"A house divided within itself cannot stand"
"Bhedey ganaah vinashyanti bhinnaastu sujaya paraih
Tasmaat sanghaat yogen prayataren ganaah sada
Teshaam anyonya bhinnaastu swashaktim anuthishtataam
Nighrahah panditaih kaaryah kshipramev pradhaanatah"
"Republics are destroyed only by internal divisions among the people
Therefore a republic should always seek to maintain good relations among the people
The wise people in a Republic should crush the chiefs of the wicked persons
Who try to divide the people"
Bheeshma Pitaamah's advice to Yudhishthir in the Shantiparva of Mahabharat, Chapters 107/108
See how terribly divided you are on the basis of caste, religion, race, region, etc. Unless you unite you will never prosper or rise as a great nation in the comity of nations, but will remain condemned to poverty and other social evils.
There is a story of a father whose sons used to always quarrel with each other. One day he called them, and showed them several sticks, which could be easily broken separately. But when they were tied together they could not be broken even by the strongest man. This story also applies to a nation.
In India even 71 years after Independence, dalits (who constitute about 20% of our population) are usually looked down upon as inferiors by non dalits and humiliated by the latter in various ways, which dalits bitterly resent. A dalit boy marrying or falling in love with a non dalit girl is often inviting a death sentence. Our much flaunted secularism is in tatters. When a Muslim is lynched most Hindus are indifferent, and some even inwardly happy. "One terrorist less", they think. Our country is deeply divided on the basis of caste, religion, region, race, etc.
But how to unite?
In my opinion unity among our people can only come through a historical united people's struggle against the present system in India, and by no other means, though this people's struggle must be led by modern minded, not reactionary, leaders.
The present struggles in India are either casteist e.g. the Patel agitation, Jat agitation etc., or religious, like the Ram Janma Bhumi agitation. The farmers agitation was no doubt above caste or religion, but it had no scientific leadership, and so fizzled out.
When will such a united people's agitation led by modern minded leaders arise in India, who will be its leaders, what form it will take, etc is impossible to predict. But this much is certain: its beginning is approaching fast.
This is because on the one hand all state institutions in India have collapsed and become hollow and empty shells, on the other hand, the people's distress is growing. Unemployment is rising, so is farmers distress, child malnourishment, lack of healthcare etc. Our political leaders are, with a few rare exceptions, a bunch of crooks, looters, deceivers, rogues and rascals who have no genuine love for the country but are only interested in power and pelf. So we are inexorably heading for a period of chaos, which may last 10-15 years.
But chaos cannot last forever. Nature does not like a vacuum. So some alternative to the present political and social system is bound to ultimately emerge.
The rising people's distress (unemployment, farmers distress etc.) is bound to give rise to united people's movements which rise above caste and religion. For instance, unemployment affects all youth, not just youth of a particular caste or religion (reservations can only benefit a miniscule number of SCs and OBCs, for there are very few jobs). Farmers of all castes are suffering, not just those of a particular caste or community.
This common distress will force people, who were hitherto divided on the basis of caste and community, to unite, for they will sooner or later realise that only unitedly can they face the huge challenges before the nation and the looming calamity. Also, it will throw up modern minded, scientific, leaders, for only they can guide the people out of the morass they are in.
In this united people's struggle youth of different castes and communities will come into closer proximity with each other, and will stop regarding youth of other religions as enemies and shall stop regarding dalits as inferiors. In other words, in the course of their united struggle for a better life their mindsets will change. Then many youth will have inter caste and inter religious love affairs and get married, defying their casteist and communal parents. This will happen on a large scale, contributing to the breakdown of the present caste and religious disunity in the country. This process will be aided by the modern minded leaders patiently educating the masses and removing feudal and backward notions from their minds.
After victory in this united peoples struggle (which may take 10 years or so), a new patriotic govt. with modern minded selfless leaders will come into existence, and will set about rapidly industrialising the country. Such industrialisation will also aid in destruction of the remnants of feudalism like casteism and communalism which have plagued our country for centuries, for industrialisation destroys feudalism.
