is Not an Era for War,” The New York Times said in its headline

Following the SCO summit, India’s role as a peace maker was applauded at the 77th UN General Assembly by world leaders. French President Emmanuel Macron proclaimed that Indian PM Modi was right when he said that time is not for war, not for revenge against the west or for opposing the west against east. It is time for our sovereign equal states to cope together with challenges we face: . German envoy quipped “very well put” to PM Modis remark on the Russia Ukraine conflict. US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan cited Modi’s remark urging Putin to end the war.  Other world leaders like Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky , Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov,also cited Modi’s advice in their speeches. Indian External Affairs Minister summarized; “I am concluding this week with the sense that India really matters more in this polarised world and much of that is also due to the Prime Minister’s leadership, his image, what he has done on the global stage,”

PM Modi also had a telephonic conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wherein as per official sources, he conveyed India’s readiness to contribute to any peace efforts in the Russia-Ukraine crisis. he stated that there can be no military solution to the conflict and reiterated his call for early cessation of hostilities and the need to pursue the path of dialogue and diplomacy..

Unlike India, France did not take a neutral stand at UN and voted against Russia in the security council. Yet even before PM Modi’s advice to President Putin Macron has been advocating a reconciliatory approach. As reported by world media, including EuroNews

As far back as May 2022, French President Emmanuel Macron has warned against humiliating Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, if and when any peace settlement is agreed.

He told reporters in Strasbourg that once the war ends, Moscow and Kyiv will eventually have to sit down and negotiate with each other, so any further tensions will only serve to the detriment of the situation.

“We will have a peace to build tomorrow, let us never forget that,” Macron said on Monday. “I mentioned this earlier. We will have to do this with Ukraine and Russia around the table. The end of the discussion and the negotiation will be set by Ukraine and Russia. But it will not be done in denial, nor in exclusion of each other, nor even in humiliation.”

Macron also laid out his vision of a broader community of European democracies that would allow for deeper cooperation between non-EU countries. (EuroNews 9th May)

Even earlier on February 7, 2022 NY Times headline news was “Macron meets Putin in Moscow, aiming for a de-escalation”. It went on to add “President Emmanuel Macron of France, who has positioned himself at the center of Europe’s furious diplomatic maneuvering over Ukraine, said on Monday that the continent was at a “critical crossroads” as he met in Moscow with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia”..However there were murmurs of disapproval by some other countries watch the vido below to get both sided of the story.

---

Our Columnist Sunil Sarpal recalls the recent background to this war.

The war between USSR and Ukrain broke out approx. 6 months ago.  The cause of disenchantment was that USSR did not want Ukrain joining NATO.  USSR feared that if Ukrain, whose border separates the two nations, join NATO, other NATO affiliated nations’ forces could line up Ukrain border and intimidate USSR.   As of now, the situation has unfolded that 20% Ukrain territory is under USSR control and the war goes on unabated.  The devastation took place because of the war is unprecedented. 

Is Zelenskey responsible for the war or Putin ?

Putin’s invasion of Ukrain proved a total miscalculation.  As days progressed, it seems that the war will go on and on.   Because Ukrain forces retaliated in such a manner that USSR  forces ran away from the warring zone, leaving behind tanks, arma and others weapons in order to save their lives. 

On both sides, the loss of lives and infrastructure took place as never before. 

When war broke out an assurance came from none other than USA to Ukrain that they are whole-heartedly behind them, but USA never sent his forces to Ukrain.  Of course, sanctions and war-related weapons etc have been supplied by them as well as by Germany.  The fear factor on the part of USA could be that if their forces join hands with Ukrain, it would turn out to be a world war.  

If Ukrain President Zelenskey is so very stubborn to prolong the war and asking for help from USA and other nations, then Ukrain inviting more trouble.  The complete devastation of Ukrain could be averted if Zelenskey relents to Putin’s stand.  On the face  of USSR might, Ukrain’s defeat is on the cards whatever or how much coming their way. 

In this war, both Putin and Zelenskey are held responsible because of their respective stands.  Attempts have been made to kill both Putin and Zelenskey separately thru bombs but both escaped unscathed.

