Archaeological Excavations Are Political

There’s news of the ASI excavating a “Harappa-like site” in Keezhadi, Tamil Nadu. The site is actually 1200 years younger than Harappa and 2000 km away from the Harappa / Mohenjodaro area.

In any case, I wanted to make a small point: archaeological excavations are political. They dig for political benefit.

Now they’re digging in Tamil Nadu because they want proof for foregone conclusions about the history of the most politically active linguistic people in India. Not that they’ll find them, but they feel compelled to try.

The Vaigai river is nothing compared to the Kaveri or Krishna in its expanse, and it doesn’t take an archaeologist to persist in digging on the banks of these rivers in Karnataka.

They don’t pay as much attention to Karnataka because we’re pretty-much politically dead from the point of view of ‘national’ parties which run the Govt. of India which runs the Archaeological Survey of India. Governments don’t dig where the dead live. They dig to make graves for the living.

A Personal Note After Attending a Conference Held by Balu’s Research Group

Last weekend I attended a 2-day conference titled Dharma & Ethics – VIII: Revisiting Swami Vivekananda. It was conducted by Prof S . N. Balagangadhara’s research group at Alva’s Engineering College, Mudabidri, Karnataka. I presented a paper titled Swami Vivekananda’s Ideas on Hindu Reform. It’s been available for free download on this site for years now: just check the right sidebar. I believe we’ll have a video of my presentation soon.

You probably know that I’ve previously criticized some of the output coming out of this group, including Prof. Balu’s thesis that there’s no religion in India. So what’s going on?

Just this: I read his Heathen in His Blindness with a keen eye, I realized that he has hit upon a goldmine inasmuch as the social sciences are concerned. The book sheds a lot of light on how cultural differences played out when the Europeans set foot on India. Specifically, I agree with Balu, now, that there’s no religion in India and that Hinduism cannot be called a religion.

This doesn’t mean I agree with everything the group has published or publishes. Wholesale agreeing or disagreeing is for the weak of mind. (The conference itself proved that this group is actually quite heterogeneous. It agrees on some things and disagrees on some. For those who can’t wait to hear, I think it can be safely stated that most of the papers presented in the conference were critical of Vivekananda. I didn’t see any of the usual mindless prostration.)

I have a long list of discussions and arguments I’ve had over several years with the people in Balu’s group, including Prof. Rajaram Hegde of Kuvempu University.

At one point of time, I had pointed out an error in Prof Hegde’s reading of the Apashudradhikarana section of the Brahma Sutras, specifically in the commentary by Adi Shankara. This was on – a site which I painfully decided to stop contributing to after being ill-treated for speaking the truth.

However, the episode only brought me closer to Prof. Hegde who actually agreed with me and like a true seeker of truth, told me that he stands corrected. I met him twice afterwards, including at last weekend’s conference. I was there because of him.

It’s not just that I ‘quit’. I also quit the group’s email discussion group on yahoo, again because actual discussion had slowly become impossible. But then I met the members of the group in real life last week: Prof. Shanmukha, Dunkin Jalki, Marianne Keppens, Prof. Jakob de Roover, etc., etc.. The experience was totally different. Actual discussions happened, and I’m glad I went to the conference.

When I wrote my book, The Pyramid of Corruption, I hadn’t read Balu. Therefore, I do call Hinduism a religion in it – like everyone else. However, I do add the following qualifier:

[S]ome people question whether there is any single entity called Hinduism at all, but I use the word as a collective noun for all the religious systems that have taken birth on the Indian subcontinent.

I criticize the caste angle to this Hinduism, and I continue to do so. Balu has unleashed a storm by showing that this Hinduism is different from what the Europeans called as Hinduism. Most people have the European definition in mind, and that’s what makes Balu’s thesis very important.

In any case, as a result of what I’ve learnt from Balu, I’m willing to remove all references to “Hinduism” and “religion” in my book. That will take away nothing from my thesis. My criticism of caste will remain, and so will the idea of the pyramid of corruption. What will go away is any suggestion (I can’t recall any) that the pyramid is deified by a nonexistent religion. In fact, I’ve explicitly stated that the pyramid wasn’t a proactive creation:

I don’t want to give the impression that the Aryan Pyramid of corruption was a perfectly executed ‘project’ with some sort of strict central control.

