Constitution and the myth of Secularism | J Sai Deepak

please join me in welcoming Shri J [Applause] saak namaskara good evening and uh thanks to the Citizens Council of mangaluru for giving me an opportunity to engage with the audience first of all I'd like to thank Shri B for having taken the pains for falling following after me for close to 6 months or in fact over a year to somehow get me to speak here not that he had to do it it just so happens that my schedule has been fairly cha block with other commitments but otherwise considering the beauty of this place uh there's

no need for any other incentive for me to come here I've come here often on the way to shinger and other places when I got up the flight today one of the first questions that popped in my head what is it that you guys eat that all of you are so good-look that's a serious question and I'm I'm I'm really interested in understanding what is the genetics of this place what makes everyone so good-looking regardless of the gender and uh uh I think this is one of the one of those parts of bhat which has

been blessed with abundance in every possible form whether it's culture nature and people in terms of Human Resources so I'm happy to be here this topic is something I think I've done to death on multiple sub I mean on multiple occasions so I was thinking how do I actually present something different here and how do I make it still relevant to the challenges that we face as a society so just a bit of a correction based on the introduction no factual correction usually what happens is social media has the tendency to magnify people beyond their

actual worth and also glorify them uh perhaps I don't know maybe there's a certain sense of hype surrounding individuals once they appear on the screen one I must confess I have no interest in the pursuit of any civilizational cause nor am I interested in pursuing anything which takes me away from my professional commitments let me be very clear about this when they were actually putting together the introduction two or three words that I preempted even before they could think of it was the word activist was the word civilizational Warrior and uh whatever something else thic

Warrior or whatever it is I said none of those words shall be used the sole identity that I subscribed to at least as an individual from a professional perspective is that of a lawyer I I will live as one and die as one and nothing more I have no other aspirations the reason why this is important is that if the message has to be relatable to the audience then the person must be equally relatable to the audience it makes very little sense to put someone on a pedestal and then hope that the message of that

person will relate or resonate with the audience perhaps there is a myth going around that I have committed myself fulltime to the cause of service of Dharma not one bit it's less than 15% of my time allocation in terms of my professional commitments family commitments and then whatever remains goes here but the the model that I'm trying to perhaps push is that it is equally possible for working professionals to take some time out in the service of this cause if I were to ask people to jump into this cause fulltime I don't think I'll find

even 5% success nobody's going to do it everybody has their own jobs everybody has their own responsibilities they have bills to pay they have emis to address so where is the question of asking people to jump into this cause fulltime that's not going to happen so the model that I think that works at least for the here and the now let's see what happens in the future is telling people to strike a balance between both their commitments their familial commitments and their societal or religious commitments in whichever order of clity they see it so my

interest in taking up this cause has been extremely selfish very very selfish in the sense that I don't wish to walk out into a society or at least send my child into one where the sporting of Hindu symbols becomes the subject of ridicule or becomes the target of attacks either in the name of secularism or in the name of constitutional morality where our civilizational identities is take a backseat so if if anything my motive or motivation behind getting into this agnik so to speak is only because I'm trying to create a safe future for my

own family that's it beyond that there is no incentive here the fact that there is an incidental benefit for the society is as I said incidental it's a second order effect it's not the primary intended effect but since I'm trying to address the larger Optics of it or the larger atmospherics of it obviously the target of that message happens to be the society but the intended beneficiary happens to be my family I'm very clear about it if I do not present this model what will happen is maybe 15 20 people will at best join this

so-called ongoing movement there won't be any stakeholdership or participation from the rest of the societ society and the same set of Talking Heads will go to different platforms we'll get visibility our books will sell a couple of selfies here a couple of selfies there Instagram likes will increase and then a few shots and reals on YouTube will do the rounds but would it have achieved the intended effect of widening the participation of the general Hindu Society from its kumara Slumber into the actual issues that stare us when it comes to our existence in civilizational let's