---

But will the momentum for peace, proposed by pacifists like Modi and Macron, gather pace or will temporary victories or setbacks of either side stall the move towards détente, remains to be seen – Manohar Khushalani.

It is Mahavir Jayanti today, one of the most important days in the Jain religious calendar. As the Jain community celebrates the birth anniversary of Bhagwan Mahavir by exchanging greetings on email or whatsApp messages, it seems Nature has taken upon itself to celebrate this auspicious day on a grand scale, Universal in nature. The Universe knows no geographical boundaries, hence the divine celebrations are playing out on the entire planet.

The Corona virus has mandated we rethink how we live, consume, and treat others. I will briefly mention only two principles that Lord Mahavir gave to the world that seem like a balm on the Corona-ed human soul.

The current state of the world is very appropriately reflected by the opening lines of Charles Dickens famous novel A Tale of Two Cities: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, …” It tells about a time of chaos, conflicts, and despair, as well as happiness. It, in fact, tells us about the time of extreme opposites without any in-betweens.

Something similar is unfolding on planet earth today.

As I sit pondering over the birth celebrations of Lord Mahavir since when I was a child, the images of community events where school-children performed plays and songs depicting the life of the Teerthankara, the liberated One, flash before my eyes. It was a time of community gathering, celebrations, much fun and socializing, followed by lots of sumptuous food eaten together. I recall with much nostalgia the annual speech I was asked to deliver, in English (at age 7 onwards, because I studied in a convent school!), on his life and principles. I knew by rote the main tenets of Jainism and Lord Mahavir’s three-fold path of Right Faith, Right Knowledge and Right Conduct. For many years it continued thus, and I could have rattled off the entire Four-fold or Eight-fold Path (they are different for ascetics and householders) without pausing for a breath. Yet there was no deeper thought, no time for reflection on the teachings of this noble, liberated soul. Posters and banners proclaiming the lofty tenets of the world’s most non-violent religion were put up all over town, but how much was followed by people is anyone’s guess. As indeed it often happens in most religions.

However, today, as I sit locked up in my house – Coronavirus indeed has locked up indoors practically all humanity, I am having some Eureka moments! Yes, the wisdom of all my Mahavir-Jayanti speeches, scripted by people more learned than a 7-year-old, is gradually dawning on me. I feel the lessons humans have failed to learn by volition are being taught by Nature, à la science experiments demonstrated in a lab. Humans are perforce made to sit back while Nature takes over and teaches. The coping stone of Mahavir’s teaching has been “Live and Let Live,” kindness to all beings and cruelty towards none. He even went to tell humanity that plants too have a life, and therefore deserving mindfulness from humans.

The fact that the deadly Corona virus most probably originated from wet animal markets in China has forced mankind to rethink cruelty towards animals. In India most slaughter houses are shut, people are shunning animal flesh, eating healthy and vowing to continue with their kindness towards other living creatures. Humans are not the only inheritors of this beautiful planet. We have encroached in most downright manner, the habitat of birds and animals, cocking a snook at the principle of “Live and Let Live”. Now when the world, locked up behind closed doors, sees animals hitherto unseen on the roads roam freely, does it realize that in our race “to live” we forgot to “let others live”. We need to let the animals and birds, the air and water, sky and earth breathe and own their space in the universe. Our rapacious ways and the choices we make will not only kill them, but spell our own doom. In fact, we can live only if we let others live. The choice we had in “Live and Let Live” is long gone.

Another important tenet that Mahavir gave to humanity, and my most favorite one, is the beautiful precept of Aparigraha, or, in simplistic terms non-attachment to material things. Aparigraha is one of the virtues in Jainism, and one that was uncannily prescient when Mahavir expounded it more than 2,500 years ago. It is also one of the five vows that both householders and ascetics must observe. Non-Violence, Non-Stealing, and Truthfulness we all believe are necessary virtues, but when it comes to Aparigraha we are neither aware nor believe the same is very important virtue in higher pursuit of life.

Aparigraha is the virtue of non-possessiveness, non-grasping or non-greediness. Aparigraha is the opposite of parigrah, and refers to keeping the desire for possessions to what is necessary or important, depending on one’s life-stage and context.