In the words of Balu’s group, the words “with some sort of strict central control” would change to “with religious sanction”. Balu points at the absence of this central control, more specifically via a “holy book”, when he says there’s no religion in India.

My book remains as relevant as before, but I’m willing to rewrite it in the new language I’ve learnt from Balu. I’m saying “willing to rewrite” because I no longer want to proactively go out and publish it myself. As the dismal sales of my book have proved, and as the drop in hits to this website have proved, I don’t think anyone has time for philosophical matters affecting society. There’s no time left after going through all the bullshit pouring into newsfeeds.

Besides, The Truth is not something I’m willing – any longer – to try and insert into newsfeeds or even the old-school email inbox. While I’ve already stopped broadcasting on facebook and twitter because of the low return on investment and high pain, even emails have proved equally useless. 80% of people who got this essay in their inboxes didn’t even open the email. Most of those who opened it didn’t care to read even the first paragraph fully. If you’ve read every sentence till here, you belong to a statistically insignificant group. Most who read this just jumped to this paragraph without reading in sequence (like reading should be).

So why not just keep The Truth to myself, maybe just murmur it to myself here on the website? Shouldn’t the thirsty should go to the well, like I went to the conference? Vice versa is a waste of time and energy, useless. So if at all I have something to say, I’ll say it on my website and be done with it. I’m stopping all sorts of distribution right away.

8 Reasons Why It’s Clumsy for Kannadigas to Chant ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’

1. It’s Hindi. We can no longer afford to accept Hindi imposition. Hindi must go from public places in Karnataka yesterday.

2. It’s political. Some people will pretend it’s not, but it is. We can no longer afford to be tutored by others on what political slogans to shout and which EVM (electronic voting machine) button to press. This docility is killing us.

3. The Kannadized version of Bharat, i.e., Bharata, doesn’t go well with pure Kannada words denoting mother. Thus, while Kannada Taayi is euphonic and nobody questions whether it’s good Kannada, Bharata Taayi sounds alien; it’s also difficult to utter because of the mahaprana in Bha and the unfortunate repetition of ta at the junction of the two words. Nobody says Bharata Taayi. You can’t mix Bharata with other pure Kannada words for mother, either. Bharatamma or Bharatavva are both unacceptable. Nobody says that. On the other hand, Kannadamma and Kannadavva are perfect Kannada words. Note that Maataa is Sanskrit, as is Bharata, and the two words obviously go well together. But when we say Bharata Maataa, it’s not really Kannada. It’s an imported term which cannot be easily translated into Kannada using pure Kannada words. In other words, thinking of Bharat Maataa as our mother requires us to import the words in which to think so, taking the whole process quite far away from our hearts.

4. Even if the Hindi slogan is translated to Kannada as (say) Bhaarata Maatege Jayavagali, it does not come with a universally accepted meaning clarifying the chanter’s stance on his language, its speakers, and their historical abode. The chanter could actually be wishing Bharat Maate well at the cost of Kannada, Kannadigas, and Karnataka. The fact that the sentence is Kannada doesn’t provide the missing clarity.

5. If chant a slogan we must, we Kannadigas have Sirigannadam Gelge Sirigannadam Baalge. By chanting this we unequivocally wish ourselves, our people, and our language well. Doing this and letting other linguistic peoples do the same must be our way of ensuring India’s victory.

6. Although our great poet Kuvempu called Karnataka Maate the daughter of Bharata Maate, the former existed long before the latter, and there are good reasons to call the former the latter’s mother. Thus we the children of Karnataka Maate are like Bharata Maate’s siblings. Both we and she must sing praise of our common mother, Karnataka Maate.

7. Some people want us to ‘think accommodatively’ and sing priase of both Bharata Maate and Kannada Taayi. But that doesn’t diminish the fact that Bharata Maate is our sibling. In fact, those who worship this sibling have very little respect for Taayi. They call mother unofficial and claim to have the right to cut her into pieces. They’re not even done celebrating the dissection of Telugu Taayi.