say survival I would always say that Hindus have a fairly huge problem of deification and glorification before performance is achieved they're eager to glorify and celebrate people before they have proved themselves on the anvils of actions on the on the anils of delivery on the anvils of actual concrete outcomes so I would request you to not make that mistake either on the policy front or the cultural front and especially on the political front don't make that mistake don't Dey and glorify people make sure that they deliver the goods that they've been voted for that would

be my single biggest message before I start on this topic otherwise what's going to happen is this will become and one of the reasons I have taken a step back from public engagements or even litfest for that matter is that the same set of faces are going everywhere where and I don't wish to join those proceedings unless and until I know that it's not just a question of relevance but a question of impact it must have an impact and not just a question of individual relevance so maybe there is a bit of aurbic honesty in

this I would request you to digest it because I think we are at a certain point in our history where if we don't address these issues with withering honesty then this D and the noise that is created around individuals will drown the actual challenges that we are beset with the problems are so large and are so huge that no single individual has the ability to address it on his or her own it is going to require Collective participation it is going to require Collective contribution and therefore the model a working model of striking a balance

between your professional regular lives and your ability to contribute to Dharma as well coming to the topic one of the reasons I've been speaking writing on the subject extensively is thanks to my own personal experience of trying to project and present certain causes before constitutional fora such as the Supreme Court on subjects and institutions which are close to my heart so most people don't know as to what I do in terms of practice let me just say that so that you know why this transition has happened I began as an engineer turned lawyer and my

primary area of practice is actually intellectual property law and competition law even if I say so myself I have some degree of expertise over the last 15 years I've been the adviser to multiple governments on implementation of Ip policies I've also represented bat in trade negotiations with the United States I've done all of that so why did I make the jump to Constitution at all in the first place so when I joined law school Constitution was the actual goal but you see Constitution doesn't pay bills it's a very poor area of practice it's not exactly

a a place thriving with a lot of money and activism had no interest I come from a low middle class family I was very interested in settling my student loans and quickly climbing the social ladder that was my very clear incentive so I said let me spend some time pursuing Lakshmi in the hope that I get to pursue Saraswati after that and the idea was that I split let's say my practice areas in such a way that my money comes from the Delhi high court and my passion is is wetted and satisfied in the Supreme

Court on the Constitutional front that's how I have largely divided it so if some a lot of times what happens is as a consequence of all these uh social media engagements or public engagements people somehow get the distinct impression that I'm going around asking people to contribute funds to my cause I don't need money from anyone I have no interest in soliciting funds whatsoever you want to contribute contribute to your local goala to your vatala for offes here to schools here those have been Hindu priorities traditionally and those should continue to be Hindu priorities for

eternity as far as my own transition is concerned I'll blend it with the topic so you know why this has been so personal for me 2016 that is from 2009 to 2016 I was part of a law firm I Rose to became the youngest associate partner in March 2015 by which time I had developed a fair reputation as someone who could argue in court with of the need for a senior by which time my opposing councils had said if you were not part of a firm we'd start engaging you for arguments so by 2016 is

when I decided to quit and go independent now as long as you're part of another outfit it's very difficult for you to take positions because the organization will pay the price for your positions and particularly if they happen to be politically incorrect positions and you're fairly vocal about it they may or may not agree but without blaming them for anything the fact of the matter is I decided to prove myself exclusively on the anvils of professional commitments for the first 7 years people should know me for my professional competence before they know me for my

opinions was my approach to it because every Tom Harry can have an opinion so what why should people hear you why should people pay attention to what you're saying they will listen to you provided you have done something you have you have something to show for and therefore the strategy very clear strategy at least a calculated one was establish yourself and then you start talking on the subject so for close to 7 years I spent my time keeping my mouth shut keeping my head down proving myself exclusively as a competent commercial litigator in the Delhi