In my current ruminative mood, I was wondering that the end of winter is usually the time for big-ticket sales in all shopping malls as well as online commerce sites. At this time of the year, one would have seen teeming crowds stocking up on “discounted goods,” unmindful of their need. But forced lock-downs the world over have seen people managing with what they have and no one is any the worse for it. When man‘s avarice could not be checked by any wise person’s advice, Nature had to step in and teach mankind a lesson it is not likely to forget any time soon. Instead of hoarding unwanted stuff, most people are decluttering their homes and spring-cleaning wardrobes. The world is seeing the benefit of minimalist life. This minimalist lifestyle, or Aparigraha was preached by Lord Mahavir at a time when the world probably was still unspoilt by abundance of material possessions. While excess consumption leads to bigger houses, faster cars, fancier technology, and cluttered homes, it never brings happiness. This, the world is being forced to see in the times of Corona virus. “A tomb now suffices him for whom the whole world was not sufficient,” said Alexander, the great Greek conqueror about himself just before he died.

We don’t need a full house, we need a full life. This is going to be a life-changing resolution. Lord Mahavir’s other teachings of Forgiveness, Compassion and Sacrifice are as pertinent in the new world order when there seems to be a tectonic shift in human consciousness. Of that later!

Mirror To Mirror with Former BBC Correspondent Krishan Tyagi

Pakistan never recognised that Jammu & Kashmir enjoyed a special status in the Union of India through Article 370 and Article 35A in the Constitution of India. Pak government, establishment and media call the Indian region of Jammu and Kashmir “Maqbooza Kashmir” (Occupied Kashmir) using the formal phrase “Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK)”. But the moment the Modi government decided to abandon those provisions, Pakistan decided it is a violation of some agreement with Pakistan! Pakistani establishment claimed the Article 370 could not be removed unilaterally by India.

As the Indian parliament passed the resolutions to abrogate Article 370 (and Article 35A as a consequence) and reorganised the region into two Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladhakh, Pakistan reacted sharply. Pakistan’s national assembly in a joint session condemned India for unilaterally changing the status of Jammu & Kashmir. Pakistan downgraded the diplomatic relations with India by sending the Indian envoy back home; the trade with India has been completely stopped; the train and bus services between the two countries have been stopped; Pakistani air space has again been restricted for Indian planes; and most importantly, Pakistan is taking the matter to the United Nations Security Council and International Court of Justice, if possible. Prime Minister Imran Khan has phoned world leaders and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has visited Beijing seeking China’s support at the UNSC in order to make India withdraw its measure in relation to Jammu and Kashmir.

There has not been much of a reaction from the Indian government to the unilateral measures taken by the Pak government. The only response from the Indian government that we saw during the week was that the Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Ravish Kumar asked Pakistan to review its decision to downgrade the ties with India.

However, the Indian media as well as Pak media have been taking great interest in the developments in Pakistan in the field. The Indian media in general dismissed the Imran Khan government’s attempts to garner international support against India as desperate and fruitless efforts. For instance, Palki Sharma Upadhyay at WION News, India’s global news channel, wished Pakistan “Good Luck” in its efforts. On the other hand, as expected Pak media has been very supportive of their government.

Different television channels have joined their government in severely criticising the present Indian government’s measure to absorb “disputed Jammu and Kashmir” into India; condemned “Indian atrocities on Kashmiri people”; and used abusive words for Indian prime minister Narendra Modi.

On the Pakistani television news channel 24 News,one of the senior most Pak journalists, Najam Sethi who also believed that India has acted inappropriately, presented a very realistic assessment of the options available to the Pakistan establishment in its opposition to the abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution in relation to Jammu and Kashmir.

Mr Sethi reported that there was no positive response from Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the US or China to PM Khan’s phone calls and FM Qureshi’s visit to Beijing. These countries at present have very strong trade and investment relations with India, and it is not in their national interest to annoy India. China particularly at this moment is not very happy with Pakistan. Turkey is the only country that has supported Pakistan on the issue. Basically, Pakistan doesn’t have much of international support.

