India

"If we exclude the possibility of every astronomical notice in Vedic literature being a record of ancient tradition, which is extremely unlikely, we can say that there is strong astronomical evidence that the Vedas are older than B.C. 2500. They might be as old as B.C. 4000. There is some support for this date, but it is not convincing."

"“The observations on which the astronomy of India is founded, were made more than three thousand years before the Christian era. (…) Two other elements of this astronomy, the equation of the sun’s centre and the obliquity of the ecliptic (…) seem to point to a period still more remote, and to fix the origin of this astronomy 1000 or 1200 years earlier, that is, 4300 years before the Christian era”."

"In a recent essay Tahir Mahmood goes even further: on his reckoning the Triple talaq is not just a rule which the Islamic jurists formulated to help women be rid of undesirable husbands, it is a rule which the jurists came to recognize and accept at the initiative of the aggrieved women! ‘This simple but meaningful reform introduced by the Prophet got corrupted in the course of time,’ he writes, recounting that the Prophet’s pronouncements constituted a deterrent to husbands and that they put limits on what a husband could do. ‘In fits of anger husbands began pronouncing on their wives “three divorces at a time”. And married women, sick of their tyrant husbands, in a bid to get rid of them, insisted that “three divorces at a time” should be given the effect of third-time divorce so as to instantly divorce the marriage. To help wives in distress, most jurists of the time agreed.’"

"Addressing the Maharashtra assembly, Women and Child Development Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha said, "PM Modi took a big decision by taking action against Triple Talaq. By banning triple talaq, he did justice to the women of India. He gave chance to those who were oppressed and liberated them.""

"The ‘Triple talaq’ ‘is the heretical or irregular mode of divorce,’ Syed Ameer Ali wrote over a hundred years ago in his famous Muhammadan Law, ‘which was introduced in the second century of the Mahommedan era. It was then that the Omeyyade monarchs, finding that the checks imposed by the Prophet on the facility of repudiation interfered with the indulgence of their caprice, endeavoured to find an escape from the strictness of the law, and found in the pliability of the jurists a loophole to effect their purpose.’"

"When I abolished triple talaq and ended that practice, muslim sisters feel that I am genuine about their concerns."

"The Hindu systems of astronomy are by far the oldest, and that from which the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and even the Jews derived Hindus their knowledge."

"Whither by day depart the constellations that shine at night, set high in heaven above us? Varuṇa's holy laws remain unweakened, and through the night the Moon moves on in splendor."

"We have taken a very important step by taking action on Triple Talaq. We have always thought about our Muslim sisters and mothers. If we can remove Sati Pratha, if we can think of equality for women, why shouldn't we think about removing Triple talaq for our Muslim women?... Remember how scared Muslim women were, those who suffered due to practice of Triple Talaq, but we ended that. When Islamic nations can ban it then why can't we? When we can ban Sati, when we can take strong steps against female infanticide, child marriage, then why not this?"

"For ever so long Indian Muslims, and therefore Indians in general have suffered because of this amorousness of the Muslim liberal. For a brief moment it seemed that Ayodhya would spell a change. On the one hand, the Muslim community was brought face to face with the costs of the politics of Shahabuddin, Imam Bukhari and the rest: it seemed more willing to listen to the liberal voices within it. On the other, the Muslim liberal was reminded that it was not enough for him to be liberal. If the community continued to follow obscurantist leaders, there would be a reaction, and all, including the Muslim liberal would be sucked down in its tow. Several Muslim liberals therefore began taking a lead in defining what ought to be done on issues which had become the preserve of the obscurantists. On ‘Triple talaq’ itself, as we saw, several months before Justice Tilhari gave his judgment, the Muslim Intelligentsia Meet had passed a resolution condemning the practice as being in violation of the Quran and Hadis. It had drawn attention to the ‘extreme hardship and harshness’ to which the practice exposes women. So, there was an aperture of opportunity. But the moment passed: soon enough Ali Mian, the All India Milli Council and the rest were once again in the forefront; the Muslim liberal was once again back in his cubbyhole. Each of these factors contributes to the power of the ulema. But, as we shall see, the central explanation is different."