8. Even above Kannada Taayi sits Shakti, the abode of cosmic energy, that Goddess from whom everything emerges. When we feel really spiritual about where we live, we must chant Shakti‘s praise, not anyone else’s. This is done very beautifully in the Anthem of Mysore, Kayou Sri Gowri, sung even to this day with the greatest feeling of bhakti, thereby connecting the singer and the listener alike directly to divinity. No intermediaries, thank you.

Some Thoughts on l’affaire Malhotra-Pollock-Murty-Ganesh

A rich Kannadiga gives 5.6 million USD to an American professor of Sanskrit in Columbia University to translate Sanskrit (and some actually spoken-language) works to English. An American citizen of north Indian origin, making highly publicized trips to India and not having two aksharas of Sanskrit in head suddenly rises to save Sanskrit, writes a book arguing that the American professor is inimical to Hinduism. Another Kannadiga, but this time an actual walking encyclopedia of Sanskrit and Sanskrit literature, shows what’s wrong with the American citizen’s book. Then the American citizen writes a reply literally begging all insiders to support him instead in the war against the enemy, viz., the said professor, showing the world that it’s not the truth that matters in this war but solidarity within the Indian army.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have a few things to say about these developments.

It’s a pity Rohan Murty is paying someone, anyone, to translate Sanskrit and other Indian-language classics to English. The $5.6 million largesse is based on the idea quite popular among educated urban Indians that Indian languages are going to die soon, that is if they already aren’t dead. However, since the wisdom of our ancients shouldn’t die with them, we’ve got to quickly collect it in a living language, viz., English, before the dying languages in which it’s coded become totally unintelligible.

Better than this fatalistic approach would have been to actually fund the Sanskrit University in Karnataka. I’m saying this even though I don’t think this institution should actually exist; it’s more important for us to invest in Kannada. In a world where people understand the difference between Sanskrit and Kannada I wouldn’t make this statement. But people don’t understand the difference.

Even Shatavadhani Ganesh (the walking encyclopedia of Sanskrit in case you didn’t guess) pretty much finds no difference between Sanskrit and Kannada. Kannada, for him, is equivalent to Sanskrit because it has no life without Sanskrit. Read two Kannada sentences written by Ganesh and you’ll experience reading Sanskrit for all you know.

Ganesh shares the belief that Indian languages are dying or dead. Only, he shares the belief about living languages such as Kannada. The one dead language, if you can call Sanskrit that, is like totally actually completely fully alive and kicking. It is in his mind; I must be fair to him.

I don’t share this fatalistic belief about Kannada or other living Indian languages. They’re not dead. They’re not dying. They’re only going from strength to strength. Those who are working in these languages know this quite well. Yes, they lack a few things such as terms of modern science and technology, but if you’ve even taken a superficial look at the recent attempts to fill this void, you know that these languages are just waiting to replace English.

All this is certainly true for Kannada, my mother tongue, which we’ve been strengthening from the inside for close to a decade now. I say we since I’m also a part of this ongoing movement led, so to speak, by stalwarts like D N Shankara Bhat, K V Narayana, and others. This movement intends to make Kannada stand on its own legs in today’s world. We’ve been coining new words in Kannada, writing a new grammar for Kannada because the existing ones try to force-fit Sanskrit grammar like one force-fits a square peg in a round hole, and building a new genre of Kannada writing from scratch – the science and technology one.

Given this, I think it’s much better for Rohan Murty to put his money in efforts to strengthen Indian languages, especially his own mother tongue, Kannada. Not English! What Rohan’s mother, Sudha Murthy (a Kannada writer of some repute) tries to do individually needs the power of Kannadiga youth, and money, behind it. There are many more linguistic registers to fix in Kannada than literature.

Even in the limited context of ancient Sanskrit texts, there is a lot of important Kannada work that hasn’t even been attempted. The Vedas, Upanishads, and the like, remain totally inaccessible to most Kannadigas, including Brahmanas. They need to be completely converted to Kannada, ready for chanting and everything. It’s time we did this to take the wisdom of the ancients to the masses speaking a living language. If this seems like a pitch for Rohan Murty’s money, you’re sensing it right. Why not?