Najam Sethi also talked of the UN Resolutions on Kashmir proposing a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir. Generally the people in Pakistan think the plebiscite was supposed to take place in the Indian region of Jammu & Kashmir only. Because the plebiscite did not take place, Pakistan calls Indian region of Jammu and Kashmir, as mentioned, “Indian Occupied Kashmir” and the area under its own control “Azad Kashmir (Free Kashmir)”. Mr Sethi informed the 24 News viewers that according to the concerned UN Resolutions, the plebiscite was to be held in the whole of Jammu & Kashmir, INCLUDING THE KASHMIR UNDER PAKISTANI CONTROL.

However, as mentioned in the review, even Mr Sethi, a very mature journalist, omitted the extremely important detail of the UNSC Resolution 47, adopted on 21 April 1948, wherein the proposal to hold a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir was made. The Resolution had recommended a three-step processfor the resolution of the dispute between India and Pakistan. In the first step, Pakistan was asked to withdraw all its nationals from Kashmir. In the second step, India was asked to progressively reduce its forces to the minimum level required for law and order. In the third step, India was asked to appoint a plebiscite administrator nominated by the United Nations who would conduct a free and impartial plebiscite. These steps were sequential, meaning the second step was to be taken up on the completion of the first one, and the third step was to be taken up on the completion of the second one. Mr Sethi kept quiet on the fact that the plebiscite did not take place because Pakistan did not fulfil the first condition. It never withdrew its nationals from Kashmir. So, the reality of the UN Resolutions on Kashmir is that they could not be acted upon because Pakistan did not keep its part. The responsibility for the non-implementation of the UN Resolutions lies with Pakistan.

Even more importantly, the fact is that the present state of Pakistan is not the state of Pakistan that was a party against the state of India in the UN Resolutions relating to Kashmir in 1948-1949. THAT STATE OF PAKISTAN NO LONGER EXISTS. More than half of the population of that State of Pakistan transformed itself into another State called Bangladesh in 1971. So, a smaller part of that State cannot claim itself to be the inheritor of the erstwhile State of Pakistan, the party to the dispute with India, even if it calls itself Pakistan. In that Resolution, present day Bangladesh, the then East Pakistan, was a joint claimant as a part of Pakistan. The present day Pakistan can only pursue that claim if Bangladesh joins it in pursuing that claim.

So, all the UN Resolutions relating to Jammu and Kashmir, where the State of India and the then State of Pakistan were the parties to the dispute, are null & void after the transformation of East Pakistan into Bangladesh.

But, no one including Indian political leaders and Indian media has ever told Pakistan.

Courtesy mirrortomirror.com

In a huge move, Home Minister Amit Shah on August 5, 2019, announced scrapping of Article 370 of the Constitution that provides special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. With it was also laid to rest the highly discriminatory provision of the state that penalized a woman for marrying an outsider but protected a male in similar circumstances.
Article 370 and 35A – as introduced in the Indian Constitution for granting special status to Jammu and Kashmir, were a fundamental breach of women’s fundamental rights as Indian citizens. A glorious tradition that believes in

Yatra naryastu pujyante ramante tatra Devata,
yatraitaastu na pujyante sarvaastatrafalaah kriyaah

“Where Women are honoured, divinity blossoms there, and where women are dishonored, all action no matter how noble it may be, remains unfruitful”,

the state of J&K deprived its daughters their basic right if they married an outsider. In Jammu and Kashmir, citizenship was unequal among men and women. The irony was never lost on the daughters when the entire country thronged to the most revered shrine of Mata Vaishno Devi, yet the same state displayed an unsavory bias against its girls.

What an anomaly. If a woman from J&K married a foreigner she would lose her right to inherit, own or buy immovable property in the state, whereas no such law affected a male in a similar situation. Consider this, if a boy from the state married a girl from outside, his wife not only became a state-subject (the certificate that confers special privileges on the state residents), but their children enjoyed the status by default. Whereas, if that boy had a sister and she also chose to marry an outsider, she stood to lose her state-subject and all the related rights. Her husband would never be welcomed as a traditional ‘Jamai’ in the state. Their children were aliens. All because of her gender!

You might exclaim, “Are you joking!” Yet, that’s exactly what it was. A poor joke played by the state on its own daughters.