High Court 2016 June is when I went independent as an independent arguing Council which is in the mold of a barister wherein you don't interact with a client your sole job is to argue in court you don't file you don't draft you just argue so your clients are other lawyers who want you to argue and the actual client is the client of that lawyer so the client is in a relationship with the solicitor who is the one who prepares the matter the solicitor engages the barister to argue in court so I I happened to be

in the arguing mold so that's the practice model that I jumped to because by then I'd already established a reputation as someone who could fairly argue in court around that time the saala case was raging before a three judge bench and the three judge bench was asking itself whether this matter is is serious enough for it to be referred to a five judge bench and therefore arguments were going on I think between October 2016 and February 2017 before the three judge bench there is one organization called people for Dharma which was looking for lawyers who

could take up their cause pro bono now they didn't have access to me I didn't have access to them neither of us knew of the others existence someone on social media later that person met me and revealed his identity put out a message to them a public tweet in fact that if you're looking for someone who will fight this cause passionately regardless of any commercial incentive go to this guy because he's serious about these things now I don't know how that person had read this about me from a distance but that's how they said it

that's how the opportunity landed on my table and when the opportunity landed on my table I realized with growing awareness and concern that bhat had achieved a certain unfortunate stage where all the institutions that inform its identity and civilization will now have to prove their worth before constitutional courts as to how their practices are constitutional religious practices and traditions that have survived and that have existed for thousands of years will now be tested on the annuals of the constitution in front of an Anglo phone audience and traditional practices will now have to be conveyed and

packaged in English for them to understand whether it is constitutional or not now remember all these people just like us at least most of us are people who have gone through an English education system with or without any traditional exposure to our customs and traditions or even if there is exposure there's a decent chance that they look down upon those Traditions so this is not a primary audience of children in schools it's it's not a secondary audience of people in colleges it's a tertiary audience with a lived experience of constantly having looked up looked down

upon their culture for 30 years or 40 years and you're trying to convince them in a span of a week or so that this practice is not misogynistic that this practice is perfectly valid ask yourself a simple question somebody brings their life experience to their jobs and you are hoping to argue against their life experience and their worldview in a span of a few hours trying to convince them as to why this practice must continue genuinely speaking I I didn't think we had any hopes of success no hopes of success you can't even convince children

today of your Customs how can you hope to convince adults with set Egos and set patterns of thinking who occupy those positions which obviously give them a certain degree of importance there is no ins incentive for them to con to to be convinced otherwise to be persuaded otherwise but why was the representation still necessary the representation was necessary because if you don't vocally express your point of view it is as good as that point of view not existing people will therefore say there is no alternative point of view there is no alternative opinion so sometimes

even if it happens to be a losing battle at the outset at least in round one your job is to continue hitting and kicking the door to try and pry that door open for your point of view so knowing fully well that the the odds were stacked against us and when I mean we it's a huge team of let's say a variety of lawyers perhaps I was the youngest to argue in that particular matter everyone put their best foot forward if you had Legends like Mr Satish parasaran including Dr singi was arguing from this side

for God's sakes Dr singi argued for the tranor deas swam board defending the tradition on behalf of the temple in defense of the practice a host of voices some of the most Stellar voices produced by the Indian legal fraternity did argue from this side and still managed to come out only with a 41 verdict one opinion in your favor four against you and the one person to deliver a verdict in your favor happened to be a lady in the cause which is supposed to be about women the dissenting opinion in favor of the tradition came

from a lady and the men were saviors of women in that cause this is unfortunately how contemporary feminism Works where men become more feminist and women themselves and in the process what happened was there was a moment of Chan created allow me to say this everything that has happened since 2018 especially since the birth of the sabarimala movement has only led to a rising Hindu Consciousness before 2018 not many people had heard the words Nik brahmacharya people in the north of India several parts of that country had no knowledge of this particular Temple despite Russians

