Mahabharata 2014

Politics has never been my cup of tea. I have never been interested in it at any time during my whole life. I am fully conscious of the fact that I was subjected to it and was made to suffer helplessly and silently at various levels in my working life, social life and family life (particularly extended family life). Perhaps I am too simple-minded, a moron, who has not been bestowed upon such traits as are necessary for indulging and succeeding in this wily craft. On the contrary, I have been accursed with a very strange idiosyncrasy, which is hilarious at times and embarrassing at other times. When I see something, some person or some situation, I immediately get reminded of another thing, another person or another situation. There are times when there is a noticeable similarity between the two objects whereas on many other occasions, there is not even the faintest resemblance. Anyways I continue seeing things that way and am not able to help it.

I see Mahabharata in the political situation that currently prevails in India. I see it being re-enacted deliberately and shamelessly with such outrageous exhibition of hatred, animosity, abysmal indecency and evilness as would make even the original Mahabharata desperadoes look like angels. 

I call this new edition as ‘Mahabharata 2014’.

What are the various characters and situations that I see in ‘Mahabharata 2014’? 

I begin with myself. I see myself as Sanjay. I am only seeing ‘Mahabharata 2014’ being enacted and am reporting it dispassionately like a live broadcast of a cricket match sans any opinion or comment of my own. Since I am reporting to myself only, I become Dhritrashtra too. But I see another person who fits the bill for that role. He will come in and take over shortly. 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the protagonist in ‘Mahabharata 2014’. Narendra means "lord of men" but to me it is "human incarnation of Indra”. Since Indra was the biological father of Arjuna, Narendra Modi is Arjuna literally and figuratively. I also see a marked change in character from the original. This latter day Arjuna is intrepid and is neither afraid nor reluctant to fight. His ambidexterity is characterized by a conspicuous singularity. He can take on and vanquish any adversary as well as any of his own. He is persistently accused of recalcitrance by friends and foes alike.

Another rather the most important feature of ‘Mahabharata 2014’ is the absence of Krishna. I do not see Krishna in any person nor do I see any person being capable of playing Krishna. Consequently Arjuna of ‘Mahabharata 2014’ is virtually without a sarathi (Charioteer)–the guide. Ostensibly for the records, the new BJP leadership has taken an initiative to draw upon the political wisdom and acumen of its stalwarts and to seek continued guidance from them. Accordingly, it has instituted a ‘Margdarshak Mandal” (Guidance Group) - a collection of select BJP stalwarts. But since ‘Margdarshak Mandal’ is virtually dysfunctional, Narendra Modi is bereft of the advantage of independent, frank and free sound political wisdom. He is therefore constrained yet happy to act as both Arjuna and Krishna.

Rahul Gandhi is the obvious pick for the part of Duryodhna. Sonia Gandhi automatically gets to be Gandhari. It is rather remarkable that the spelling of 'Gandhari' includes all the letters that form the spelling of 'Gandhi'. The two remaining letters in 'Gandhari' viz.  R & A could as well be expanded into Remorseless Aversion, the trait that she is currently exhibiting against Modi by scornfully condemning him as a personification of all things evil and branding him as 'Maut Ka Saudagar' (Merchant of Death) etc. etc. Alternatively, RA could be simply read as Rahul’s Amma or yet again taken as Robert’s Amma-in-Law.

In ‘Mahabharata 2014’, I see the Kauravas, the Pandavas and other armies in the present day Indian political parties, organizations, alliances and other outfits.

I see the so called ‘Saffron Brigade’ comprising RSS, BJP and NDA allies as the 'Righteous' Pandavas. And I see Indian National Congress(INC), Nationalist Congress Party(NCP), Samajwadi Party(SP), Janta Dal (United)(JDU), Lalu Prasad Yadav’s Rashtriya Janta Dal(RJD), Mamta Bannerji led Trinamool Congress(TMC), Mayawati led Bahujan Samaj Party(BSP), Kejriwal led Aam Aadmi Party(AAP), all communist parties and any "Left" sympathizers and supporters as the opposing ‘sinister’ Kauravas. A large number of self proclaimed rationalists and secularists also overtly support the Kauravas.

I often see Atal Bihari Vajpayee as Yudhishthira, perhaps because he was the first non-congress politician who became prime minster of India. That was very much like Yudhishthira being anointed the king of the newly created kingdom of Indraprastha.

However, since Vajpayee is presently reported to be having serious health issues, is often confined to a wheelchair and fails to recognize people, I see Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the Bhishma of ‘Mahabharata 2014’. I pray to Almighty for blessing Vajpayee with a healthy extended long life. But taking it stoically, there is no denying the fact that ‘he lies on the death bed and will depart for his heavenly abode whenever he wills it’.

I see Manmohan Singh as Dhritrashtra. He was not even an MP when he got picked as Prime Minister. He has never been a member of Lok Sabha. The only time, back in 1999, that he fought an election for Lok Sabha, he was defeated by Vijay Kumar Malhotra of BJP. He continues to serve as a member of the Indian Parliament, representing the state of Assam (not Punjab! nor Haryana!! nor even Delhi!!!) in the Rajya Sabha for the fifth consecutive term since 1991.