An interesting example is the well-known family of Farooq Abdullah himself. Farooq Abdullah married a British woman and their son Omar Abdullah got to become the Chief Minister of the state. Omar’s wife was also not from the state, yet it did not impact his rights. On the other hand, Omar’s sister when she married an outsider she lost all rights as a state subject.

On October 7, 2002, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court overturned the established legal position. The court ruled that by marrying an outsider, a J&K woman did not lose her permanent-resident status. The decision was contested by the state’s political parties, who drafted a bill known as the Daughters Bill or the Permanent

Residents’ (Disqualification) Bill stripping a woman of permanent resident-status if she married a foreigner. Although the bill was not passed, a similar bill was introduced in March 2010. This bill was also not passed. It, however, had considerable political support

The 2002 ruling came after a bunch of women went to court to fight against the discriminatory nature of the law. The battle, however, was only partially won. Women marrying outside the state could inherit their parental property, but the rider was they still could not pass it on to their children.

Women have had to fight for their rights through history. However, in a modern India that enshrines equal rights to its women in the Constitution, the state of Jammu and Kashmir continued to practice the anachronistic denial of fundamental rights on the basis of gender.

August 5, 2019, spelt a historic victory for the women of the state. August 15 is India’s Independence Day, but in my opinion women of J&K could herald their independence 10 days in advance. By one fell well-deliberated swoop, Home Minister Amit Shah set the anomaly right. The Damocles sword was lifted from the neck of many a woman of the state who had inherited property, but by virtue of having married an outsider could not pass it on to her children. They always feared losing the property.

Besides other political and geographical implications of the August 5, 2019 move by the Home Minister under the aegis of PM Narendra Modi, it is a big day for the women of the state who now feel on par with men in their citizenship rights.

“I am a woman with thoughts and questions and shit to say. I say if I’m beautiful. I say if I’m strong. You will not determine my story–I will.” -Amy Schumer

OneVorld is first with a detailed and most comprehensive break up. After a sweeping victory in Indian Elections, as per information received from reliable sources, this is the likely cabinet of Prime minister elect Narendra Modi who will be sworn in by the President of India at 7 pm, today 30th May in Rashtrapati Bhawan. The event is being managed like a suspense thriller. To keep the interest of the viewers alive, it’s possible that TV viewers will know about the Ministers during the ceremony itself. Meanwhile OneVorld brings to you a blow by blow account of the likely Ministers of the cabinet.
Sources say PM Modi and BJP president Amit Shah will be the only two leaders dialing lawmakers to inform them they will be ministers.
The lawmakers were also advised not to believe Newspaper reports and trust only the direct calls made to them

On Sunday 12 August 2018, a US-based group called ‘Sikhs for Justice’ organised a rally in London (UK) to demand what it called ‘Sikh Referendum 2020’ in the Indian state of Punjab to find whether Sikhs there want a separate State for themselves.
Before discussing what such groups exactly want, first a couple of simple questions for this group –

Does the group ‘Sikhs for Justice’ imply that they are the only Sikhs who stand for justice, and those Sikhs who are not their members don’t stand for justice? What is the meaning of the group giving the title ‘Sikhs for Justice’ exclusively to themselves?
Secondly, do the ‘Sikhs for Justice’ demand ‘Justice for All’ or ‘Justice for Sikhs only’. If it is the latter, then you should be calling your organisation ‘Sikhs for Justice for Only Sikhs’, rather than presenting yourselves as ‘saviours of everybody’. Let the group’s potential followers and observers know that the group members are not concerned about non-Sikhs – no matter how much indignities are inflicted and atrocities are committed upon them.
On the other hand, if ‘Sikhs for Justice’ stand for ‘Justice for All’, then the group needs to answer what have they done from their own side to provide justice to the families of innocent people killed by the followers of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, presumably their own spiritual leader? Before he was flushed out of the Golden Temple, Mr Bhindranwale led a gang of (Sikh) terrorists who killed hundreds of innocent Hindus, Nirankaris and Sikhs. According to the independently compiled reports, in the two year period between 4 August 1982, when the so-called Dharma Yudh Morcha (Sikh Jihad) was launched, and 3 June 1984 there were more than 1200 violent incidents in which 410 persons were killed and 1180 injured. In the year 1984 itself between 1 January and 3 June, 775 violent incidents happened killing 298 and injuring 525. All this happened before the Operation Blue Star and before the anti-Sikh riots following Indira Gandhi’s assassination. Do those innocent victims not deserve any justice? Before you ask for justice for yourself, shouldn’t you be asking for and doing something towards justice to the victims of your own violent campaign that provoked anti-Sikh sentiment in India in the first place?