Shatavadhani Ganesh, interestingly but understandably, finds our attempts to reinvigorate Kannada regressive. It’s regressive to try and strengthen Kannada, especially without the best help people like him can offer, viz., filling the empty vessel of Kannada with life using Sanskrit. It’s regressive to try and build a science and technology corpus in Kannada because English is the way to go. It’s regressive to question the ancients’ view of Kannada grammar because it’s ancient and ancient is right. I haven’t exactly proposed chanting the Vedas and Upanishads in Kannada to him but if I may take a guess based on my previous interactions with him, he’d dispose it off as both impossible and unnecessary. Impossible because he’s too busy with Sanskrit; and unnecessary because where’s the difference between Sanskrit and Kannada?

You must now be wondering why the title of this post mentions Rajiv Malhotra. Why hasn’t the American citizen out to save Sanskrit, not possessing two aksharas of Sanskrit in his head, entered the story yet? I didn’t plan it out this way; I naturally began talking about people I can relate to, those who are tied to me by the bond of Kannada.

But mention I must, because many who are reading this have pretty much cut off their links with Kannada due to circumstances they don’t control. Their children are in English medium schools and the national media, together with the nation’s constitution, has already buried Kannada. Having cut off, some of the people in question have joined the Rajiv Malhotra cult because he’s naming and shaming whites like Sheldon Pollock (the American professor in the story). And boy, isn’t it fun to name and shame whites, the ones who killed Sanskrit, created the caste system, and divided India by creating new languages?

What do I have to say about Rajiv Malhotra? The man’s scholarship begs proof of existence; it’s certainly no match to the walking Sanskrit encyclopedia of Bengaluru, Shatavadhani Ganesh. This fact Rajiv proves in every book of his, every tweet of his. His idea of intellectual kshatraguna is worth nothing in real intellectual circles. Being an intellectual is about pursuing the truth – real or imagined – not about bulldozing your way in the intellectual battle like a warrior with a sword to kill. The only thing to be destroyed in the intellectual battle is ignorance – irrespective of in which individual it’s lodged – the siddhanti or his purvapaksha. Not for Rajiv. For him, intellectuals are people who churn out material to destroy enemies like Sheldon Pollock and stick to it come what may, the truth be damned. Enemies don’t speak the truth, we do. We we we we we. We are right, they are wrong.

You can see this nonsensical approach to non-scholarship in Rajiv Malhotra’s reply to Shatavadhani Ganesh. He’s basically begging Ganesh to fight the enemy, i.e., Sheldon Pollock, instead of creating dissent in what he calls, from the comfort of his home in the United States, the home team. You can also see this approach in the casual way in which Rajiv Malhotra believes someone could have written a ‘grammar of the Dravidian race’. Languages, not races, have grammar, but try telling that to an intellectual kshatriya with an army of twitter trolls. Their intellectual standards are different.

To put a long story short, I don’t have anything to add to the criticism of Rajiv Malhotra in this article. Shatavadhani Ganesh has done a wonderful job of it. I find him unshakeable (I’ve tried) when it comes to Sanskrit and Sanskrit works. Where he is shakeable (I’ve tried) is when it comes to Kannada and living languages.

Ganesh seems to be unaware of Sheldon Pollock’s Language of the Gods in the World of Men – I mean the half that talks about Kannada (not that I think he’s read the half that talks about Sanskrit). In that, Pollock traces the historical path of Kannada as it slowly replaced Sanskrit as the lingua franca – something S Settar independently does in his monumental and recent work, Halagannada: Lipi, Lipikaara Mattu Lipi Vyavasaaya. Ganesh doesn’t have time or inclination for stuff like this. All this talk about Kannada and its independence from Sanskrit (in his blame he includes samskruti also) is the last wish of the dying. Kannada is transient, Sanskrit permanent.

So let’s not even fight the battle for Kannada; let’s chant the Bhagavad Gita and run away like cowards.