Manmohan Singh ruled as Prime Minister for 10 years, not only with a near zero visual acuity but also complete virtual impairment of other faculties including those of speech and hearing. He was totally dependent upon and was directed by Sonia Gandhi in ‘managing’ the affairs of the state including his prime ministerial duties and obligations. Therefore, I am not at all surprised that I see Manmohan Singh as Dhritarashtra.

I see Lal Krishna Advani as Dronacharya. Though he belongs to BJP, he is not comfortable with Narendra Modi and has bewrayed signs of sympathy for opponents of Modi both within BJP and outside.

I see RSS and Mohan Bhagwat as King Drupada and Dhrishtadyumana. INC and its allies keep alleging that RSS is the master mind of the ‘Saffron Brigade’ and that all the battle plans and stratagems are worked out by Bhagwat & Co. I also see that it is not a coincidence that mouthpiece of RSS bears the name Panchjanya, the name of Krishna’s conch (See references 1 & 2 below).

I get confused because in Mahabharata, the real master mind was Krishna and Krishna alone. If RSS and Bhagwat were accepted as master minds, they would become Krishna. I reiterate that I do not see Krishna in any person nor do I see any person being capable of playing Krishna.

I am convinced that Narendra Modi is playing two roles viz. Arjuna and Krishna. But I do not see him succeeding as Krishna. I am concerned that owing to the absence of Krishna, I see that this war of attrition will not be ending any sooner.

I am confused with respect to Draupadi also. I see Draupadi in two ladies viz. Sushma Swaraj and Smriti Irani.

After BJP’s loss at the hands of INC, in the general elections in 2004, it was Sushma Swaraj who had averred  that ‘if Sonia Gandhi were selected as prime minister, she would wear white saris, shave her head, not wear any ornaments, eat only black gram and sleep on the floor so long as Sonia Gandhi remained prime minister.’ (see reference 3). I see this averment as Draupadi’s vow: ‘not to tie her hair until she has decorated it with the blood of Dushasana’.

Smriti Irani’s election campaign against Rahul Gandhi and their bitter war of words on ‘Twitter’ and other social media are well known. Therefore, it is alright that I see Smriti Irani as Draupadi. Anyway, I see Smriti Irani as Draupadi more often than I see Sushma Swaraj in that role.

Describe here below are some events which occurred during the past few years that remind me of some events of Mahabharata.

BJP’s victory blitzkrieg in assembly elections held in 2013 in the states of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and BJP turning up as single largest party in Delhi assembly elections the same year, reminds me of  Rajsuya Yajna performed by Yudhishthira. I see Rajnath Singh as Yudhishthira.  Rajnath Singh as BJP president led the party during the above elections while Yudhishthira as the king performed the Rajsuya Yajna. I see that Vasundhra Raje, Shiv Raj Chauhan, Raman Singh and Dr. Harsh Vardhan led their armies a la Arjuna, Bhima, Nakula and Sehdeva (order of names is random and correspondence between two sets of names is unintentional).

And I see the biggest event of all: Narendra Modi being catapulted onto the national scene and taking centre stage. In fact, this event comprised a series of events: Modi getting inducted into BJP’s parliamentary board; his  getting appointed as leader of the campaign (subsequently rescinded) and finally the official declaration of his being selected as ‘prime ministerial candidate’ of BJP and NDA. In the culmination of this event, I see Narendra Modi morphing into Arjuna. I also see that this event caused a lot of heartburn within BJP and NDA. LK Advani’s sulking and smarting from being sidelined is well recorded. I see that the biggest fall out was that Nitish Kumar and JD (U) openly protested and that the alliance between BJP and JD (U) was broken and JD (U) parted company with NDA.

Narendra Modi as Arjuna was lapped up by people and how!!!

‘Ab Ki Baar Modi Sarkar’, ‘Har har Modi, Har ghar Modi’ ‘Achhe Din Aane Wale Hain’, and ‘NaMo’ became household sacred daily chants. Modi wave, rather tsunami hit the Indian electoral shores and swept state after state. And then came along the biggest achievement of BJP in its whole political life: BJP securing absolute majority in Lok Sabha elections in 2014. It was an unprecedented and unique first. Bravo!!! BJP had outdone itself.

I see that Modi reveled and excelled in playing Arjuna.

The Modi tsunami continued its devastation of the INC electoral fiefdoms. INC was comprehensively mauled in Maharashtra, Haryana and Jharkhand. BJP came up with unprecedented electoral performance in J&K and annexed (shared) power in state government for the first time in the annals of history in J&K and India.

The success of BJP with Modi at the vanguard had two consequential effects.

1. INC and its allies and all left-sympathizers became alarmed and extremely worried. They saw the specter of total annihilation staring them in the face.

2. Some adherents of BJP became overconfident and overzealous. They started behaving as if they had come to possess a magic lamp, mere rubbing of which would summon a genie, who would do their bidding and would accomplish any task they could wish. They over indulged and did some acts which they misconstrued to be populist among Hindu masses. These acts did not help BJP and Hindutva. They had contrary effect: the self proclaimed secularists and anti-communal (read anti RSS and anti BJP) forces got further alarmed. The roar of the victory juggernaut of Modi and BJP served as a wakeup call for the self proclaimed ‘secularists’ and ‘anti-communal forces’. Hitherto, most of these disparate entities had no love lost between them and were at loggerheads and daggers drawn with one another. A lot many of them had been sworn enemies of the INC. But now they identified one common enemy: Modi.