"For, while in theory talaq is said to be so abominable to Allah, in practice the position is entirely the opposite. The jurists repeat the counsel that divorce is something from which one should abstain. But this is just counsel. As to the power, they are unanimous: it is a power which lies with the husband, and it is untrammelled. Should the husband choose to exercise it, no one, and no consideration can save the wife. The counsel itself has the caveat invariably built into it, a caveat large enough to drive an elephant through it: you should not give talaq, the jurists say adding, except when there is need for it! ... In theory talaq may be abominable but in practice the husband has the power—the absolute, unconditional power, a power for exercising which he is not accountable to anyone on earth—to throw the wife out by just uttering the word ‘talaq’."

"They gleam with armlets as the heavens are decked with stars, like cloud-born lightnings shine the torrents of their rain. Since the strong Rudra, O Maruts with brilliant chests, sprang into life for you in Pṛśni's radiant lap."

"Pushan was born in the start of the path, in the path of Heaven, in the path of the Earth. Both beloved stations he circles to and from with knowledge (X.17.6)."

"May Mitra, Varuna, the sun, the destroyer, the portents from the earth and the atmosphere, and the planets moving in the sky (divicarā grahāh) bring well-being to us. (AV 19.9.7)"

"Agni is first established here by the ordainers, the holy invoker, to be worshipped in the sacrifices. The bearer of truth, most wise, he appears as Heaven with the stars (IV.7.1,3)."

"With the Maruts, Indra, let your friendship be. Then you will defeat all enemies. The three times sixty Maruts, increasing you, are holy like a mass of rays (or stars) (VIII.96.7-8)."

"The Maruts are visible from afar, like the heavenly ones with the stars (I.166.11)."

"The seers of ten rays first thought out the sacrifice. May they direct us in the breaking of the dawn. The dawn opens up the night with her red horses, with the great light of the luminous sea of milk (II.34.12)."

"Like Heaven with the stars, Agni appears along both firmaments (II.2.5).7"

"Like a dark steed adorned with pearl, the Fathers have decorated heaven With constellations. They set the light in day, in night the darkness. Bṛhaspati cleft the rock and found the cattle."

"Sage Maruts, may we be the drivers of the car of riches ful I of life that have been given by you. O Maruts, let that wealth in thousands dwell with us which never vanishes like Tisya from the sky."

"Seven yoke the chariot that has one wheel. One horse conveys it who has seven names (I.164.3)."

"May those five Bulls which stand on high full in the midst of mighty heaven, Having together swiftly borne my praises to the Gods, return. Mark this my woe, ye Earth and Heaven."

"‘By a deplorable, though, perhaps, natural, development of the Sunni law,’ wrote Justice Faiz Badruddin Tyabji in his famous work, ‘it is the fourth and most disapproved or sinful mode of talaq (that is, the Triple talaq) which seems to be the most prevalent, and in a sense, even favoured by the law...’ Not only was it the most prevalent and favoured form, he noted, its effects are ‘aggravated’ in that talaq having been pronounced thrice, it could not but be taken to be conclusive and irrevocable. That was Justice Badruddin Tyabji writing eighty years ago. Forty years ago, Justice Shahmiri observed that as this form of divorcing the wife is the ‘least onerous for husbands, it is the most prevalent form obtaining in India.’10 Eighty years ago... Forty years ago... And three years ago Professor Tahir Mahmood noted, ‘For centuries the common Muslim has believed that the so-called ‘Triple talaq’ is the only ‘Islamic’ form of divorce...’, that ‘Divorce by a Muslim husband in this country (India) almost invariably means a Triple talaq’—with the concept of a single revocable talaq people have little acquaintance.’"

"They yoke the red horse who moves around those who stand. The lights (or constellations) shine in Heaven (1.6.1)."

"Our fathers who drove up the wealth made of light, by Indra at the end of the year they destroyed Vala. By the truth they made the Sun rise in Heaven (X.62.2- 3)."

"It is not polarisation to show that Congress has violated the Constitution and enacted laws providing reservation on the basis of religion. Our Constitution clearly prohibits reservations based on religion but the Congress govt in Karnataka reversed the law passed by BJP to provide reservation to OBCs and gave it to Muslims, classifying all Muslims as OBC. Even the National Commission for Backward Classes, a constitutional body, criticised this as against principles of ‘social justice’. The Congress govt in Telangana has recently said that it will replicate this move. This proves that Congress wants to reduce the reservation provided to SCs, STs and OBCs across the country and give it to minorities. What else can one expect from a party whose prime minister said that minorities have the first right on resources of this country?"