Here’s Why SC Shouldn’t Have Invoked Vedas, etc., in Sabarimala Case

I’ve already argued that the Indian state should stay away from this matter, and also addressed question as to whether this is discrimination and how it should be fixed if true. So I won’t go into that. Let me instead make a few quick points to show that the Court is ill-advised.

Today, I was surprised to note that the Indian state’s trespassing into society is not only unnecessary but also very, very, ill-advised. The Supreme Court apparently asserted today that:

  1. There should be “no discrimination” (against women) at Sabarimala because there’s no discrimination in the Vedas and Upanishads, and that this “discrimination” has “cropped up historically”, and that
  2. Since Krishna “is everywhere in everyone, men and women”, “there should be [no] gender discrimination in the premises of the temple”.

I’ve already argued that the Indian state should stay away from this matter, and also addressed the question as to whether this is discrimination and how it should be fixed if true. So I won’t go into that. Let me instead make a few quick points to show that the above assertions of the Court are ill-advised:

  1. It’s not statesmanlike to bring up the Vedas, Upanishads, the idea of Krishna, in this matter because even if they did permit the alleged discrimination, India cannot behave as if it’s not a sovereign state. It can’t take lessons on law from those who can interpret the Vedas, etc. It brief is to stick to the constitution and interpret it all by itself.
  2. It’s irrelevant to bring the Vedas, etc., in the matter of Sabarimala in particular because it is very likely the modern form of a Buddhist shrine. The Buddhists couldn’t care less about them even if the Indian state were to surrender its sovereignty to them. (From #1 above, I don’t have to add that it’s not stately to invoke the Buddha either.)
  3. It’s erroneous to single out social practices and say only they are “historical”. Even the Vedas, etc., are historical. S N Balagangadhara has made it crystal clear that the Vedas, etc., cannot be taken as the holy books of a “religion” called Hinduism. In fact, he shows how India has no religion (note the singular) but only traditions (note the plural). Given this, it’s a mistake to think that the Vedas, etc., apply to every single Sabarimala temple in every nook and corner of India.

Kannada in Higher Ed: Why the Usual Suspects’ Opposition is Uncalled For

The Government of Karnataka wants to introduce Kannada as a mandatory subject in Higher Education, esp. professional courses such as Engineering and Medicine. But apparently, corporate leaders and educators think it’s a bad move.

Let me examine these guys’ arguments.

Here’s what Mindtree’s Krishnakumar Natarajan, had to say:

Higher education should be beyond local languages. In higher education, the capability and skills imparted to students is more important. Are we creating enough local content and research in the local language? And what is the maturity of the local language content?

First of all, Natarajan is speaking as if GoK wants to make Kannada the medium of instruction in higher education. Else, why all the stuff about research and content and maturity? Is he saying Kannada literature isn’t mature enough? I hope not, because that’s not only incorrect but also racist – white racism, to be precise. The GoK only wants to introduce Kannada as a subject in higher education, so these concerns are uncalled for. I wonder where they even came from.

Now that we’re on the topic of actual higher-education content in Kannada, let me say that socially responsible corporates must share the responsibility of making Kannada fit and ‘mature’ for the purpose. They must share the responsibility of creating enough local content and research in Kannada. It’s not as if corporates are doomed to be mere consumers of content.

Ranjan Pai from the Manipal education conglomerate says:

What are we trying to achieve? The market and the globe is more anglicised. Forcing non-Kannada students to learn Kannada will be regressive. It won’t send the right message.

Since you ask, we’re trying to achieve social cohesion. Ring a bell, Mr. Pai? Understand such a thing? Is it taught in your education institutions? The idea that the market and the globe is getting more and more anglicised comes from a myopic view of the world. The world’s languages are getting increasingly represented everywhere, and Kannada is ahead of the pack in many ways.

If asking students studying in Karnataka to learn basic Kannada is regressive, what is asking them to not give a damn about the local language? Progressive?

Do you really want to make money from non-Kannadiga students by telling them not to give a damn about the local language, Mr Pai? It’s a fundamental responsibility of education institutions to maintain if not enhance social harmony. If education destroys it, shouldn’t we call it terrorism?