Coming to the main issue, the State Sikh separatist elements crave for is called Khalistan, the land of the pure! The thinking is to have a state on the lines of Pakistan, the land of the pious! Pakistan and Khalistan are synonyms.

Now, a verse from the Granth Sahib, the Sikhs’ holy book, written by the 15th century Indian mystic poet and saint Kabir, says –

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya, Qudrat Ke Sab Bande!
Aik Noor Te Sab Jag Upajiya, Kaun Bhale Ko Mande!!
(God created the light from which all human-beings were born! The whole universe was born from one source; So, whom would you call good and whom bad!!)

The verse is widely quoted in Sikh teachings. So, the question the proponents of Khalistan need to answer is – Who do they call ‘pure’ and whom they would call ‘impure’, and on what basis?

The Sikh Gurus have also said, “Manas ki jaat sabai eikai pahachaanbau”, meaning ‘All human-beings are one caste; we must treat them all equally.’ So, on what basis are the proponents of Khalistan discriminating between Sikhs and non-Sikhs, and demanding a State exclusively for Sikhs? Are they not violating the teachings of the Gurus, while claiming to be their disciples?

By demanding an exclusive State for Sikhs, the proponents of Khalistan are in fact saying Sikhs can’t live with non-Sikhs, definitely not with Hindus, who are basically their cousins. If you can’t live with your cousins who are the same race as you, who speak the same language as you, who have the same ancestors as you, and who respect your religion as much as their own, which is your ancestors’, how would then Sikhs live with people of other races and other religions (in whose eyes they are still pagans) in Britain, Canada and the US? When are they going to demand separate Sikh States in those countries? In your “struggle” for Khalistan against India, you expect to get support from Western countries! Do you expect the people in Western countries to be totally dumb and not see the danger you pose to them in the future? People of Canada have not forgotten 23 June 1985 when you blew up midair Air India flight 182 operating on the Montréal-London-Delhi-Bombay route off the coast of Ireland killing 329 people. Among them were 22 Indian nationals and 280 Canadian nationals. Do you think the Canadian people thanked you for that?

You are demanding a State on the pattern of Pakistan that was created exclusively for Muslims. That State was based on ethnic cleansing. It was established by chasing out Hindus and Sikhs out their lands where they had lived for thousands of years. Now, you are craving for a State exclusively for Sikhs! You’re dreaming to chase out Hindus and other non-Sikhs from Punjab! Do you know what repercussions it could have for the Sikhs living in other parts of India? More than 5 million Sikhs live outside Punjab, in other states of India. Before demanding Khalistan, have you consulted those Sikhs? Are you going to invite all those people to join Khalistan? Do you have a settlement plan for them? Are they prepared for this? Why the socalled referendum should be confined to the state of Punjab?

Today you demand a separate State in the name of Sikhism. Suppose tomorrow a minority community among Sikhs such as Ramgarhias (who even today have separate gurudwaras) or Dalit Sikhs demand a separate State for themselves, would you accept the demand?

Would the proponents of Khalistan treat all Sikhs equally? Would you all drop your surnames showing your castes such as Sandhus and Siddhus? Why have you not done it so far?

You say Pakistan is your friend. According to the 1941 census, in some of the districts that now form Pakistan the Sikh population was as high as 19.8%. After the creation of Pakistan it dropped to 0.1% in all of them. What do you think Pakistan did to its Sikh population?
The Pakistani army and ISI might still “love” you and help you in your “fight” against India. However, in the eyes of Islam, you are still ‘disbelievers’. People like Hafez Sayeed still consider you Kafir (infidel). So, what treatment do you expect from Pakistani establishment where Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhavi, Maulana Masood Azhar and Hafez Sayeed wield power, once Sikhs get separated from India?

