India! I dare you to be rich

Category Archive: Religion

Hindus agree that the buffalo is not sacred. Let there be a “EAT BUFFALO FOR HEALTH” movement in India.

I've discovered an interesting fact – that even the most fanatic supporters of the "sacred cow" hypothesis (it is a false hypothesis, but that's a different point) have nothing to say about the buffalo.

The buffalo is not "sacred" in India, or is just as "sacred" as a chicken. [Also this]

As a blog notes, "all the northern states have buffaloes now. Farmers have accept it because of clear increase in demand for buffalo milk and meat. There is no sentimental attachment to a buffalo" [Source]

Not only is the buffalo not considered sacred, it is sacrificed EVEN TODAY in many temples in Hindu India, like a chicken or goat may be sacrificed. (In the past even barren cows and bulls were so sacrificed, but that's not relevant to the point I have to make.)


From India Today – photograph of a temple from the outskirts of Guwahati

Kamakhya temple has buffalo sacrifice (Youtube). “Almost three to four  buffaloes are sacrificed at Kamakhya every month and dozens of them are slaughtered during Durga Puja festivities.” [Source]


There are regular sacrifices of buffaloes in some temples in Kerala, and there is massive consumption of buffalo/ cattle meat in Kerala.


Nepal, a purely Hindu kingdom, holds massive ceremonious slaughter of buffaloes.

The point I wish to make

I have no interest in people's personal food choices but it is clear that:

a) Regardless of the veneration (or otherwise) of the cow in India, the buffalo is NOT so venerated TODAY. (In the past only the MILCH COW was so "venerated", not barren/bull).

b) Significant HINDU populations in India (and Hindu Nepal) regularly consume buffalo meat.

c) India is forced to export its buffalo beef to the rest of the world since domestic consumption is very sporadic and poor.

d) India has THE highest rate of malnutrition among children in the world. There is massive protein deficiency.

I also don't like the idea of animal sacrifice (although I don't wish to dabble in people's religious beliefs). I prefer humane slaughter in proper abattoirs. Animals must be treated humanely. There is no excuse to treat them badly – even as food.

Solution: Let there be a EAT BUFFALO FOR HEALTH MOVEMENT in India which will lead to a new industry, improve the buffalo stock, and improve the nutritional status of our children.

A win-win for everyone. Without firing up the mad Hindutva fanatics who are determined to make India as backward as they possibly can.


“There has been a huge demand for Indian buffalo meat in China" [Source]. What's the point of this – when our own children are badly nourished, we are making China healther?

Continue Reading

If Hindutva = Liberty, then I’m its greatest fan, else I’m its GREATEST enemy.

The USA was founded on the concept of LIBERTY, the idea that every American could lead his or her life as he chooses in the pursuit of happiness. 

Regardless of what ill-informed barbaric people from India often say, the USA is NOT a Christian country. Never was. 

Its foundation is in John Locke, whose signature idea is tolerance. Locke is best considered a kind of agnostic and was a close friend of Isaac Newton, a pantheist.

Every sect, as far as reason will help them, make use of it gladly; and where it fails them, they cry out, “It is a matter of faith, and above reason.” – John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690)

Although Locke's natural law refers to God, he insisted on the separation of the Church and the State. 

It was Locke's idea that influenced Jefferson, and therefore created USA as the world's first nation committed only to PRINCIPLES – of liberty, tolerance and equality.

It is because USA is committed to liberty in its Constitution that even Obama the socialist is unable to destroy it entirely. If the USA will survive as a great nation it will do so because of Locke and Jefferson. And LIBERTY.

Unlike this idea of liberty, the idea of Hindutva is fraught. It claims that there is something different about Indians – their "Hindutva". This idea takes inspiration not from Locke and Jefferson but from Hitler's racist idea of a German (Aryan) identity. 

Hindutva is a FUNDAMENTALLY ILLIBERAL IDEA. Reading Savarkar, Golwalkar and others who founded this idea makes it clear that they were not looking for liberty but for RACIST AGGRANDISEMENT.

Hindutva is a collectivist idea, a group idea, an idea also based on religion – the so-called "Hinduism". I use the term "so-called" because it Hindutva has NOTHING to do with Hinduism as I know it (and yes, I do know a bit about the religion into which I was born). Hindutva is a shallow racist and hateful idea that makes use of mythologies (such as Ramayana) not to promote good behaviour and good character, but because that's the way for its promoters to gain political power. Hindutva has NO basis in either the history or philosophies of India. 