argentinians and Brazilians coming to this temple with proper dsha any number of videos put out by foreigners basically saying we understand this why can't you Hindus and Indians understand it that was the extent of the problem but sometimes I think these challenges are moments of learning and moments of churn because they pry open the conversation from a confined box and they and the entire Pandora's Box is opened gender jati Temple everything comes out and then people start thinking okay what do we actually know about this particular subject for us to have such strong opinions on

people started revisiting from there in 2018 when the first negative verdict came out so many people who had written off keralites and malalis as commun who were irredeemable and encourageable the women of Kerala took out processions in defense of the temple thereby establishing that political choices and religious beliefs need not necessarily coincide they could be different and that possibility was out for people to see so the educated women of the most literate state of the country came out on the streets protesting against a verdict which was apparent ly meant to liberate women in defense of

a practice that was apparently misogynistic look at the irony of it and they said we know this practice better than you think we do you don't need to come and save us we can defend ourselves there are better things for us for you to defend us against not this if at all you would really wish to intervene and protect us there are other serious issues this is luxury litigation people who are utterly jobless or whose only job is to take pot shots at Hindu institutions are the ones who who are behind it and who constantly

think that Hindu in institutions must be in a Perpetual mode of Reform and everything that they know and practice for the last Thousand Years must be junked and discarded that seems to be the motive behind it so it was a moment of learning because it opened my eyes to how little I knew about an institution of which I thought I knew some what is the meaning of this practice how is it supposed to be observed all the myths associated with the sabala dsha I had to unlearn and I was put in touch with a brilliant

set of people who were vastly more qualified than I am and I was or I will be ever on the subject of Dharma who decided to download all their knowledge upon me giving me the opportunity to present this before a court of law perhaps what I'm trying to do is to say that I was not it was not a solo act I just happened to be a glorified articulator and messenger of their opinions and their points of view before the highest form of the land and the credit must go to all those people who were

behind the scenes I also walked away with the glory partly because of social media representation when the fact of the matter is a lot of Aika I mean bakas with stood liti blows on the ground I didn't have to I mean I didn't have to face a single LTI blow right two my star argument of the D is rights came from a boy younger than I and a non- lawyer his name is tarun Daga he was part of the team he basically said if women have rights doesn't the Dy have rights that was the seed

of the argument and I then thought about it so the strength of a lawyer need not be that he is the the the origin of an idea he must just be open to ideas and then he must know how to build an argument out of it and to develop that argument further that's what happened from there I went to the next experience which was the padmanaba Swami Temple case where I happen to represent the chief tantri of the temple and then I realized what kind of a relationship did princely states of bhat have with their

duties myor chamundeswari jagat therefore the gajapati of odisha madling G then coin I think Pisha so every princely state seems to have its own Dy and every princely family when it negotiated its accession with the Indian State primarily was saying take everything else away but leave our rights with respect to our daes intact because this is our hereditary institution if you break this this relationship there will be real consequences for us the fear of the the fear of karmic consequences was very very real for them and so if you if you go through the negotiations

I think the right hand man of uh Wabi Patel who wrote a book on the integration of States and who released the white paper on how integration must happen captures it brilliantly as to how these parties negotiated with the Indian State and then I said okay if 90% of the princely states were Hindu princely States and the the basis of the partition was the division between Hindu princely stat and Muslim princely states how did Hindu princely States come together to come out with a non-hindu bat how is that possible so each of the parts have

very clear religious Allegiance but apparently the unit that they form is a secular unit which has no religious identity at all is this what they negotiated for how does this even work that explains the absence of the word sing secularism partly in the original Constitution because they were all participants and stakeholders to how the Constitution will be framed because it would have a bearing on their surviving rights after the accession including the religious rights how do you call this a secular Constitution if it has a specific provision for protection of the cow if it has

a specific article article 295a under which the union of India from the Consolidated fund of India continues to pay an annual rent to the padabas Swami Temple for the lands that it is taken from the temple so Temple payment is made out from an apparently secular Constitution how do you explain this which is why I believe it's important for us to understand the entry of secularism into the Indian constitution very very clearly for all practical purposes it was pushed and forced into the draft or rather into the body of the document only during the emergency