This is the inevitable course of the future history of India in the coming years, and the result will be creation of a powerful unified modern nation (which will include the present Pakistan and Bangladesh) in which all its citizens will be enjoying a high standard of living and decent lives.
Addresses to the Indian Nation: the Role of thinkers, writers, artists and the media in Indian ReunificationRead Now
I have mentioned in my earlier Addresses that Indian Reunification is possible only through a mighty anti-feudal people's struggle and revolution led by patriotic modern minded persons.
Historical experience shows that every political and social upheaval is preceded by a churning and struggle in the field of ideas, i.e. an intellectual revolution.
Thus the British Civil War and Revolution of the 17th century was preceded by the writings of Desiderius Erasmus, Francis Bacon, Rene Descartes etc and the Reformation in Europe by Luther, Calvin etc. which upset the dominant Catholic ideology and faith in many European countries, including England and began 'The Age of Reason' (see online). The French Revolution of 1789 was preceded by the theories and writings of Voltaire, Rousseau (see my article 'Voltaire and Rousseau'--Times of India) and the thinkers of the French Enlightenment (Diderot, Holbach, Helvetius etc.). The America Revolution (1775-1781) was preceded by the writings of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and others. The Russian Revolution of 1917 was preceded by the writings of Herzen, Chernyshevsky, Plekhanov, Gorki and Lenin.
So also the struggle for Indian Reunification will require a revolution in the field of ideas, a struggle in the fields of art and literature, and a new media which genuinely serves the people.
Why does an actual revolution require a prior intellectual revolution? The reason for this is that before a person fights for a cause he must know what he is fighting for, and must become convinced he is fighting for a noble cause. For that he must be educated and inspired by patriotic intellectuals, who explain to him the object of the struggle. Without this knowledge and conviction he will not fight, or fight only half heartedly.
1. The purpose of Addresses to the Indian Nation
The object of my Addresses to the Indian Nation is to create that intellectual revolution which will lay the groundwork of a subsequent actual revolution and the reunification of India. The purpose is to destroy the false ideas and notions (e.g. the bogus two nation theory) which were drilled into the heads of the Indian people by certain vested interests, and to attack feudal, backward ideas e.g. casteism and communalism.
In Europe this intellectual revolution which preceded the actual revolutions was the work done by scores of very great thinkers e.g. Locke, Voltaire, Rousseau, etc. On the other hand in India it is the IRA that has to do this, because unfortunately our so-called 'intellectuals' are no real intellectuals at all but pseudointellectuals (see my articles 'Indian liberals and their illiberal ignorance' in DailyO.in, 'To the patriotic Indian intellectuals' in saddahaq.com, 'How intellectual are our intellectuals' on my facebook page, and 'Intellectuals like Ram Chandra Guha have no right to criticise Modi' in DailyO.in).
Many of our university professors flaunt foreign degrees, but their heads are full of bookish, sterile and useless knowledge, which I call 'gobar' (cow dung). They have no deep understanding of the country's problems, but have only superficial understanding and half baked ideas.
For instance, there are many professors of economics in Delhi School of Economics, JNU, Delhi University etc. flaunting Ph.D. degrees from Harvard, Yale or the London School of Economics, but not one can tell how to solve the problem of massive unemployment in India (which I have attempted to do in my Address 'A Glimpse of Reunified India (see indianreunificationassociation.weebly.com).
2. The role of art and literature
As explained by me in my article 'The True Role of Art and Literature' (see in indicanews.com), there are broadly two theories of art and literature : (1) art for art's sake, and (2) art for social purpose.
According to the first theory art is meant only to create a piece of beauty to appeal to our aesthetic sense or to entertain us. If if serves a social purpose it ceases to be art, and becomes propaganda.
According to the second theory, art is meant for serving society, by highlighting the evils in society, and inspiring people to fight against social evils and against injustice.
I have explained this in great detail in my article referred to above, so I am not repeating what I have said there. Suffice it to say that in a poor country like India with its huge problems of unemployment, farmers' distress, child malnourishment etc. only the second theory is acceptable in our sub continent, but where is the great art and literature of today? Where is the Dickens of today, where is the Sarat Chandra and Nazrul of today? Where are the Subramania Bharathi, Faiz, Munshi Premchand and Manto of today? There seems to be a total vacuum of great art and literature today.