No matter how one looks at this idea, it is DANGEROUS AND HARMFUL.

Let's oppose Hindutva and BJP tooth and nail.

Let's insist on liberty for all Indians in India – regardless of their beliefs (if any), gender (if any) or language/ colour/ other superficial distinction/s.

Hindutva, I'm your GREATEST ENEMY. This dangerous and vicious idea must LEAVE my motherland. Let's revert India to the state of liberty when it was genuinely a great place to live.

Continue Reading

Hindu! First go and fix Hinduism, THEN complain to me about Mohammed and Islam

I have no religion so I can exercise a TOTALLY OBJECTIVE judgement over all religions. I find, invariably, that the founders of various religions had good intentions, even said good things. Not everything they did was good or respect worthy, but they tried.

However, their religion almost always became a CURSE on mankind, with political people (who LUST for power and money) taking command and driving the followers of religions into committing the most heinous crimes in the name of God.

Therefore, from the age of 12 when I gave up religion (and have never gone back to it, although I'm no longer an atheist but an agnostic) I have been even handed in my critiques of religion. Some good, some bad.

I don't take sides, nor mince words. I praise the good and condemn the evil.

BUT those who are religious believers don't take such an approach. They OUTRIGHT condemn others. To one such person I had this to say today:

Re: the 3 statements you made (against Mohammed/ Islam), you did not contextualise. When I praise Jefferson I also know that he kept slaves. So did Washington.

Civilisation moves on, in fits and starts. What was OK at one time is looked down upon in the future. Slavery is a classic case, being found in ALL civilisations.

And re: child marriage, the less said about Hinduism the better. And Sati.

If I were to call Hindus in this manner:

- those in whose religion old men marry little girls (and many of them: polygamy was common in Hinduism – and is practiced even today)

- those in whose religion Dalits are not just shunned but regularly killed

- those in whose religion women are BURNT ALIVE along with their husbands

- those in whose religion widows are treated with UTMOST CRUELTY (have you seen Water?)

- those in whose religion marriage to another caste will lead to death by stoning in a village assembly

- those in whose religion the village 'boss' sleeps with the wife of EVERY newly married person (this STILL happens in many UP villages) [Proof]

then would that help?

My point is that you have failed to demonstrate HUMILITY about your own religion (don't throw stones at others if you live in a glass house), failed to contextualise (Mohammed WAS a reformer – that is absolutely clear), grossly exaggerated and made things appear to be 'black and white', and attributed Ghazni's depredations to the TEACHINGS of Islam. In doing so you have ignored the GREED of Ghazni, the fact that he used mercenaries from YOUR religion (yes, Hindus are happy to destroy temples if paid to do so – and have done so repeatedly – MOST Buddhist constructions in India were DESTROYED by Hindus, and Buddhists literally driven out of India).

Mohammed would have been SHOCKED at the state of Islam today. It is the exact opposite of what he wanted/preached. Likewise Lord Krishna and Lord Rama would have been shocked at the state of Hinduism.

Oppressions are PART of ALL religions. It is easy to use the name of religion to justify one's oppressions. Christianity has been the world's most intolerant and detestable religion. But now (political) Islam is coming close.

That doesn't mean one can broadly paint any religion (particularly its founder) with a black brush. There is a lot of good, even as there is a lot of bad.

So my suggestion: before you criticise Islam FIX Hinduism. Then come to me.

I have no religion, so I take a balanced approach and criticise all religions equally (even as I PRAISE the good, where I find it – and there is plenty of good).


"our collective inability as people committed to the annihilation of caste, to make any difference in a context where caste atrocity is at best a spectacle for consumption and speculation; where images of children who have been brutally assaulted and murdered are traded by the media in ­unthinkable ways and their experience negated by the rogue state. Where does one begin to roll this back?"


Continue Reading

To regain the respect of the world, Islam must do what Christianity did: separate the state and religion

Despite many failings, the original Islam had plenty of good things going for it. It was a reforming religion which got rid of distinctions between rich and poor, low caste and high.

As a result of the higher levels of civislisation brought to the world through Islam, both mathematics and science received a significant boost during the middle ages, a time when Christianity had worked hard to destroy all remnants of civilisation in the West.

But today Islam is on the back foot. It is rare (very rare!) to find any non-Muslim who respects Islam.

And why?

Because it is the POLITICAL leaders of Islam and those who kill in the name of Islam who have brought it to its knees.