so those who wish to bat for the Constitution and its integrity and whatnot have a lot to answer for because this concept and this principle was inserted in the Constitution during the most unconstitutional period of bhat when for all practical purposes all checks and balances were in a state of animated suspension so so how do you then constantly bat for secularism that is a question of fact that is a question of history that needs a very clear answer even the most hardcore of Hindu voices somehow are wedded to the concept of secularism without realizing what

its Origins are and its devastating catastrophic effect on the civilization as a whole now how do we understand secularism in bhat it says the state has no religious identity the state shall maintain an equal distance from all religions and all faiths and the state shall never use its funds which are supposed to be secular funds for the promotion of any particular Faith or any institution of any particular faith in your lived experience has bhat done any of these the answer is a no so either the definition of secularism in this country is a Ki or

we are fundamentally a hypocritical State these are only two possible conclusions that I can come out with now the the consequence of insertion of secularism in the context of bhat has been a large scale wholesale brainwashing of the entire population which has the effect of telling the population that it shall never have the right to proudly wear the civilizational identity of this country on its sleeve I've said this before I'll say it again secularism is a political Evangelical tool whose job is to sever your roots between you and your past as a state as a

society as a country what they will do is that it's a river called secularism they'll take you to that River ask you to dunk in that River and then your baptism is done and thanks to that baptism you're now secular Hindus morons or oxymorons or oxymorons or morons so according to me secularism is that particular water body to which we all taken to convert and come out with a lens which is completely brainwashed what is the origin of this word what is the origin of this concept I've I've written about this but before me stalber

have written about this extensively so whatever they've written I'll just summarize it in 15 minutes so that you have a clear picture around the 12th or the 13th century in Europe long long ago not so long ago whenever long ago the point is around 12th century when there was only one denomination of the church which is Catholicism in Europe the relation Rel ship between the church and the rulers was an extremely tense relationship because the church effectively is based on the doctrine that human existence is divided into two kingdoms Kingdom of the earth and Kingdom

of Heaven the church has Monopoly over Kingdom of Heaven rulers are allowed to Rule the Kingdom of Earth but since Earth is subservient to heaven the ruler is Subs to the church therefore a tussle goes on for close to 3 to 4 centuries between the church and Christian rulers not just rulers Christian rulers during this entire period what happens is that Kings tried to take over the property of the church to control its ability to interfere with Administration hid money as much as possible so that the church is ability to comment on Administration comes down

so that the power that they wield over Society comes down and then the church also does a few things wherein apologies confessions are sold for money so a general let's say uh frustration or angst against the church as an institution starts building in European society that gradually leads to the Reformation movement with Martin Luther not Martin Luther King Jr but Martin Luther who is the founder of the Lutheran brand of denomination of Christians and who are mostly if you see Lutheran denomination you'll find it in Germany for for God knows for what reason so he

begins um a movement of reformation where he challenges the Monopoly of the church when he starts challenging the Monopoly of the church he then comes out with a protest against Catholicism ISM which results in the Protestant movement a protest against the manner in which the Catholic Church operates controls all religious aspects and basically says you shall not have access to Salvation unless and until you go through the church specifically the Catholic church he tries to break that Monopoly of the Catholic Church on salvation and all other aspects of religious Behavior as well as non-religious behavior

that Reformation movement results in several Christian states of Europe choosing sides some choosing the Catholic Church's side and some choosing the Protestant side results in a huge fight multiple treaties and the final treaty is what we know as the Treaty of West FIA so the Treaty of West FIA was not some kind of a political treaty it was fundamentally a religious treaty wherein the Monopoly of the Catholic Church over Christianity was completely broken and for the first time the treaty recognized that Christianity shall henceforth have two denominations Catholicism and protestantism now once you do this

the concept of separation of the church and the state comes from that treaty which is to say the Catholic Church will not interfere with the rights of individual European rulers to decide whether they want to be parts of Catholic chrisan Christianity or Protestant Christianity so therefore separation of the church from the state is basically it still retains the Christian character it only says the Catholic Church will not tell us whether we should be Catholics or Protestants and the ruler of each European state will have the power to decide whether he wants to be on the