I see this ‘unholy’ alliance of anti-RSS, anti-BJP and anti-Modi forces as Samsaptakas of ‘Mahabharata 2014’. In Mahabharata, Samsaptakas were the bravest of the Trigartas, who, led by their King Susarman, had taken an oath ‘to either kill Arjuna or die in that attempt’. After taking their oaths, they performed their own funeral rites, for they well knew that their chances of victory were slim, and that death was almost a certainty. (See Reference 4)

I see that in the meanwhile, Modi took yet another avatar. He became Abhimanyu in addition to being Krishna and Arjuna.

Another event that keeps coming to my mind is Delhi Elections-2014. I see it as ‘Dyut Kreeda and Draupadi Cheer Haran’: the gambling game and the attempted disrobing of Draupadi.

BJP gambled by delaying Delhi elections. The delay gave an opportunity to all anti-BJP forces to rally together and it gave them sufficient time to plan and implement their strategies. Since for them it was a ‘do or die’ situation, they focused on a single point agenda - that of defeating Modi (and BJP). Aam Aadmi Party and Arvind Kejriwal were supported overtly and covertly by INC and others with all their might in all manners and forms including financial, social, organizational, logistical, disinformation, propaganda and even muscle power)

BJP lost the game. The margin of loss (67:3) was nothing short of stripping in the public. BJP became Draupadi and Arvind Kejriwal became Dushasana. Since this time round, Krishna was not there to come to her rescue, Draupadi had to suffer ignominy. I do not see any BJP member as Bhima. I do not know whether this humiliation would be avenged any time soon and wonder as to when BJP would be able to regain its honour. 

I see yet another event: Bihar Elections 2014. Opponents of Modi and BJP had learnt their lessons well from Delhi elections. It had dawned on them that Bihar was the final frontier. They had come to realize and were afraid and that if Modi and BJP were able to conquer Bihar, all other states (except Tamil Nadu and perhaps Andhra Pradesh) would easily fall into the lap of BJP. Therefore, they temporarily buried their differences, capped their larger than life egos and stitched a Mahagathbandan of unlike minds. They got a lucky break. They were able to hire Prashant Kishor, who was rumoured to have been ditched unceremoniously by BJP after Lok Sabha elections. Prashant Kishor in his new avatar became Dronacharya who would organize a Chakra Vyuh. Nitish Kumar was already mightily miffed with the selection of Narendra Modi as NDA’s prime ministerial candidate. He lamented under his breath that he had been denied a ‘rightful’ opportunity to lead NDA and to become Prime Minister of India. In the wake of this happening, Nitish Kumar had already transformed into Karna. At the same time, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Mamta Bannerji, Maya Vati and others who were slated to face BJP’s onslaught in the near future were seeing Modi as Abhimanyu in addition to seeing him as Arjuna. Their pledge of support to Nitish Kumar was equivalent to their volunteering to join the coterie of ‘Seven Maharathis’, the seven warriors who were instructed by Dronacharya how to thwart Abhimanyu’s rampage. (See Reference 5)

I see the defeat of Modi and BJP in the Bihar elections 2014 at the hands of Mahagathbandan with tacit support from others as ‘Abhimanyu Vadh’ (slaying of Abhimanyu).

Will Modi and BJP be able to avenge this defeat? Only time will tell.

I am not blessed to see the future. I see only the present and am able to recollect and reflect on the past.

I see a few more characters in ‘Mahabharata 2014’. I do not know why, but I see Lalu Prasad Yadav as Shakuni. Perhaps, I subconsciously believe that in the dice game that the Bihar elections also was (in addition to Delhi 2014 elections), Lalu was able to gimmick the dice with the controversy he created in the wake of Bhagwat’s remarks on reservations in general and reservations for backward classes in particular. He also loaded the dice with proclaiming himself as the champion of the downtrodden and spearhead of fight against ‘communal forces’. He was able to manipulate the dice to do his bidding. It is no wonder that RJD outsmarted even JD (U). What this Shakuni will do with Karna is also something to ponder for Nitish and JD (U). Lalu will be in no hurry to forget the treatment that was meted out to him by Nitish and JD(U) till Mahagathbandan was stitched or rather till the seat sharing arrangements were finalized. Lalu is certainly not a votary of ‘forget & forgive’. Jungle Raj may as well have its second coming.

I see Lalu as Shishupal, given his predilection for using all kinds of epithets, insinuations and invectives for BJP in general and Modi in particular. There are other claimants to the role of Shishupal. The latest is Arvind Kejriwal. He has had the gumption to call Modi ‘a coward and a psychopath’.

Of course, the original claimant to the role of Shishupal is Mani Shankar Iyer who is a known communist and a proud BJP/RSS hater. Iyer calls himself a ‘Secular Fundamentalist’ and does not hide his pathological hatred for RSS and BJP. He spews venom against RSS and BJP and anybody who professes to be a Hindu.

He is a known acolyte of Gandhi family. He feigns to be indebted to Gandhi family because of the support he received from Rajiv Gandhi at Cambridge when he entered student politics and fought a presidential election there. Though Rajiv Gandhi was his junior at Doon school and Cambridge, Mani Shankar Iyer must have done crystal ball gazing and seen him as a potential Prime Minister and in turn must have found it worth his while to hitch on to Rajiv Gandhi. He is a classical example of ‘More Loyal than The King’. After Rajiv Gandhi’s death, he continues his loyalty with Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and INC. I also wonder that with his communist leanings and professed interest in Grass Root Democracy, why he is not a member of communist party.