3. The role of the Indian media
I had written about the role of the Indian media in a detailed article published in The Hindu titled 'Justice Markandey Katju on the Role of the media in India' (see online) and in another detailed article titled 'The role of art, literature and the media' on my blog Satyam Bruyat.
I pointed out there that far from helping the Indian people in their struggle for a better life most of our media are in fact playing an anti-people role. They divert attention from the real issues facing the nation like massive poverty, record and rising unemployment, appalling child malnourishment, widespread farmers distress, almost total lack of proper healthcare and good education for the masses etc. to non issues like lives of film stars, cricket, astrology, babas, petty politics etc. They behave like the Roman Emperors who said "If you cannot give the people bread give them circuses" or like Queen Marie Antoinette who said "If the people do not have bread let them eat cake".
After the recent Pulwama attack most of our media, particularly the electronic media, almost went berserk, whipping up jingoism, sabre rattling and war mongering. This shows that most of our media are utterly shameless and irresponsible. All they care for is getting higher TRP rating to get profits and please politicians. One TV anchor actually sat on his show in military uniform, as if he was going to the front to fight.
4. The role of IRA in the intellectual revolution
Intellectuals are the eyes of society, and without intellectuals society is blind. Due to their study of various subjects and deep understanding of historical and social forces, intellectuals alone are capable of guiding and leading the people. All revolutions were led by intellectuals, e.g. the leaders of the American Revolution like Thomas Jefferson, leaders of the French Revolution like Robespierre, and leaders of the Russian Revolution like Lenin.
But what happens if in a society the so called 'intellectuals' are only pseudo intellectuals , not genuine intellectuals . Then it will be like a blind man leading the blind.
The truth is that there are hardly any genuine intellectuals in India today. Most of the history professors in our Universities only teach the distorted history which the British dished out to us to create hatred between Hindus and Muslims, hardly any Economics professor has an inkling about how to solve India's massive economics problems, etc. Like parrots most of them repeat to their students the nonsense which their own teachers taught them. They do not know what is India, they do not know that Gandhi and Jinnah, the so called 'Fathers' of India and Pakistan, were objectively British agents, they do not know the real purposes of the Britishers in partitioning India, etc.
So it is the IRA which will have to do the job which these professors should be doing, viz, giving intellectual guidance to the nation.
And that is what we in the IRA have been doing. Above all, we are exposing the truth of that historical British swindle called Partition, and showing that India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are really one nation, and must be reunited if we are to progress.
Indians, I have already pointed out in my previous addresses that we have to undo that historical British swindle called Partition and reunify India, Pakistan and Bangladesh under a modern minded secular government if we wish to give to our people a high standard of living and decent lives.
This new reunified India must have a powerful armed force to defend it against its enemies. It is this matter I will discuss here.
1. Reunification of India is only possible following a mighty people's revolution. This is because if we reunite the very purpose of foreign powers to divide us, namely (1) to prevent India from emerging as a modern industrial giant like China, and (2) to keep it as a huge market for the foreign arms industry, will be defeated. So these foreign powers will do their best to prevent us from reunifying, and for this they will use their agents, the governments of India and Pakistan, as well as others, to ensure that India and Pakistan remain hostile to each other, and there is hatred between Hindus and Muslims.
2. All great revolutions required the people to create a new army. We may consider historical examples:
(A) The British Revolution
Before the English Civil War (1642-1651) there was no professional standing army in England, but only militias of the king and aristocrats.
In the Civil War between King Charles 1 and Parliament, the latter created the New Model Army under Cromwell, and it was only by doing so that the British Revolution succeeded.
(B) The American Revolution (1775-1781)
In the American War of Independence against the British, the American people had to create the Continental Army under George Washington, which alone enabled them to win.
(C) The French Revolution (1789)
Before the revolution France had a small army officered by aristocrats. Soon after the revolution began most of the officers fled from France fearing assassination. To defend France from the invading foreign armies which wanted to restore monarchy in France, the Minister of War, Carnot raised a huge people's army by his levee en masse, which ensured the defence of France.