Catholic side or on the Protestant side but the concept of secularism in Europe never meant give up Christianity that the state shall have no identity the state shall have a Christian identity the ruler shall be a Christian the only difference is whether he would be a Catholic Christian or a Protestant was the distinction compare that with what we are being told about secularism in Barat Europe secularism translates to retention of the Christian identity it only says you will remain equidistant from denominations why if you happen to have a Protestant minority population in a Catholic majority

State then there must be safeguards to protect the interest of those denominational minorities and therefore the majority minority Concept in terms of protection of the rights of the minority is to be traced to that particular situation where where minority Protestants had to protect themselves against majority Catholics and vice versa however the existence of a minority Catholic in a Protestant majority state would not require the state to give up its Protestant majoritarian identity and vice versa so they were entitled to have their own identities and I'll give you a simple comparison think of it as fights

let's say a fight between vites and shites if the king happened to be a shite and you had a minority VI population he would have to safeguard their rights but that doesn't mean he would have to give up his own shy white affiliation and he would still be a Hindu king but with a shite identity who basically says I will employ laws in such a way that they're equidistant from both sects this is not DH it is p dharm means I don't have an identity I'm equally distant from different religious identities p means I have

a religious identity but I'm equally distant from the wnite and the shite secularism when exported to bat like every other European export to colonized societies was meant to divide the society and to to prepare it for ultimate conversion secularism is the intermediate step before you give up your religious identity alog together and this is a documented intended let's say strategy that they themselves say in their correspondence why is it that the definition of Europe of secularism in the mothership which is Europe allows them to read maintain their National Religious identities but when it is exposed

to countries like bhat it results in countries like bhat having to give up their civilizational identities and religious identities why which is why I use the words consciously the myth of secularism because what has been perpetrated on us is a Mia which has got nothing to do with the original story of secularism in the mothership namely Europe so the next time someone says secularism means separation of the church from the state please ask that blessed idiot to explain why does it speak of church and the state why not any other institution why does this concept

speak of the church because the history of secularism is the history of the church hence the words separation of the church and the state second the other compromise that was struck between the rulers and the church church as part of this principle was since the territory of the church will be separate from the territory of the king in terms of the jurisdictions the king shall never be allowed to appropriate property of the church in this country what it is translated to is the appropriation of Temple property by the secular Indian state so it was meant

to ensure that the king shall never have the right to interfere with the financial Independence and autonomy of the church it has taken the exact opposite consequence in this country for all practical purposes we are glorified M putas and puries who have zero understanding of how these Concepts have devastated our society fully and ENT trenched unnecessary Concepts in the heart of the society hopefully not forever and idiots on social media fight on saying you are secular I'm pseudo secular and Ulta don't give up the concept all together because secularism in its truest form and definition

is incompatible with Hindu philosophy it is incompatible with Hindu ethos it is incompatible with Hindu Administration because Hindu governance is based on the concept of R and Dharma the king is seen as the torchbearer of Dharma this the king is effectively seen as the one who will advance the cause of Dharma and Dharma can take a religious connotation it can take a spiritual connotation it can take a political connotation so it can become rajad Dharma or it can become even sanat Dharma but rajad Dharma is also to be traced only from sonat Dharma there is

no way you can divorce or dissociate the two when someone says that bhat should embrace secularism it effectively means dharma's position in politics and policym should be completely dislodged whereas every other country which subscribes to a particular religious identity gets to Fashion its laws on the basis of its religious beliefs except us so 52 countries with an Islamic identity can Source their laws and their beliefs and policy from Sharia and the Quran Christians can do that you still have kingdoms monarchs in Europe whereas we abolished princely States completely insulted them by abolishing even priv purses