Mani Shankar Iyer is a master of the art of irritation. He seems to be drawing sadistic rather psychopathic pleasure in spawning controversies. I do admire his command of English language and his gift of the gab. But I wonder that with the kind of language he employs and the manner (see the contortion on his face) in which he articulates his highly biased views, why is he almost a permanent fixture in debates and discussions on some TV channels. Since in his latest interview to Pakistani Dawn News, he has virtually sought Pakistan’s help in ‘removing Prime Minister Narendra Modi from power, to be able to continue peace talks between India and Pakistan’, I see him being tried for sedition / treason.

I have been also wondering about the ‘Yadavas’. I was not able to understand why RSS, BJP and other Hindutva votaries are anathema to these supposed descendents of Krishna. I dug into Mahabharata once again to seek the answer. I found that in the original epic, a number of Yadva clans had always sided with Jarasandha who was the father in law of Krishna’s maternal uncle Kansa. Kansa was slain by Krishna which made Jarasandha a sworn enemy of Krishna. In fact Krishna had to leave Mathura and move to Dwarka in Gujarat to save Yadavas (of Mathura) from Jarasandha’s attacks. Jarasandha was also a friend of Karna and was in turn sympathetic with Kauravas. A number of Yadva clans who owed their allegiance to Jarasandha, automatically became allies of Kauravas.

Again, it is notable that when both Arjuna and Duryodhana approached Krishna for seeking military support, Krishna obliged both of them by agreeing to help. At the outset, he affirmed that he himself would not take up arms and fight. Then he informed that he would divide his military help into two parts. He further informed that

• One part would comprise only him and that too without weapons.
• The other part would comprised his Narayani sena.

Arjuna was given the first chance to choose. He chose the weapon-less non-fighting Krishna. Duryodhana registered his protest against not being given the first chance to choose but was, in fact, happy to take Narayani Sena. Consequently, Yadavas fought on the side of Kauravas and against the Pandavas. They are thus ordained and destined to fight against RSS and BJP.

I also see a minor irony in this ‘Mahabharata 2014’. Krishna had to run away from U.P to Gujarat, Modi came from Gujarat to U.P to fight and win the election and establish himself as ruler of Delhi, the latter day Indraprastha.

I do not see any end to this ‘Mahabharata 2014’. This war of attrition is likely to continue at least till 2019 or till the time BJP/NDA has control over both houses of parliament or loses control over both houses, whichever is later.

And I am sure to see more things and shall report at opportune times.

References:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panchjanya_(newspaper)
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C4%81%C3%B1cajanya
3. http://www.thequint.com/india/2014/08/13/sushma-swaraj-vs-sonia-gandhi-a- 16-year-old-rivalry
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsaptakas
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhimanyu

Remembering Iqbal Yet Again-This Time Courtesy Aamir Khan-Matinee Idol in Tolerant India

Aamir Khan is known to be an intelligent actor and a person. A large number of persons have vouched that he does not say or utter anything unless he means it. He has himself reiterated that he stands by all that he stated during that infamous interview on 23rd November 2015 at Ramnath Goenka Awards for Excellence in Journalism 2015. Aamir has been able to evoke or rather provoke the response that he must have desired. Even I felt compelled to analyze the reasons that motivated him to make that statement. In fact, the thought that came to my mind, in response to Aamir's utterance was involuntary. I got reminded of Allama Muhammad Iqbal. It is because, Iqbal was perhaps unique in exhibiting the change of heart from flip to flop. It was Iqbal who wrote  Tarana-e-Hind (Anthem Of India) ' Saare Jahan Se Achha Hindostan Hamara' which remains even today ( and will remain, forever, the best known unofficial Anthem of India). And he was the one who later authored and moved the paper on ' Two Nation Theory' which Jinnah translated into a demand for partition of India to carve out a separate nation for Muslims.

(See the Reference 1 below. 

The reference also includes Iqbal's transformation and another version of 'Sare Jahan se Achha' which he now titled as 'Tarana-e-Milli'. A semblance of (a worldwide)  Islamic State is noticeable in this poem.

Also included is another link which gives another interpretation of Iqbal's thoughts on Muslims in India and on India at large. )

Aamir is a brand ambassador for the campaign 'Atithi Devo Bhav- Incredible India' launched by the Union Ministry of Tourism. Aamir endorses the campaign at various platforms across the mass media and therein he extols the greatness of India and Indians (himself included) who treat every guest as a god. He thereby beckons all foreigners to come visiting India without fear. (See the Reference 2 below) 

Aamir  also produced and hosted  'Satyamev Jayate' , a highly acclaimed TV Series. Not only was there no opposition to his content and exposition, but also both the Series and Aamir received all round praise including even from Bal Thakre, a self proclaimed Bete Noire of all Muslims and all things Islamic. 

Now Aamir too has done an about turn and exhibited change of heart similar to Iqbal's.  

Agreed that Aamir Khan was made a brand ambassador during the Congress regime but he has not been eased out as yet. 