"Around 15 per cent reservation quota of the OBCs was given to Muslims in Karnataka. Congress is setting a wrong precedent by giving reservations based on religion. Founder-members of our Constitution had opposed the idea of reservations on the basis of religion... The Congress wants to snatch SC/ST and OBC quota. The party wants to give it to Muslims to settle its vote bank. Congress wants to impose an inheritance tax on private properties, and their wrong intention was exposed again."

"It was neither the first nor the last time that Gandhi and the Congress accepted over-representation of the Muslim community or of the Muslim League. As we have seen, even a division of 100 percent Muslim and 0 percent Hindus in the projected first Cabinet of free and undivided India had been considered by Gandhi and Azad. The Congress always took Hindus for granted, and Hindus inside the Congress failed to put up a protest commensurate with the injustice being perpetrated. ...B.R. Nanda, an avowed admirer of Gandhi, who admits in Gandhi and His Critics that ‘from the acceptance of separate electorates in the Lucknow Pact in 1916 to the acquiescence in the Communal Award in 1933, and finally to the Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946, it was a continual retreat in the face of Muslim pressure.’"

"You see the history of Congress; this demand (for reservation) has been raised since the 1990s.... So, what was the first sin they committed? In the 90s, they decided to classify Muslims as OBCs in Karnataka. So they were rejecting and suppressing OBCs earlier, but for political gains, they labelled Muslims as OBCs. Congress was ousted from the Centre. This plan remained stalled till 2004. When Congress came back in 2004, it immediately decided to give OBC quota to Muslims in Andhra Pradesh. The matter got complicated in court. The India Parliament had decided to give 27 percent reservation to OBCs in line with the basic spirit of the Constitution. Now, they tried to loot this 27 percent quota."

"The Rajinder Sachar Committee (under PM Manmohan Singh) ruled that Muslims are entitled to huge privileges given their “minority” status, as if the Hindus have to compensate them for anything... I am not in favour of historical entitlement,... but if at all any compensation is to be paid, it is not the Hindu community that has a debt to service... From the secularists, the omnipresent “minorities” propaganda is to be expected, they will use any and every discourse that can put Hindus on the defensive. Not so expected is that many in and around the BJP have swallowed the notion of “minorities” hook, line and sinker, including even their entitlement to privileges. (Ch 32)"

"It is certainly not an unfair reading of Gandhi’s mind to state that he offered ‘hope that separatism would eventually disappear.’ This separatism had become an official part of India’s political landscape with the creation of the Muslim League in 1906 as a party advocating loyalty to the British Empire, along with special privileges and reservations for the Muslim community. But the Mahatma consistently mishandled the issue and helped solidify Muslim communal politics. By 1934, when the communal division of political power and government jobs was being consolidated in law, his Congress movement was reduced to looking the other way, or what Gandhi called ‘neither accepting nor rejecting’. The phrase of ‘neither accepting nor rejecting’ summed up Gandhiji’s position vis-à-vis the ‘Communal Award’, the plan to thoroughly communalize the legislatures under the Government of India Act 1935. The secular position would have been to oppose the plan outright and to insist on non-communal assemblies elected by a single electorate comprising all voting citizens, regardless of religion, who were free to vote for any candidate, regardless of the latter’s religion. ..."

"In 2006, a meeting of the National Development Council was held where there was a huge uproar over the statement of Singh. They remained quiet for two years. In the Ghoshana Patra of 2009, they mentioned it again. In 2011, there is a Cabinet Note on this where they decided to give a share from the OBC quota to Muslims. They tried this in the UP elections too but to no avail. In 2012, the Andhra High Court cancelled it. They went to Supreme Court, even there they did not get any relief. The 2014 Manifesto also talked about reservation on the basis of religion. When the Constitution of India was made, no RSS or BJP people were present. Babasaheb Ambedkar, Pandit Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and several great men of our country were present, and after long contemplation, they decided that reservation cannot be given on the basis of religion in a country like India. See their manifesto for the 2024 elections. It has the imprint of the Muslim League. The way they are flouting the Constitution, the way they are insulting Ambedkar… There is a sword of danger hanging over reservation for SCs and STs. They will make life difficult for OBCs. Should I not inform the people of the country about this? I believe that it is the responsibility of all the learned people, who are rich in knowledge, who are unbiased, to educate this country, to tell it the right things."