force them to sell their property force them to rent out their ancestors lands how many know that close to about 126 temples in Tandra are still controlled by the descendants of the marata Empire there is a bosle who is still responsible for 126 temples in djur he doesn't go around in a Ben he goes around in a scooter the head of such a great samanam goes around in a scooter the pandalam family A couple of generations ago had to work hard to make ends meet and what are we constantly told about our princely states that

they were collaborators that they managed to keep our way of life alive when they knew it was extremely difficult to defeat the British because that was the largest colonizing empire ever known in history so they did what they could to strike a compromise with him and still preserve our way of life and our institutions is lost on all of this because we have purchased distorted European ideals Lock Stock and Barrel without asking is it relevant to me does it apply to me what are its consequences for my identity that's the fundamental question we should have

asked the unfortunate reality today is that even those institutions and organizations which are supposedly guardians of Hindu and Hindu Hindu Dharma all also swear by the very same devastating Concepts without changing the definition or without asking whether it is applicable remotely or not with no intention to embarrass anyone my only suggestion is when it comes to some of these issues try not to get sucked into the social media battles of BJP versus Congress think for yourself because that's a it's a such a nonproductive useless conversation because it sets such a low bar for the conversation

with no original thought possible because both sides agree on certain issues they may only point out each other's hypocrisy whereas I am basically saying we should not be accepting certain rules of the game which have been taken for granted instead of asking who is more secular we should start asking why secular let's have an open debate on the subject why secular what is its impact and it extends to a host of other values I'm not here trying to take pot shots at any organization I'm only trying to say since you have taken the interest in

the initiative to attend a lecture on such a boring topic I'm assuming that you're open to slightly more different points of view than the standard Congress versus BJP troop because I am sick and tired of it I am done with it it is way past the sell by date we are consuming expired Goods which can lead to nothing good so focus on three things what is good for our civilization what is good for that identity which informs the identity of the civilization who is doing a better job of protecting that particular identity are they doing

it enough can we push them to do better those are the only questions which according to me are relevant everything else is hogwash and everything else is White Noise meant to keep you occupied and away from the actual problems sure at the time of Elections at the time of hustings we all have our choices and there you never get get to make an ideal Choice you're like bad better worst or bad better worst so that's the hierarchy of let's say virtue in this country at this point politically speaking so there you go for the least

harmful option in the hope that you can at least push them to do something because the other side has clearly said I here to destroy you I'm I'm going to adopt a scotch Earth policy even that fellow doesn't realize that he's committing political suicide when there's an empty Field open to protect Hindu identity openly right now the political option of an unabashed let's say representative of Hindu security and Hindu interest is lying on the on the table like free money unclaimed but he is anyway given up because he's obviously controlled by external motivations and sources

so when you start discussing these concepts for a moment keep the political lens aside and focus on something deeper and two the purpose of introducing decolonization as part of our discourse is to question everything that we have taken for granted till date since 1835 when that blessed English education system was inserted into our consciousness to brainwash us over the years you have to realize what they said when they introduced that system forget the so-called M dialogue that people keep quoting and citing that's irrelevant there's actually something deeper they realized after multiple battles that the one

aspect of bhara society that they must not touch is religion because you can take over our resources you can do whatever you want the moment you touch religion you will get a bloody nose 1857 proved it even further so between 1835 and 1857 they had multiple such experiences and then they realized this community will resist immediate forced conversion because they've been fighting that brand of forced conversion for 800 years before that so we have resisted the sword openly so therefore we are comfortable picking up the sword to resist the sword and therefore they start a

slow poison which will take effect over Generations like time bombs that will explode where Hindus themselves will stand outside universities protesting against CA against NRC idiots of the first [Applause] order and that bomb is exploding almost 150 years after it was set in motion you're trying to protect your present while your future is standing up against you and when this happens they are hoping remain Hindus but remain Hindus on paper only only for legal purposes you'll remain Hindu Because by the time you're out of this laundry which which I call the English education system the

