Even recent scholars from the West now admit that the Indian religion was and is great as its scriptures show its scientific base. Indian sages knew a thousand years before the West came to know that earth revolved around the Sun and age of universe was more than 40 million years unlike the Bible that claimed god created the universe in six days but six thousand years ago. The debate between Rishi Mandan and young Sankaracharya provides glimpses of scientific depth of Indian philosophy. The main lesson that flows from it is that heat generated by individual’s anger can rob freshness of flowers in his garland. Contradictory concepts abounded in Indian philosophical works.

Contradictory isms were accepted to form few thousand sects. They existed in tolerance of each other and respect and right of existence to other each other. Unlike four religions of the Middle East, the Indian religion, older by few thousand years to new crops, multiplicity of gods was propounded and followers of each god were allowed to exist freely with their different ways and modes of worship. However the social reconstruction that came around 1500 BC to classify Indian society in four Varna with denial of rights to knowledge and entry into abodes of worship resulted in giving monopolies to a corrupt class of Purohit.

In Homo hierarchies the French scholar gave a plausible theory for classification of Indian society in four sections as consequence of scientific understanding of pollution. Organic functional needs of vocations were relegated to lower strata. Need for avoiding contacts with harmful germs to maintain distances were converted into evil of untouchability of humans of certain castes. Those sections that inherited rights to perform all rites from birth to death converted rights to trade to extract demanded sums for their performances. The corruption reached levels that necessitated reforms to bring in existence new concept for way of life as Jainism and Buddhism in 5 century BC. Yet social equality eluded India. Overwhelming proportion in the population remained deprived and as such could not become an integral part.

Till the eleventh century Indian sages were far ahead of other cultures, religions and even people in giving a new understanding in religion, philosophy, mathematics, logic and astronomy. It spread to Europe via Arabian civilization. Ancient accounts in Greek, Roman, Arabian and Chinese logs are evidence of strength and varieties of Indian thought. India had already developed concept of Gan Sangh where people ruled themselves without a symbolic holder of political power not unlike the Roman Republics of third century BC. Vardhaman Mahavir and Siddhartha Gautam had emerged from such Gan Sangh to give concepts of Jainism and Buddhism. But in few centuries both concepts were swallowed. So were several invading tribes to be absorbed in prevailing caste system. Muslims stepped in Sindh from Persia in seventh century to deal with piracy menace from Sindh province. Legends of wealth and knowledge had brought Alexander in third century BC and Mahmud of Gazhani in eleventh century. No thought was given to unity to resist invaders.

Dr. BR Munje was first to recommend unity of the Hindus with a centralized authority like the Vatican for Catholics or the Mecca for the Muslims only after clashes between Maplas, settled Arabian land holders and landless workers. Violence was over the quantum of wages but branded as the communal carnage. The Sangh formation was response to communal riots in Nagpur in 1924.

Many believe the emergence of the Sangh was to stem distortions that Mahatma Gandhi had introduced in social structure by making the OBCs, the Dalit and the Muslims insertive of their political rights. It threatened the dominating supremacy of the Brahmin class. The Sangh was created to fight it as a one man rule structured body and with denial of thinking to its volunteers. They fight secularism under the belief that it aims only at sponsoring interests of the Muslims. Now new meaning has been added that every young must fight rape of its mother land by seeking throw out the Muslims from India. It does not recognize that overwhelming majority among the Indian Muslims are original Indians. Most of them have carried their castes and caste specific vocations also to disturb equality that Islam proposed. Even though they are doing exactly what they did as Hindus. They are not denied entry into place of worship as they were in the Hindu main sects.

In 1982, twelve thousand Dalit families had embraced Islam. They resented their treatment as untouchables even though they were educated and had vocations other than their traditional caste vocations. They were lured back. At purification ceremony, a media question was posed where would be their place in the Hindu society? Will they be upgraded as the Brahmins? In a response VHP functionary Ashok Singhal abused media and walked away. The sensibilities of the deprived classes stand raped for centuries. Cure is not available even now but attention is now sought to be diverted by asking everyone to fight the Muslims as they were aliens and different from the main religions of India. It is conveniently overlooked that overwhelming majority among Indian Muslims is of original inhabitant, many lured to and others preferred to embrace Islam. Their vocations are of their ancestors.

Danger signs from the Middle East over rise in extremist activities are cited for justification of need to deal with the Muslims as their ancestors ruled India for five centuries to shame. No one asks the relevant question why they accepted subjugation for such a long time? Why mainstream remained in safe environs of their homes instead of joining freedom struggle. Formation of Pakistan is taken as justification for waging war. But no demand is voiced to end to social inequalities inbuilt in the social stratification.

There are negative and positive approach options for everyone. Peculiarity of Indian soil is that it introduced social stratification even in Islam that never was conceived to be part and everyone was to be equal before the Supreme Being. In India fashion is to add Khan after the name to denote superior status among the Muslims. Otherwise how Hussein’s son can be known as Khan? It is to denote that they are superior caste as Mishra and Sharma are among the Hindu pantheon. It is much easier to preach violence against sections. But no nation or community has ever emerged as the superior through route of violence. Stronger ones have always emerged to defeat the victors later. History is replete with thousands of examples. Even Napoleon Bonaparte was defeated. Indian tradition has never been to use sword instead of word to defeat and annihilate anyone.