Iqbal was not comfortable with Nehru and Gandhi. He did not trust even Maulana Abul Kalam - one of Aamir Khan's ancestors (See Reference 3 below).

May be Aamir is uncomfortable with the current Prime Minister for some reasons best known to himself.

I am totally confused. 

Is it Aamir who is uncomfortable with being in India or is it Kiran Rao who is actually concerned (and with what is another moot point)?

I get the feeling that it is Kiran Rao, who is afraid of intolerance owing to her being  a true secularist, having descended from time-honoured inter-religious nobility of Hyderabad (See Reference 4 below).

And because of the above mentioned fact, the intolerance that Kiran is afraid of, is not exhibited by any Hindu organization but the one manifested by the increasingly unfettered rise of radicals like Owaisis who would want total submission (staring with conversion) from independent and secular women like Kiran Rao. 

Alternatively, it may be that Kiran Rao has been feeling uneasy at home with Aamir and has bravely expressed that she was afraid for her son going wayward like Aamir. She might have wanted to leave and live separately far removed from Aamir to minimize his interference with her life and to eliminate his influence on her son. In the process, she might have considered moving to a foreign country as a wise, easy and viable option. There exist any number of examples,  where a wife having irreconcilable problems with her husband, has exercised this ostensibly amicable option, has made a clean break and has lived happily thereafter. 

It is also notable that Aamir is a kind of a history-sheeter in familial disharmony. He ditched Reena. His treatment of his brother Faisal and his problem with his own father are well documented and are in the public domain (See Reference 5 below.)

Aamirs's penchant for one-upmanship (rather brinkmanship) has soured his relations with many of his friends and colleagues in Bollywood.  Juhi Chawla, Shah Rukh Khan and Salman Khan would have volumes to speak about his shenanigans. There would certainly be many others who would have felt abraded by his ‘holier than thou’ attitude.

Aamir Khan is, without doubt, a past master of the craft of turning an adversity into an opportunity. (See Reference 5 below). And contemporary Indian electronic media is very happy to provide a mega stage to anyone who can take a pot shot at the current dispensation at the center.

Whatever be his reasons for the statements he made, I am pretty sure that Aamir will not leave this country because he must be aware that he is of any value only in India. In Pakistan, he will be treated as a Mohajir and a second class citizen unless he shows that he is the fountain head of a crime or terrorist organization a la Dawood Ibrahim. In any other country, he will be treated according to vocation he adopts and the success he achieves for which there is no guarantee because he would have to start from scratch in untested grounds and unfamiliar ambience.

In fact, I would like Aamir to join politics, win an election and be part of a government and set all wrongs right to make India the ideal, secular, progressive nation with all Indians living happy, safe, healthy and wealthy lives forever, irrespective of caste, creed, religion, gender, colour and any other conceivable physical and mental parameter of distinction or discrimination.

Iqbal was perhaps lucky to have died before creation of Pakistan. He may well be turning in his grave seeing the culmination of his efforts into creation of Pakistan and decadence that has become the way of life in that country.

I would not wish Aamir Khan to meet the same fate in India or any other place. 

Finally, in the unlikely event of his actually thinking of migrating away from India for the reason stated by him, I would exhort him by saying ‘Mat bhaag ro roke mat bhaag’. It is in ‘Tolerant India’ that idiocies like PK and DK (Bose) are not only tolerated but ironically also appreciated, enjoyed and encouraged to thrive.

References

1.  "The poet philosopher Muhammad Iqbal (1877–1938), (the poet of East), provided the philosophical exposition and BarristerMuhammad Ali Jinnah (1871–1948) translated it into the political reality of a nation-state. Allama Iqbal's presidential address to the Muslim League on December 29, 1930 is seen by some as the first exposition of the two-nation theory in support of what would ultimately become Pakistan.^" 

^{Excerpt From}

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-nation_theory#Start_of_Muslim_self-awakening_and_identity_movement_.2819th_century.E2.80.931940s.29

Iqbal's transformation and Tarana-e-Milli

In 1910, Iqbal wrote another song for children, Tarana-e-Milli (Anthem of the Religious Community), which was composed in the same metre and rhyme scheme as Saare Jahan Se Achcha, but which renounced much of the sentiment of the earlier song. The sixth stanza of Saare Jahan Se Achcha (1904), which is often quoted as proof of Iqbal's secular outlook

Maẕhab nahīṉ sikhātā āpas meṉ bair rakhnā

Hindī haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai Hindūstāṉ hamārā

(Religion does not teach us to bear ill-will among ourselve

We are of Hind, our homeland is Hindustan.

contrasted significantly with the first stanza of Tarana-e-Milli (1910) reads: Cīn o-ʿArab hamārā, Hindūstāṉ hamār

Muslim haiṉ ham, wat̤an hai sārā jahāṉ hamārā

(Central Asia and Arabia are ours, Hindoostan is ours

We are Muslims, the whole world is our homeland⁾

Iqbal's world view had now changed; it had become both global and Islamic. Instead of singing of Hindustan, "our homeland," the new song proclaimed that "our homeland is the whole world." Two decades later, in his presidential address to the Muslim League annual conference in Allahabad in 1930, he was to support a separate nation-state in the Muslim majority areas of the sub-continent, an idea that inspired the creation of Pakistan

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Sare-Jahan-Se-Achcha-poet-Mohammed-Iqbal-remains-pariah-in-India/articleshow/17150082.cms#

2. http://www.discoveredindia.com/atithi-devo-bhava-incredible-india.htm

3. He is related to the Indian philosopher Abul Kalam Azad who is related to him through his grandmother.

excerpt from

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aamir_Khan#Early_life_and_background

4. Kiran Rao and actor Aditi Rao Hydari are maternal first cousins. Hydari’s maternal grandfather, J Rameshwar Rao was the Raja of Wanaparthy, a town in Mahbubnagar district while her fraternal grandfather Sir Akbar Hydari was the Prime Minister of Hyderabad State.

