The Mosquito Hindus, Part 2 — a case study
I am not afraid of Muslims. I am not afraid of Britishers. But I am afraid of Hindus against Hinduism.
~ Vinayak Damodar (Veer) Savarkar
Frequently asked questions
One should read the Part-1, before reading the presented article from HinduPost: The Mosquito Hindus: Narratives from the Dharmik frontline
The gist of Part 1:
- Sadhus and Sanyasis are allowed to fight, e.g., Naga Sadhus, Bath Sadhus, Akharas, many more.
- Verbal assault is completely acceptable when fighting back is completely prohibited as in present-day India by disarming Hindus, while other foreign religions worship places when raided show hordes of arms, cash and such materials.
- Hindus who oppose this principle are inadvertently being anti-Hindu and do not fit in with Swami Vivekananda’s definition of “Who is a Hindu?”
Can adolescent Brahmacharis and Brahmacharinis use “swear” (another western characterisation) words in their verbal assault?
- Yes, please see above. If you cannot logically and eventually refute the above, whatever position you hold or espouse is invalid and as per Swami Vivekananda, you might not be a Hindu.
- Please scientifically define a child, adolescent and adult.
- When did the phenomenon of adolescents come into being?
How old were Kovalan and Kannagi, the lead characters of the great Tamil epic Silapathikaram when they had an arranged marriage and started living independently as a family/couple?
- They were 16 and 12 respectively. There was no concept of adolescence just about 100 or so years ago. Like many artificially created psychiatric illnesses, this was created by the West. In fact, Hinduism is the only science that advises Bramachariam (celibate life of Gurukul students) till the age of 18 or 21 so that people become more spiritual and less materialistic. In fact, the age of consent for sexual activity in many European countries, such as Germany, is still 14 years.
- So anybody who restricts right thinking and independently minded educated individuals demonstrating verbal maturity is unscientific as he/she goes against the empirical evidence. They are stooges of Christian West’s pharmaceutical industry.
- Macaulay-system educated immature ill-informed dependent teenagers are a modern aberration and they go against historical empirical evidence of mature adulthood as seen in Silapathikaram.
- Anybody who denies the above is also anti-Tamil literature such as Silapathikaram.
What about Dhruva, Marakandeya, Ayyappa, Murugan, Prahalad, Bala Ganapati, Bala Krishna, Andal and many more?
According to Aravindan’s (he seems to be enjoying becoming an inadvertent frontrunner to be a Wendy’s child) perspective, Child Abuse is widely prevalent in Hindu symbolism where “Gods” are made out of “children” and worshipped without “formal” approval from the “Mosquito Hindu Baseless Allegations Manufacturing Committee”.
Get The Rational Hindu’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Are the critiques of the young Brahmacharinis of Swami Nithyananda Gurukul and Ashram anti-Tamil?
Yes, they called it child abuse. They refused to answer if Kovalan and Kannagi’s (who had an arranged marriage at the above-said age and started their family life independently and immediately) Tamil culture and lifestyle would be considered child abuse by their standards. Given the historical empirical evidence there was no phase called adolescence, and if brought up and educated appropriately, by late teens people were responsible and healthy as adults, mentally and physically.
Can the term child abuse be used casually given the above evidence?
- No. Child abuse is a technical clinical term that can be used only after a clinical psychologist or such qualified clinicians have seen the subjects under strict clinical scientific protocols and makes a diagnosis to that effect based on scientific and clinical evidence. Otherwise, it could tantamount to criminal defamation.
- As a matter of public knowledge, these days adolescents are known to swear at least amongst their cohorts or around unknown adults. Does it mean that all the modern day kids or child abused? Perhaps modernity imported from the Christian West itself is abusive to children? Given that the Westerners still do not wash their bottom and do not practise even basic hygiene even in this modern age, one should not be surprised that if modernity is the culprit. In that case, blaming an individual or any one institution, especially which is avowedly trying to reverse this effect of modernity, is arguably criminally defamatory.
Can those Bramacharinis do blind-folded reading?
- Yes. In our scientific investigation, it appears so. In fact, the institution is able to make certified blind children and adolescents be able to read. Any critic should thus be prepared to test this than make unfounded accusations that could be construed as criminally defamatory.
Can teaching blindfolded reading, be it through third eye powers and spirituality or otherwise be construed as child abuse?
- It is conspiratorial to suggest so, based on one’s unfounded belief that that is not possible. Nobody has a right to reject empirical data and facts without sufficient evidence to the contrary. Such a baseless and criminally defamatory accusation is superstition, not science.
Who are such people who make such (potentially criminal) defamatory claims?
- One individual is Swarajya Magazine contributing editor called Aravindan Neelakandan.
- He has been offered to test the blindfolded reading at a mutually convenient public place, bring certified blind children to test, etc. Without testing it himself using these opportunities that have been afforded to him he has made baseless claims.
- He has been abusive to people who have tried to contact him to clarify the same.
- This raises very pertinent questions about his neutrality and open-minded scientific curiosity.
- Though he has a degree in psychology (Western Psychology and not Indian Psychology — https://youtu.be/bBEZeVtBDCc . It is perhaps for “scholars” like Aravindan that Infinity Foundation is organising its fourth Indology Conference in less than 2 years? — https://swadeshiindology.com/si-4/announcement/) from years ago, he is neither a professional psychologist nor a practising clinical psychologist currently. So to use clinical diagnostic terms, such as child abuse is an abuse of freedom of speech and (potentially criminal) defamatory.
Why drag in Swarajya Magazine’s name here?
- It is not to bring in any institution’s name here unnecessarily. Aravindan Neelakandan is a contributing editor of this magazine. Even if he writes on his own personal blog or Facebook page, as long as it is in the public domain and/or circulated widely, his position that could be criminally liable (possible criminal defamation) will be seen as being associated with Swarajya too, as the words of one of its editors. If that is not the case, Swarajya can be reasonably expected to dissociate itself with such statements, especially written ones, by an appropriate notification and/or press release or such.
A final question on credibility: Is Aravindan Neelakandan an “adhikaari” of the Dharmic texts or practices? Does he have any “authority” to interpret texts, practices, symbols from the Sanatana (Hindu) traditions?
He is not an authority — either (sanatanic) traditional or modern (as seen above he has very little credentials to talk about psychology other than as an opinion, and opinions cannot be defamatory or abusive). He is at best an eloquent commentator with an avowed Hindu and Bharatiya sensibility. We are not discussing his “motivations” here. We are purely discussing his credentials as an interpreter and adjudicator of Sanatana Dharma.
(Many thanks to Sudarshan T Nadathur for reviewing the draft)