MY COMMENT FROM FB today [link]

How does the common man distinguish between one variety of Islam and another? That's the problem.

In a country like India, driven by a constitution that should (but doesn't always) separate religion from government, there is some chance that good Islam will be seen. But in "Islam states" there is almost zero probability of seeing good Islam.

Islam should do what Christianity did: after centuries of fighting and killing, Christianity accepted that the state and religion must be separate.

Only by following a liberal constitution in which the government enforces the rule of law (not Sharia law) and has nothing to do with religion, can Islam regain the respect of the vast majority of the people in the world. Today, because of Saudi Islam, Irani Islam, Taliban Islam, Pakistani Islam, etc. the world no longer respects Islam.

Wherever Islam has become political and runs governments, it becomes evil.

The kingdom of God and the kingdom on earth must be kept separate. Unless this happens, the only places where good Islam will be seen will be countries like USA, Australia, India – where the government is supposed to uniformly impose the rule of law, and keep religions separate from governance.

Continue Reading

Energy came first, then matter, then gravity (and hence space, therefore time)

Ramesh Umarane has a theory that consciousness came first, then space time, then energy ["there can be no energy without space"]. That is a derivative of Advaita, an otherwise plausible theory if it is considered to be a form of pantheism.

The actual sequence, however, is the following (note there is much more complexity, but for that you'll have to go to a proper book on the subject).

From the singularity (a concept currently contested under multiverse theories) came a "dense" soup of energy at unimaginable 'temperature'. This blew "out" (inflation) instantaneously, creating space-time as it went along.

"The universe began, scientists believe, with every speck of its energy jammed into a very tiny point. This extremely dense point exploded with unimaginable force, creating matter and propelling it outward. the Big Bang flung energy in all directions at the speed of light (300,000,000 meters per second, a million times faster than the H-bomb) and estimate that the temperature of the entire universe was 1000 trillion degrees Celsius at just a tiny fraction of a second after the explosion. The Big Bang did not expand through anything. That's because there was no space to expand through at the beginning of time. Rather, physicists believe the Big Bang created and stretched space itself, expanding the universe. " [Source]

In my view (not the standard theory! so beware!) energy travelling faster than the speed of light created its own 'gravitational' field (sub-atomic) and distorted space. It kept travelling in a straight line but space had by now been created and what appeared to be a straight line was a tiny particle. Any light slower than that (a general minimum speed being c – although light can travel slower than that), became a 'photon' and kept travelling (and continues travelling today) at the speed of light. Now there are things like the Higgs bosons, etc. and they are probably right to imagine that there is a "particle" that constitutes matter, but I prefer my 'theory' of the smallest particles being nothing but energy "travelling" faster than light that has created and distorted space to such an extent that it appears to have mass.  

But ignoring my "theory" for a moment (I bring not the slightest rigour to prove this idea, so it is best ignored), the fact remains that it took THREE SECONDS for proper atoms to form after the commencement of the universe. "Proper" space and matter took time to form. And as the matter expanded, space expanded along with it, and also time.

So the sequence is ENERGY > MATTER + SPACE + TIME.

Then, 14 billion years (appx.) later comes human consciousness. So the sequence is:


A sequence that imagines that consciousness came first is plain wrong.

Another visualision:


Continue Reading

Muslim bigotry as the SOLE reason for the growth of Hindu bigotry, RSS and BJP

Copying from two of my FB posts a moment ago:

My message to my Muslim Indian friends. Be SURE, VERY SURE, that YOUR BIGOTRY is the SOLE cause of the success of the dangerous RSS ideology.

The moment you adopt FREEDOM OF SPEECH, and stop BEGGING for special subsidies for your religion from taxpayers, these "Hindu" bigots will be cut loose. They will have NOTHING to say. Their own bigotry (against Dalits, women) will show them in bad light. 

But till today, MUSLIMS have been the MOST BIGOTED group in India. You prevented Macaulay from imposing genuine free speech in India. You led to the creation of Hindu Mahasabha, RSS, and now BJP.



Not all is lost in India, as this interaction that appeared on my FB wall shows. These are probably among the nearly 70 per cent of the Indians who voted against BJP. 

The problem? Most don't take their concept of liberty to the next step: economic liberty. Nor care to understand how a liberal government can be created. I think we should, as a logical argument, show them that freedom of speech and tolerance NECESSARILY leads to economic liberty, as well. NEVER to control over citizens by governments.


Continue Reading