Excerpt from 

http://www.andhraheadlines.com/news/movies/153873/aamirs-wife-kiran-has-roots-in-telangana

5. Aamir's troubled relation with father

http://bollywoodjournalist.com/2013/06/25/aamir-khans-troubled-relationship-with-his-dad

I am confused and mighty confused at that

Hindu Santana dharma boasts of a pantheon of 330 million gods. Even the most ardent and the most avowedly devout Hindu can not enumerate the names of all these gods and certainly not tell what they symbolize; what powers obtain from their worship and what ramifications ensue because of their annoyance and displeasure owing to any  of zillions of reasons. There do not exist  manuals or guidebooks for every one of these gods. And even if the guidebooks and manuals did exist, how would laymen utilize them. This lacunae  gives birth (and licence) to any number of god men, social leaders and  religious despots  who devise and formulate their own rites and rituals and are able to influence and indoctrinate gullible people to adopt and follow the same. Cults get created, the society gets partitioned. The tragedy is that, in due course of time, some of these men and women get anointed as gods and the pantheon gets further augmented. 

Hindus are very fond of creating gods. Bhagwan Rajnish and Satya Saibaba are two of many such examples. Sachin Tendulkar is also deified as God of Cricket. There are temples dedicated to  Rajnikant, Shivaji Ganeshan, Amitabh Bachchan and even Khushbu. AIADMK treats Jayalalitha as a super goddess.

It is an undeniable yet inexplicable truth that a lot of things are done by a mass of people without a thought and only because their predecessors had been doing those things. Many social and religious activities are indulged in by generations without the doers and propagators bothering to know the rationale behind the thoughts and  actions;  the guiding principle being 'What has been good for my ancestors is good for me' .

My confusion is multi-dimensional and wide ranging. I try to elaborate.

I sit down daily for offering my prayers in a small closet in which I have installed the idols of my favourite deities viz. Radha &  Krishna. I understand a bit as to what Krishna symbolizes but do not know in which scripture Radha got introduced. Still I worship Radha and Krishna duo.

When I go to a temple, I am always faced with a  dilemma  as to which deity to go to first and the sequence in which to pay my obeisance to the multitude of deities whose idols installed in the temple. Very often, in a temple devoted to a single deity, there are a number of sub temples nay stalls where a panda extols some special attribute of the subject god and solicits some cash from the devotee. My confusion gets further confounded at the time of putting money in the "Hundi"; How  much to put in Hundi for each god. I have caught myself, on a number of occasions, in being hesitant to part with more than a certain amount, which itself frequently varies because of an innumerable number of reasons and circumstances.

I am confused but I let it go.

Sikhism was born out of dissatisfaction  and disillusionment of Guru Nanak with orthodoxy and ritualism of both Hinduism and Islam. Guru Nanak also did not approve of the overt and covert fight between the propagators of Islam and adherents of Hinduism. He proffered Sikhism as the via media  solution  where in both the Hindus and Muslims would shed their identities as Hindu and Muslim and would instead assume a new identity which he named 'Sikh' a colloquial distortion of 'Shishya' : the disciple. Some also say the word 'Sikh' is derived from 'Shikhshit' : the learned or the educated. The new identity was conceived to remove and resolve the differences. The intention was most noble. But the reality is that now we have three warring entities in stead of two. The contemporary Sikhism has its own rigid ritual protocols and practices. 

I am confused because of the contradictions in the ways of contemporary Sikhism. Sikhs are very sensitive about 'Kesh' (hair) and the turban.  Keeping the hair in their natural state without trimming is a diktat which ' true' Sikhs are mandated to follow. Kesh is one of the five 'K' identity marks of (Khalsa) Sikhs. Turban ( 'Dastaar') is not a directly mandated  identity mark but a convenience which has assumed much more importance than hair that it is required to protect.

Sikhs are very protective about the turban. They get easily worked up and are ever ready for a fight in defence of the turban; They aver that nothing can be put over the turban. Fair enough; every individual or a group of individuals is entitled to follow some practices, which become their distinguishing characteristics. But my confusion is the inconsistency or dichotomy of the conduct. While the Sikhs vehemently protest against the statutory use of helmet while riding a two wheeler as that is perceived as infringement of their faith, they do not object to a Sikh cricketer wearing helmet when batting.

I am peeved to see many Sikhs wearing only a patka in place of the turban and still refusing the use of helmet. I am confused as to whether to call it faith or hegemony.