Different proponents of Khalistan have made different territorial claims for the formation of Khalistan. If you are after the territory Maharaja Ranjit Singh ruled, then most of it is in Pakistan now. Are you sure that Pakistan would allow you to take over that region? Some of your leaders have made claims over Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and parts of Rajasthan too. What is the basis of these claims over these areas, where Sikhs form a tiny minority of the population, that too through immigration from Punjab in the recent decades? Or do you think you would be able to chase out non-Sikhs from those areas too?

Historically Sikhism has been pan-Indian. The Granth Sahib draws from works of saints in North as well as South India (a large part of it is written in Khari Boli and Braj Bhasha, and not in Punjabi), and many of the important seats of Sikhism such as Nankana Sahib in Pakistan, Sri Patna Sahib in Bihar and Hazur Sahib in Maharashtra are outside the Indian state of Punjab.

So, how are you going to follow the dictum Raj Bina Nahin Dharam Chale Hai (without self-rule a religion can’t keep going) with many important seats of Sikhism still outside the raj (rule) of Khalistan/Sikhistan?

The proponents of Khalistan also need to inform their potential followers a bit about the character of the proposed State –
As you also believe Dharam Bina Sab Dalle Malle Hai (without religion everyone gets trampled upon), first and foremost question is, what would be the position of clergy in the governmental system of Khalistan? You were happy for Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale to occupy the Golden Temple and stockpile a large quantity of weapons and ammunition there.

Would in your Khalistan both the government and the religion be run by the clergy sitting in the Golden Temple and they would be allowed to store weapons & ammunition in gurudwaras and keep an army? Or would there be an elected government? If the government would be formed through elections, what power the clergy would have over the government ‘to stop it from trampling over everyone’?

Or would you follow the Pakistan model where the army has the overriding power over the elected government, and religious clergy is kept subordinate to the government. If you adopt that model, how would the dictum of ‘Dharam Bina Sab Dalle Malle Hai’ be taken care of?

Assuming Punjabi in Gurumukhi to be the official language, and being “progressive” leaders you would like people to learn English too. But would people be allowed to learn other foreign languages such as Hindi, Urdu, Persian, etc and watch foreign films such as Hindi and English movies, and whether they would be allowed to have full access to the internet? Such freedoms could have corrupting influence on the “pure” people of Khalistan, you know! What dress code men and women would be made to follow? If a man wants to cut his hair, or shave his beard, what punishment would they be given? Basically, how would you deal with a ‎bajjarprati?

The most important question is – Whether there would be any freedom of religion at all in Khalistan? One would assume going back into the Hindu fold would not be tolerated in Khalistan. You would most probably have death penalty for such people! But what if a person wants to get converted into Islam or Christianity, how would they be dealt with? Would you kill them too, or would you let them change their religion?

Remember, if you let people change their religion, theoretically everyone can change their religion, and the Khalistan could disappear. It is not entirely impossible – Sethis, Bajwas, Cheemas and Ranas in Pakistan got converted from Sikhism to Islam. On the other hand, if you bar people from changing into Islam, do you expect to have friendly relations with Pakistan? Furthermore, if you bar people from converting into Christianity, how those of you who live in Western countries would justify your right to profess and propagate your religion in these countries? What if these primarily Christian countries bar you from practicing any non-Christian faith? You would be denying the citizens of Khalistan the rights that you enjoy yourself in the West. Would that be justifiable? You murdered Nirankari Chief, you attacked followers of other cults and faiths! And, you expect the West and the World to support you! Pakistan may support you till you get separated from India. Do you believe Pakistan to continue to coddle you, particularly when some of you talk of breaking up Pakistan too!

You proclaim Sikhs are a separate nation and your history starts only from the time of Sikh Gurus (about 500 years ago), and you have no connection with the Hindus! How has this come about? Are Sikhs a different species and were airdropped by ‘God’ into the land of Punjab! Contrary to your belief, no such thing happened – Get your DNA checked and you would find that you have the same blood as Jats of Haryana, Rajputs of Rajasthan, Khatris of Punjab and the rest of Hindus. Your ancestors were the same as those of the Hindus. This is a physical fact.