(D) The Russian Revolution (1917)
In the First World War the German Army smashed the Imperial Russian army. Hence after the Revolution of 1917 the Bolsheviks had to create a new army, basing it initially on the Red Guards and a section of the old army which had gone over to the new government, and later adding new personnel.
(E) The Chinese Revolution
The Chinese created the Eighth Route Army and the New Fourth Army which used guerilla tactics in fighting the superior Japanese army.
Thus we see that in all great Revolutions the people had to create a new army
3. To create a first rate armed force requires a high level of industrialisation. That is because modern wars are fought with sophisticated weapons which can only be produced by a highly industrialised country.
Even 71 years after Independence we are almost totally dependent on purchase of most of our heavy weapons like fighter aircraft, tanks, artillery, ships etc from foreign countries (at heavy cost ). Recently it was reported that India purchased some assault rifles from the American firm Sig Sauer. So we cannot make first rate rifles even 71 years after Independence.
If a war breaks out, our armed forces cannot fight for long, because their supply of weapons and spare parts may be cut off. What kind of an armed force is it whose country cannot produce its own weapons? I regard it as a fake armed force, which can only fight with another fake armed force like that of Pakistan, not a real armed force like that of USA or China, countries which produce their own weapons.
Moreover the weapons sold to us by foreign countries will not be having the latest, leading edge equipment in them, obviously because these are usually developed by the foreign arms manufacturers after spending billions of dollars on research, and they will not be willing to pass on their secret technology to us. For instance, the fighter jets sold to us will be stripped of the latest avionics. So the weapons sold to us will be having outdated technology, not the state of the art one.
4. The principal rival to united India will be China. I have explained this in detail in my article 'Trump's opposition to Chinese Imperialism overshadows his defects' published in outlookindia.com and in my article 'Trump could keep China in check' published in indicanews.com.
As explained there, the Chinese with their huge over 3 trillion dollars foreign exchange reserves have become like ravenous hungry wolves, imperialists seeking raw materials to capture and markets to plunder. Today they are an expanding, aggressive imperialism, liked the imperialism of Nazi Germany or Japan, and constitute the greatest danger to world peace, as Hitler was.
To check them we will need a modern, powerful military, and for that we must rapidly industrialise, for only a highly industrialised country can have a powerful armed force. And for that we must have a reunited India, for unless we unite we will be wasting our resources and strength on fighting each other and weakening ourselves.
"Meri suno jo gosh-e-naseehat niyosh hai"
Kashmiris, lend me your ears
The situation today in Kashmir is that due to the continuous problems from the Indian Government for decades the Kashmiri people have become almost totally alienated from, and bitterly hostile to, India. Some have even picked up and are using arms against the Indian security forces, and casualties are being suffered regularly on both sides.
As a Kashmiri myself I am deeply sad at the sufferings of the Kashmiri people, and I have repeatedly condemned atrocities on them.
Nevertheless, I regard it necessary to tell them the truth: the slogan of azadi (independence) which they keep parroting, is wrong, and should be replaced by the slogan calling for reunification of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh under a secular government, Kashmir being a part of reunified India. That is the only way out for the Kashmiri people from their present predicament.
Let me explain:
1. No Indian Government can survive if it permits azadi to Kashmir. Public opinion in India has hardened on this issue. So however much the bloodshed, Kashmir will never be allowed to secede. Kashmiris must get this basic fact into their heads.
2. Many Kashmiris refer to the UN resolutions which Nehru allegedly accepted. Three things must be said in this connection:
(A) The UN is dominated by the powerful countries, and weaker countries have usually to act according to their will. At the time India got Independence our political leaders, like Nehru, were inexperienced and idealistic, and our country was weak. So they had to accept the decision for plebiscite. But Nehru's decision cannot bind India today.
(B) The UN had also resolved on partition of Palestine and creation of Israel as a Jewish state. Most Muslims condemn the UN for this. Then why do Kashmiri Muslims keep harping on the UN resolutions for plebiscite in Kashmir? You can't blow hot and cold together.