Biocon’s Kiran Mazudar Shaw says:

Kannada cannot be made compulsory in all courses, but can be offered as an option. Let’s see the fine print as I can’t imagine how they can enforce this very ill-conceived idea.

Ideally, what can or cannot be made compulsory in Karnataka will be decided by Karnataka state, not a non-Kannadiga businesswoman or her money. Hasn’t Biocon made it compulsory for employees not to smoke inside labs? In the same way, the state wants to make it compulsory to study Kannada. There’s nothing ‘ill-conceived’ here. The UK is asking people who don’t know English to leave. Why shouldn’t Karnataka consider doing the same with those who don’t know Kannada?

But the fact is, the state is not going to that extreme; it can’t as long as the current constitution isn’t declared null and void. Karnataka only wants to introduce a course – yes, just a course – asking people to learn the language of the land. It helps everyone.

As HC Boralangiah, former VC of Kannada university says:

For non-Kannada students, we have prescribed simple texts. We want them to become familiar with Kannada and Karnataka’s culture. Otherwise, we risk losing Kannada. Making Kannada compulsory means students need to pass in an examination as part of their degree.

And people find this unnecessary, regressive and ill-conceived? Come on, guys, stop your bean-counting and show some respect to India. Show that you are responsible citizens of India – the India right around you which you can touch and see and smell, the India that speaks Kannada.

Let’s Say the Congress Got Subhas Chandra Bose Killed. Now What?

The ‘big explosive truth’ about Bose’s death, whatever it is, is useless for the common man. I absolutely support the idea that the truth about the case should come out – it’s much better than falsehood. But what after that?

Let’s say, hypothetically, the much hyped Bose files reveal that the Congress (or Nehru, the man everyone’s pointing a finger at) got Bose killed.

What do we do with this piece of information? Ditch the Congress and vote BJP in every election from now on – which is obviously what the BJP wants? Maybe even get the Congress banned?

Before we go there, we’ve got to deal with one small problem: the same Nehru, the same Congress, created the structure of the Indian nation today and wrote everything down in the Constitution. Oops, it’s is now poisoned!

If the Congress or Nehru indeed got Bose killed, wouldn’t it follow that there are criminal minds behind the Constitution of India? Shouldn’t we declare the Constituent Assembly’s work null and void and start all over again with people who have impeccable credentials?

The above would be the argument of those who take operational corruption really seriously and think that requires us to question the systems that operationally corrupt people built.

Mind you, that’s quite like what the BJP is doing today: they’re trying to expose operational corruption in the time of Nehru as a way of upholding their own ideology. But only, the BJP is not going the full distance. It doesn’t suffice to blame the congress. They need to blame the Constitution which the Congress created, too.

Be that as it may, my argument is different. I don’t give a damn about operational corruption as long as India’s primitive corruption thrives. I’m not worried about the book not being followed; I’m worried about the book being followed – because when it’s followed, primitive corruption thrives.

I don’t care if Nehru got Bose killed. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. It’s a useless piece of information because the real problem in India is not who runs the show but what show is run. That’s why I find it stupid for people to base their vote on how Bose or Gandhi or whoever-it-is died.

What show is run depends on the Constitution of India. I want it rewritten from scratch because the show has serious problems. Not because its creators could potentially have indulged in operational corruption, but because India’s primitive corruption has gotten into it all by itself. There’s no way it couldn’t have gotten there, whether the people involved were operationally corrupt or not.

Therefore, I’d like votes to be cast based on who can get the Constitution rewritten from scratch, today. Not based on how someone died ages ago, even if that someone is a tall figure like Subhas Chandra Bose.

The Constitution needs rewriting for the simple reason that it mishandles India’s diversity, notably of the linguistic kind, and makes the Aryan Pyramid of Corruption thrive all over India. This is the real issue in India, and it’s a problem when politicians and the media take attention away from it.

From this perspective, the ‘big explosive truth’ about Bose’s death, whatever it is, is useless for the common man. I absolutely support the idea that the truth about the case should come out – it’s much better than falsehood. But what after that?