"Gandhiji took an unclear position which amounted to an unspoken acceptance of the communalization of the democratic process, a stepping-stone on the way to Partition. In particular, separate electorates meant that Muslim candidates needed to cater only to Muslim opinion, which encouraged them to take ever more sectarian positions. Regardless of any judgement of the political choices involved, Gandhi’s refusal to take sides on such a crucial issue showed a painful lack of leadership and strategic insight: fence-sitting is rarely rewarded in politics. Moreover, far from being neutral, it effectively amounted to acquiescing in the definitive communalization of the polity. ..."

"With this new list, there is no knowing where the Muslims are going to stop in their demands. Within one year, that is, between 1938 and 1939, one more demand and that too of a substantial character, namely 50 percent share in everything, has been added to it. In this catalogue of new demands there are some which on the face of them are extravagant and impossible, if not irresponsible. As an instance, one may refer to the demand for fifty-fifty and the demand for the recognition of Urdu as the national language of India. In 1929, the Muslims insisted that in allotting seats in Legislatures, a majority shall not be reduced to a minority or equality. This principle, enunciated by themselves, it is now demanded, shall be abandoned and a majority shall be reduced to equality. The Muslims in 1929 admitted that the other minorities required protection and that they must have it in the same manner as the Muslims. The only distinction made between the Muslims and other minorities was as to the extent of the protection. The Muslims claimed a higher degree of protection than was conceded to the other minorities, on the ground of their political importance. The necessity and adequacy of protection for the other minorities the Muslims never denied. But with this new demand of 50 percent the Muslims are not only seeking to reduce the Hindu majority to a minority, but they are also cutting into the political rights of the other minorities. The Muslims are now speaking the language of Hitler and claiming a place in the sun as Hitler has been doing for Germany. For their demand for 50 percent is nothing but a counterpart of the German claims for Deutschland Uber Alles and Lebensraum for themselves, irrespective of what happens to other minorities."

"A few years ago, a Muslim spokesman [Imam Abdullah Bukhari of Jama Masjid, Delhi] had demanded that 20 percent seats in the Parliament and the State Assemblies should be reserved for members of his community. He also recommended that the remaining 80 percent seats should be filled only by those persons whose selection before elections had been cleared by the same community!"

"Though, to start with, the suggestion of separate representation came from the British, the Muslims did not fail to appreciate the social value of separate political rights; with the result that when in 1909 the Muslims came to know that the next step in the reform of the Legislative Councils was contemplated, they waited of their own accord in deputation upon the Viceroy, Lord Minto, and placed before him the following demands :— ... (iv) The number of Muhammadan representatives in the Imperial Legislative Council should not depend on their numerical strength, and Muhammadans should never be in an ineffective minority."

"A very good illustration is the next and very important demand of the Muslim communalists : a larger than proportionate reservation for Muslims in the army and the police. With every clash between Muslims and the PAC, we see secularists plead for the disbanding of the PAC, and the granting of reservations of the Muslims (the minorities, as they say), either in the existing forces or in a new anti-riot force, amounting to some 25% or even 30%. In other words, we see those who started the carnage in Bhagalpur '89, in Gonda '90, in Aligarh '90, in Hyderabad '90, being rewarded with secularist support for their demands, and more support with every riot. [...] In a rabidly communalist article in the secularist paper Mainstream (5/1/1991), N.A. Ansari demands : The Muslims must be provided at least 30% jobs in government, semi-government sectors including the military, the police, the administration and the judiciary."

"Three things are noticeable about this political aggression of the Muslims.... First is the ever-growing catalogue of the Muslim's political demands. Their origin goes back to the year 1892....Accordingly the British Parliament passed in 1892 what is called the Indian Councils Act. ... It was in the legislatures that were constituted under this Act that the principle of separate representation for Musalmans was for the first time introduced in the political constitution of India. The introduction of this principle is shrouded in mystery. It is a mystery because it was introduced so silently and so stealthily."

"The last offers made to Jinnah to make him abandon his Partition plans included 50% reservations for Muslims at all levels and an effective predominance of the Muslims in the government."

"Congress is fully involved in giving the reservation of SC, ST, and OBC to Muslims on the basis of religion."

"It is a mystery as to who was responsible for its introduction. This scheme of separate representation was not the result of any demand put forth by any organized Muslim association. In whom did it then originate? It is suggested that it originated with the Viceroy, Lord Dufferin, who, as far back as the year 1888, when dealing with the question of representation in the Legislative Councils, emphasized the necessity that in India representation will have to be, not in the way representation is secured in England, but representation by interests. Curiosity leads to a further question, namely, what could have led Lord Dufferin to propose such a plan? It is suggested that the idea was to wean away the Musalmans from the Congress, which had already been started three years before. Be that as it may, it is certain that it is by this Act that separate representation for Muslims became, for the first time, a feature of the Indian Constitution. ..."