I am confused further because this very young faith (or as some of its adherents proclaim it to be a religion), has already spawned a number of sub sects and faiths which in-turn have  their own fixations, rigid rituals and rites. Sant Nirankari Mandal and Radha Soami are two of the many examples. It is notable that SGPC, the self proclaimed patent holder and guard-general of Sikhism, does not consider these as off springs of Sikhism though the preachings of the two sects are based essentially on the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev and Guru Granth Sahib. This subject itself can lead to an endless debate. I would leave it at this juncture because I am awfully confused about the same. 

I return to my main confusion(s)

Hindu Sanatana Dharma promulgates polytheism, every god in its pantheon assuredly having a defined role albeit not known to the lay men. Some more essential and integral parts of Sanatana Dharma include Sanskara observance, idol worship, vrata fasting, abstinence, pilgrimage, holy dips in holy rivers, Havan yajna, mantra chanting, bhajan-kirtans, discourses, Shraddha, tarpan ( praying for the salvation of the dead ancestors), festival celebrations, charity or Dan punya etc.  All these rituals being collectively called Karma Kanda. In fact, polytheism  and Karma Kanda are the two main aspects of Hindu Sanatana Dharma which distinguish it from the other most popular and wide spread religions of the world. I am referring to Christianity, Islam and Buddhism. Another very important and disconcerting feature of Hindu Sanatana Dharma is its refusal to allow conversions into it. A Hindu is born and not made. Proselytization is foreign to Hindu Sanatana dharma. A non-Hindu can not be turned into a Hindu. Shuddhikaran process of Arya Samaj does not enjoy wide acceptance. Yet another aspect that is the hallmark of Hinduism is reincarnation or  rebirth; life after death. 

Christianity is a monotheistic religion born as a reformation of Judaism. It  forbids the practising of all the main aspects of Hindu Santana Dharma viz. polytheism, Karma Kanda and reincarnation. I am confused because I learn that there are an innumerable divisions or sects, each with its own justification for its existence, regimen of worship and general code of conduct. There are churches every where; churches belonging to different sub-sects. At many places, particularly in Mumbai, crosses bearing the inscription "INRI" are installed. To my mind, this is equivalent to polytheism. Christians wear cross, burn candles and incense sticks before the idols of mother Mary and Jesus, say graces at meals and before going to bed, observe lent and indulge in many other practices which together are  tantamount to idol worship. Still Christianity is the most popular religion of the world. It is the religion of the wealthy nations, who in turn contribute huge sums of money to help spread the religion through out the world. Proselytization is encouraged by the church and is carried out overtly and covertly through charity, inducement, persuasion, promises of salvation and many other strategies.

However, in India, the contribution of Christianity can not be over estimated. Convent schools are the most coveted centers of primary and secondary education. They are the models which are now emulated or replicated by many indigenous educational societies viz. DAV, Indian Education Society, Sanatana Dharma Schools, Khalsa schools etc.

Christian colleges are also held in high esteem as they are reputed to not only impart knowledge in the various subjects of learning but also play very important role in personality development and social behaviour. 

I am confused because in spite of the ostensible admirable contribution by Christian institutions in education and general welfare of the poor and the destitute, they are suspected to be merely the vehicles of spreading Christianity. I am also happy to admit and assert that by and large, they do not defy the Indian law and are less loud in their protestations against discrimination, neglect and maltreatment as a minority.

The next subject of my confusion is the dichotomy of Buddhism. 

My knowledge of history, however scant, and my understanding of the basic tenets of various religions in general and Buddhism in particular, reveals that Buddhism does not encourage idol worship. But I learn that Buddha outclasses every other being with respect to. numerical abundance as well as grandeur of statues. Buddha statues are among the tallest structures in its class in the world. 

 My confusion gets further confounded because most of the tallest statues exist in China. And it is noteworthy that all these statues are not old, some being constructed fairly recently. Try the link below

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/howaboutthat/10417899/Ten-of-the-worlds-tallest-statues.html?frame=2719625

My confusion continues. 

Here comes my biggest confusion and the one I am most scared of expressing because of the danger of being misunderstood and being branded as irreverent and blasphemous.

Islam is the second most popular religion in the world, coming close on the heels of Christianity in terms of the number of followers in the world. India has the second (or third) largest population of Muslims in the world. Muslims constitute the biggest minority in India. However, there are pockets in India where muslims are in majority. 

Islam is strictly monotheistic and prohibits iconolatry. It is also supposed to be ridden of elaborate rituals and ostentation. It is also supposed to be egalitarian and free of the malice of casteism.

However, I am confused and my confusion redoubles five times every day. The call for Azaan is broadcast five times. 

The essence of Azaan is  

         ' Laa ilaaha illalaah, Mohamed ar-Rasool Allah'

( ‘There is absolutely no deity worthy of worship except Allah, 

    and Mohamed (pbuh) is the Messenger of Allah.’)

God is great. There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of God.

But this is conveyed more elaborately as is given below:

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Ash-hadu an-lā ilāha illā allāh

Ash-hadu an-lā ilāha illā allāh

Ash-hadu anna Muhhammadan-Rasulullāh

Ash-hadu anna Muhhammadan-Rasulullāh

Hayya  ala s-ssalāt

Hayya ala s-ssalāt

Hayya  ala  l-falāh

Hayya  ala l-falāh

As-salatu Khayrun Minan-nawm

As-salatu Khayrun Minan-nawm

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Lā ilāha illā-Allāh

Allah is the greatest, Allah is the greatest. (repeated once more)

I bear witness that there is no God but Allah.(repeated once more)

I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.(repeated once more)

Hasten to worship (salat).(repeated once more)

Hasten to success.(repeated once more)

Prayer is better than sleep. (repeated once more)

Allah is greatest, Allah is greatest.