But you have developed such hatred towards your ancestors that you hate the connection with them – actually you don’t even acknowledge the connection. Well, how would you feel if a section of your descendants hates you the same way? Imagine one of your grandsons or great grandsons turning their back on Sikhism and calling you ‘backward thinking’! You think it cannot happen? Your ancestors also never thought that their descendants would hate them the way you do. There was a convention among the Hindus of Punjab. They used to make one of their sons join Sikh panth. They never imagined that their descendants would disown and hate them. The law of nature is – What goes around, comes around – if you hate your ancestors, your descendants would do the same to you.

You are hankering after a homeland for Sikhs, and you say that India is the homeland of Hindus only. Would you then say that India is not the homeland of Jains, whose religious philosophy and traditions separate from the so-called Hindus are much older than yours – more than two thousand years old?

You may not, but the rest of the world can see – India is the homeland of not merely Hindus. India is the birthplace of Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism along with Sanatan Dharma. And India is the homeland of every person who calls themselves Indian, whatever their race or faith. India is certainly the homeland of Sikhs. How can it not be the homeland of Sikhs when a Sikh became the prime minister of India twice in the space of 15 parliaments after Independence! There is no top position in the country that Sikhs, with less than 2% population, have not occupied.

Khalistan is primarily a Diaspora construct. The first known proponent of Khalistan, Davinder Singh Parmar migrated to London in 1954 and asserted the demand for an independent state of Khalistan. And the chief proponent of Khalistan was Jagjit Singh Chohan who moved to the United Kingdom, to start his campaign for creation of Khalistan, after losing the Punjab Assembly elections in 1969. It was Chohan who raised the Khalistani flag in Birmingham in 1970, and placed an advertisement in the New York Times in 1971 proclaiming an independent Sikh state.

Most of the Groups such as Babbar Khalsa International, International Sikh Youth Federation, and Sikhs for Justice also are based in the US, Canada and the UK. So would you really go back to Khalistan if it ever gets formed? Or do you just want to push the Sikhs of India into a swamp?
Don’t you think, you have done enough damage to the Sikhs – from being seen as ‘Sardar ji’ (leader/protector), they were reduced to ‘suspected terrorists’ all over India at one time; their job prospects and business interests suffered; and economically from Number One position in India, Punjab, though still above the Indian average, has drastically come down in its ranking among the states – the thirteenth position in 2016-17.

Just to say, immature Justin Trudeau might be romancing with you, but the people of Canada aren’t. They were aghast at Mr Trudeau’s antics, as you might have noticed by the reaction in the Canadian media, when he was dancing with Khalistanis at the Taj Mahal during his last unwelcome visit to India. The UK authorities might allow you to hold a rally in London, but people in the UK, France, Belgium, Spain, and Germany have had their fair share of Islamic terror, and haven’t got any more appetite for supporting terrorist organisations against other countries. Your track record isn’t exactly very peaceful.

Long gone are the days when anti-India elements used to get support from Western establishments. Among the Indian Sikh community there is zilch support for you. Whether you hold a rally in London or New York, you would get nowhere.
It might be an idea that you now pack up and go home, and let the Land of the Gurus have peace and prosperity as it was before you developed a craving for the mirage called Khalistan.

Copyright © 2018 Krishan Tyagi. All Rights Reserved.

some feedbacks received by the author on his personal website:

As always, your article is well written, informative and above all educative and rational.”
Mukat Singh, Educationist

“It’s a very well researched and logically advanced sharp rebuttal of the Khalistani movement. Thank you for sharing.”
Shivkant Sharma, former Sr Producer, BBC World Service

“The questions raised are very appropriate.”
Sardar Jagmohan Singh

“I found it a very passionate argument against Khalistan.  I liked the fact that you quote from Sikh scriptures and remind people of the terrorism that Khalistanis carried out in the eighties.  The facts you give lend a lot of weight to your argument.  The only thing I can say against the article, is that I suspect some people won’t like it at all.  Personally, I think the points you make are very valid.”
Jeanice, Development Activist

“Very impressed with the article!  These elements pose a challenge to the Sikh community.”
Kailash Budhwar, former Head of the BBC Hindi Service