"I challenge the Congress and its INDI allies to give a written statement that they will not amend the Constitution based on religion, that they will not take away the reservations of SCs, STs and OBCs and give it to a certain community, that in states where they are in power, they will not take away reservations for SCs, STs and OBCs and give it to people on the basis of faith. It’s been 10 days since I threw these challenges at them and still haven’t responded. They want to punish you but as long as I am alive, I wouldn’t let that happen."

"They have reached the stage of giving reservations on the basis of faith and insulting the Constitution. Shouldn’t there be a discussion on this conspiracy to snatch reservation from SCs, STs, OBCs and give it to others?"

"But the systematic manner in which Pakistan leaders are attempting to paint the people of this country as demons out to destroy innocent Muslims, while hiding, it not defending, the horrible outrages perpetrated by members of their own community from Calcutta to Sheikhupura is nothing but an attempt to defame this country and throw dust in the eyes of the outside world regarding the crimes committed by their co-religionists. They also know, as does everyone in this country, that the Punjab disaster was but the culminating act of the tragedy which began with the unprincipled campaign of communal hated and violence which they and their party leaders had been preaching for years as the only means of securing the ambition of their heart, namely, the separation of a part of this country where they could play the role of rulers, even though at the cost of unexampled suffering and misery to their own co-religionists both in Pakistan and India."

"Sikhs have some of their most sacred Gurdwaras in the West Punjab. The freedom of these Gurdwaras and access to them for purposes of worship forms the sorest point of grievance which the Sikhs have at present against the Pakistan Government, and what is regarded as the easy attitude which the Indian Government is adopting with regard to this matter so deeply vital to Sikh religious sentiment."

"We do not know why Mr. Ghulam Mohammad thought it his duty to anticipate the verdict of history regarding the responsibility of Lord Mountbatten for the tragedy of the Punjab. He is reported to have stated at a Press Conference in London that when the history of the events of this dark chapter comes to be written ‘a part of the blame-would rest on Lord Mountbatten.’ He has made two specific charges. The last British Viceroy was aware of a deep laid conspiracy by the Sikhs and Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh “to throttle Pakistan by eliminating Muslim” and refused to take action. The other charge is that Lord Mountbatten forced partition too quickly. The British Commonwealth Relations Office has repudiated both charges. It has pointed out that it was the then Governor of Punjab who had proved himself to be an avowed partisan of Muslim League, and had looked on impotently while sanguinary riots organized by the Muslim League and the Muslim National Guards took place in North Punjab in March and April 1947. It may be convenient for Mr. Ghulam Mohammed to forget that what happened in August 1947, was a mere continuation of the bloody chain of reaction which was set in motion by the Muslim League at Calcutta in August 1946. In March and April 1947, Sikhs had been brutally massacred and looted and they were abused as cowards because they had not reacted at once with violence. As a matter of fact Lord Mountbatten yielded to his pro-Muslim advisers and stationed the major portion of the Punjab Boundary Force in East Punjab with the result that there was no force to check or control the terrible massacres of Hindus and Sikhs that occurred in Sheikhupura and other places. We should certainly like an impartial investigation into the events of those days and we have no doubt it will be found that while, on the Indian side, it was the spontaneous outburst of a people indignant at what they considered the weakness and the appeasement policy of their leadership, on the Muslim side, the League, the bureaucracy, the police and the army worked like Hitler’s team with the tacit if not open approval of those in charge of the Pakistan Government."

"The Punjab and the North-West Frontier Province had been through a brutal process of ethnic cleansing."

"‘I am grieved to learn that people are running away from the West Punjab and I am told that Lahore is being evacuated by the non-Muslims. I must say that this is what it should not be. If you think Lahore is dead or is dying, do not run away from it, but die with what you think is the dying Lahore. (…) When you suffer from fear you die before death comes to you. That is not glorious. I will not feel sorry if I hear that people in the Punjab have died not as cowards but as brave men. (…) I cannot be forced to salute any flag. If in that act I am murdered I would bear no ill will against anyone and would rather pray for better sense for the person or persons who murder me.’"

"“The Punjab Muslims do not believe in non-violence and should not, therefore, be given cause for grievance because once the Muslim lion is infuriated it would become difficult to subdue him.”"