Indian education system we would have brainwashed you properly Hindu Hindu Hindu weak Hindu weak Hindu weak Hindu I'm not a Hindu I hate Hindu stages of conversion so it's only a matter of time and therefore the word Hindu at this point if I had to take a head count of practicing Hindus we are not even 800 million according to me because the test is how many of us would defend our religious institutions with conviction and I wouldn't pick the number at more than 50% of 800 million leaving us at only 40 crores that's a very

I know I understand it's a fairly alarming assessment but based on my experience I don't think the number is Beyond 50% of the total number on paper and when conversations happen about reclaiming our spaces if the conversation had taken place in 1850s there would be no room for negotiation or compromise today the ones who are saying give us all our occupied sites back and this legislation that stands in the way of legitimate Reclamation of occupied sites are being called extremists not by others but by Hindus themselves proving that the education system has done its job

that the Slow Time Bomb has clearly exploded properly you know 40,000 sites at best is a number within the broken truncated moan bhat that you see today but if you start from Afghanistan till Bangladesh and you compare the total number of temples that have been destroyed 40,000 is an underplayed number completely underplayed number how many J lingas have been lost and how many Shakti pites have been lost is a simple calculation you start with and then you look at every other Temple possible Mulan becomes Multan air becomes ajmir you have all these names and still

you think 40,000 is a huge number it's such a huge number it can come only from the mouth of a rabid hind extremist such as Sid sorry the reality is despite going through the laundry I have not been whitewashed yet I have managed to retain that the germ a bit more for God knows for whatever reason but you will realize as you read history that if there is a community that has allowed itself to be colonized over decades post Independence the Stellar textbook example will be that of the Hindu community so what you've done in

1947 is given yourself a paper Independence which is why it is swaja which is self-rule but not swatantra which is ruled by your own principles so today we are swaja but we certainly are not swatantra by any yach stick because you're ashamed of your policies you're ashamed of your past you don't have the guts to implement any of your political thoughts or your administrative thoughts in action they're only relegated to ornamental speeches about how great we are and how we are the founders of democracy that's it and the one document that is constantly being cited

against you to say that if you take such a position you are taking an anti-constitutional position therefore happens to be the Constitution itself hence the efforts to understand is the Constitution fundamentally pitted against my civilization or over the years has it been interpreted in such a way that it appears pitted against my civilization is it is there a problem with gangotri or is there a problem with ganga flowing in NOA by the time it passes through the plains has it become dirty so hence the attempt in whatever little I've written to understand how is this

tension going to be understood how is it going to be played out fortunately I've stayed away from the political let's say noise as much as possible POs to focus on these questions because remember the other side operates in silence and they get the job done in silence we believe in making a lot of political noise without undertaking policy changes politics is temporary policy is long-term if you believe that Civilization is is long-term your investment therefore has to be in policy and therefore the horse which which I mean behind which the cart is placed has to

be policy and politics must be a driver of that particular policy we actually place the the card before the horse we will celebrate every municipal election we will celebrate every pchat election without asking has it changed the status quo on education has it changed the status quo on our own children rebelling against our culture has it changed a situation where beef consumption becomes normalized across parts of the country when generations of our ancestors fought to prevent it and today you have a situation where you have an advertisement with a couple walking into a restaurant where

beef consumption is shown with tagak being playing being played in the background imagine if this could have happened 150 years ago that is the story of so-called Hindu resistance and how we are an independent Society we are being told you independent because we we we tell you you're independent but you will still follow the rules that we set about 150 years ago for all the rebels among youth you want to break the rule break the colonial rule in your head thank you [Applause]