On Rohith Vemula’s Suicide

The Pyramid of Corruption, which term is a metaphor I use for the caste system and everything that comes with it, cannot throw any light on Rohith’s suicide. I have to say this because people who don’t really read the book, or don’t understand its arguments when they do, have historically come to very hasty conclusions about what I’ve written.

Those on The Left, who are commenting on the suicide, are basing their statements on the thesis that Brahmins or other upper caste people, specifically in The Right, have somehow conspired to push this student to commit suicide.

Even if the allegation were true (I have no way of deciding either way), nothing in my book can explain it. This is simply because it would be an ‘operational’ crime, not a ‘primitive’ one. I have nothing to say about ‘operational’ crime or corruption.

In case you don’t understand the term ‘operational’ crime or corruption, it is crime or corruption which is of the nature of a deviation from “the system”. If the allegation were true, it would clearly be such a deviation, and I have nothing to say about deviations. My book is about “the system” itself, and what would go wrong if there is no deviation.

My book is about how the caste system has entered into the very foundations of the Indian Nation. I talk at the level of how entire South India, being mostly Shudra, is in a Vaishya Vacuum. This fact benefits North India because Vaishyas are almost entirely North Indian.

I talk at the level of why Sankritized Hindi is essentially considered superior to any South Indian language. I talk at the level of a depopulating South India and Aryan (i.e., North Indian) migration into the South, and consequently Aryan control of the South, right under our noses.

From the above, I hope you understand that I don’t differentiate between The Left or The Right. Both swear by the same constitution and my book is about what’s wrong with that constitution. I call for rewriting that book from scratch.

If my suggestions are accepted, I don’t think suicides like the one in question can be saved in the ultimate analysis. Only, New Delhi would have nothing to do with them. Such cases would be opened and closed within Telangana because they’re not inter-state matters.

Yes, Rohith Vemulas wouldn’t be worried about Yakub Memons that don’t trouble Telangana. Telangana itself would be a much safer place vis-a-vis attacks from potential Yakub Memons who don’t speak Telugu. Telangana would catch non-Telugus easily. Today it doesn’t and the Centre is itself non-Telugu for the most part.

I think I can say that Rohith Vemulas wouldn’t worry about an all India “Dalit” caste, which is just a recently invented collective noun. They’d stick to local caste names and would therefore worry less. Also, caste distinctions would get slowly erased because of the increased focus on Telugu from every caste, and the collaborative effort to make Telugu fit for all modern purposes.

Further, the Centre would be a Government of Governments, not a Government of People, and therefore there would be no central Human Resources Development minister or ministry to begin with. No Central Universities either. The Hyderabad University would be answerable only to the State Government. Let me also say that Telugu, with a high degree of focus on native words, would be the preferred medium of education.

And hey, there’d be no Telangana either. There’d only be a united Andhra, because the Centre wouldn’t have the power to create or destroy states, and all the states of my conception are linguistic ones. ‘One language, one state’. Not like Ambedkar’s ‘one state, one language’.

I hope this short journey into the book gives you an idea of what the book is and is not. I hope you too, stop worrying about these ‘operational’ issues and take a look at what’s wrong in a ‘primitive’ sense.

2 Simple Points Which Will Seal the Argument About Sabarimala

Social transformation is none of the state’s business. It is because we don’t understand this fully that we allow all sorts of social disasters. Hindi imposition, for example. Also, of what value is a protest against men’s clubs in a democracy?

1. The question of menstruating women entering the Sabarimala temple lies in the domain of society, not state. So, those who want it must discuss with the temple, not the state. It’s a different matter that our state likes to poke its nose everywhere. The Supreme Court has proved it time and again. But that doesn’t take away the fact that this is state transgression into society. Social transformation is none of the state’s business. It is because we don’t understand this fully that we allow all sorts of social disasters — Hindi imposition, for example.

2. Even if one were to allow the state’s transgression into society for argument’s sake in this case, of what value is a protest against men’s clubs in a democracy? That’s what the Sabarimala temple is. You can’t oppose it without looking like a medieval lawmaker. What’s wrong if a set of males want to gather, climb a hill, and offer prayers to a certain deity, without letting menstruating women come near?