There is no God but Allah

The above Azaan is Arabic Sunni Azaan. 

Shia Azaan is slightly different as given below

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Allāhu akbar, Allāhu akbar

Ash-hadu an-lā ilāha illā allāh

Ash-hadu an-lā ilāha illā allāh

Ash-hadu anna Muḥhammadan-Rasulullāh

Ash-hadu anna Muḥhammadan-Rasulullāh

Ash-hadu anna Alīyan walī-ullāh

Ash-hadu anna Alīyan walī-ullāh

Hayya ʿala ṣ-ṣsalāt

Hayya ʿala ṣ-ṣsalāt

Hayya ʿala 'l-falāḥ

Hayya ʿala 'l-falāḥ

Ḥayya ʿala khayr al ʿamal

Ḥayya ʿala khayr al ʿamal

Allāhu akbar

Allāhu akbar

Lā ilāha illā-Allāh

Lā ilāha illā-Allā

The differences are as follows

• Allāhu akbar is recited 8 times instead of four times
• The authority of Ali is added through the line  "I testify that Ali is the authority (wali) of God"
• As-salatu Khayrun Minan-nawm ( Prayer is better than sleep) is replaced by Ḥayya ʿala khayr al ʿamal ( The time for the best of deeds has come)
• The ending line Lā ilāha illā-Allāh is recited twice.

There is a Zaidiyyah  variety also, which is similar to the Sunny prayer except  that 

As-salatu Khayrun Minan-nawm ( Prayer is better than sleep) is replaced by Hayya ʿala khayr al ʿamal (The time for the best of deeds has come) as in Shia prayer

This 'assertion of faith'-cum-'call for prayer' is issued by every mosque to enjoin upon the believers to head towards the mosque. In my neighbouring locality, which is more like a  ghetto with a predominantly Muslim population, there are six or seven mosques. Each of these mosques broadcasts Azaan separately. The calls are separated by very small intervals of time and some portions even overlap. Each muezzin tries to cry hoarse as if he were trying to out shout the others.

I am confused because I am not able to decide whether all mosques are talking about the same God or each one is extolling its own private God. Again, the volume is so high that it seems that the caller is trying to wake up God rather than the faithfuls.

Another fact that riles me no end is the broadcast from some of the mosques or perhaps from the attached madrassas, of songs, poetry and even roll call and other live instructions being imparted to the madrassa inmates. 

Yet another confusing and deplorable practice being followed by some mosques is the use of loud speakers for informing the members of the community of some unfortunate deaths and the schedule of  Janaaza and the exhortation for participation. It is categorically prohibited by Islam but no body seems to care.

Another topic which I am confused about is Islam's take on music. I have googled on this topic and have got confusing and contradictory information. The sum total of what I could glean from the mass of data is that Islam permits music which is rendered in the praise of Allah and the prophet. 

The music of the Bollywood and Hollywood variety is unequivocally and emphatically labelled as Haraam or sinful. I am confused because there is quite a large number of music directors, lyricists, musicians and singers in Bollywood who pride themselves in being Muslims and are proud that they promote the cause of Islam. If we include the actors, writers, directors, choreographers and support artists and staff, this number will swell even further. I am confused whether all these people are committing sins by practising their art.

I learn that even Sufi music, though devoted to Allah and the prophet, is not regarded favourably by the Islamic purists. For that matter, Sufism itself is not widely accepted in Islam. 

I also wonder whether Muslim classical musicians of the past and the present, some of whom have been  / are the greatest exponents of this art, are considered as muslims by the same purists. This doubt gets further strengthened because most  musicians begin their riyaz (practice) with invocation to Sarasvati, the Hindu goddess of music. I learn that this practice by followed by some muslim musicians too.

I am mighty confused because of the increasingly visible exposition of some hitherto neglected or even rejected diktats of the keepers of Islam. Some  examples follow

• Celebration of Id-milad with zeal, fervour and festivities as opposed to the sobriety which marked this auspicious day till two decades ago.
• Use of the 'Allah hafiz' in stead of 'Khuda hafiz'.
• Offering of namaz by Muslim passengers in the corridors in running trains.
• Congregation of Muslim employees, during working hours, for saying the afternoon namaz, particularly on Fridays. This is true not only of government offices and establishments but also of  public and private organisations.
• Sporting of long un-trimmed flowing beards by men, old and young.
• Wearing of skull caps.
• Wearing of burqa by women; covering all parts of body from head to toe with a very narrow slit for the eyes; which more often than not also covered by dark glasses.
• Insistence by Muslim women patients for being treated by only female doctors.

Of course, it is not my business to make a comment on how each community conducts itself within its own sphere of being. And I am talking about only about India. All my confusion and wonderment is only about the practices followed in India. 

What confuses me is the hegemony exhibited by  some communities, sects and groups when their indulgence in flagrant violations of their own religious principles and tenets is exposed and the helplessness of the government in containing or curbing them. It is perhaps the price of democratic freedom. It may be something else. 

Well, I am confused and mighty confused at this and that.