(C) UN is not God, whose wish must be obeyed. It usually acts in the interest of the powerful nations, and against the interest of the weaker nations
3. Kashmiris often say that Kashmir was always independent and never part of India. This is false. In fact Kashmir was independent only till 1587, when the last independent Kashmiri ruler Yusuf Shah Chak was deposed by the Mughal Emperor Akbar who incorporated Kashmir into the Mughal Empire of India. Later, Kashmir passed under Afghan, Sikh and Dogra rule.
Some Kashmiris say that Maharaja Hari Singh was an independent ruler, and this shows that Kashmir was independent before 1947. But the truth is that Hari Singh's independence was only nominal, like that of other Maharajas and Nawabs in India. The real power was with the British govt. acting through the British Resident or Political Agent.
4. The ideology of the Kashmiri separatists and militants is Islamic fundamentalism. So if Kashmir becomes independent under their leadership it will be thrown back into the Middle Ages, with the feudal, outdated, barbaric sharia law being imposed, women stoned to death for adultery, limbs chopped off for theft (as in Saudi Arabia) etc. Women will be compelled to wear feudal and stupid burqa. Kashmir will therefore not benefit but suffer by independence. Instead of moving forward it will move backwards.
5. Many Kashmiris say that countries as small as Kashmir exist independently and are doing well.
The reply to this reasoning is this: one cannot say that just because countries as small as Kashmir are doing well so independent Kashmir will also do well. We have to consider Kashmir by its own features, not by comparing it with Belgium, Luxemburg, Monaco or with the Vatican.
Kashmir has a massive handicraft industry, and for this its biggest market is India. In almost all cities and towns in India there are shops of Kashmiris selling shawls, carpets and other handicrafts. When I went to Kovalam beach near Tiruvananthipuram in southern Kerala I found two shops run by Kashmiris there.
This huge market will be lost, and consequently many of the Kashmiri industries will be closed down and lacs of Kashmiris would be unemployed if Kashmir is separated from India, for then Kashmiris cannot come into India without a visa, and visas will be very difficult to obtain.
Some Kashmiris may say that after becoming independent we will have a market in China or Pakistan. This argument overlooks realities. Creating a new market requires years, if not decades. Most Kashmiris do not coolly think of this but keep parroting 'azadi, azadi'.
6. Many Kashmiris point at the ill treatment of Kashmiris in India, e.g. the attacks on Kashmiri students and traders after the Pulwama attack, and on this basis demand independence. It is true that the attacks on Kashmiris were shameful, and those responsible for them have disgraced the nation. But this cannot be the basis for demanding independence. At one time many atrocities were committed on Sikhs, but this does not justify grant of Khalistan as a separate nation for Sikhs.
7. Kashmir will never survive as an independent country. If it leaves India it will inevitably come under the Pakistan or China jackboot.
8. The present militancy in Kashmir is backed by some foreign powers. This is obvious from the fact that the Kashmiri militants use sophisticated weapons, which are certainly not made locally. Some foreign power is supplying them. So if Kashmir is separated from India it will certainly not get real independence but come under the heels of that foreign power.
So Kashmiris, for your salvation wake upto realities and the truth, and join the Indian Reunification Association (IRA), which aims at undoing that historical British swindle called Partition and reuniting India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, with Kashmir as part of it, under a modern minded secular government (see the website indianreunificationassociation.weebly.com). Give up that stupid, unrealistic slogan 'azadi' which has only landed you in a ditch, and instead demand reunification of India under a secular government.
Once you do that on a large scale you will not only solve your problems, you will also be giving leadership to the whole nation, and the rest of India will become your followers.
Addresses to the Indian Nation: The forthcoming Indian Parliamentary elections and India's future IndiansRead Now
The dates of the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections have been announced (in 7 phases from 11th April to 19th May), so I may comment on this.
There are various poll predictions, but in my opinion whatever be the outcome it will make no difference to the massive poverty, unemployment, farmers distress, child malnutrition, lack of healthcare and good education etc for the Indian masses. In fact the situation is bound to get worse regardless of whoever comes to power.
I have repeatedly said that the real test of every system and political activity is one, and only one: does it raise the standard of living of the people? In other words, does it give people better lives? In my opinion whatever be the outcome of the forthcoming Lok Sabha elections, it will make no difference to the people's lives (except that minorities may feel a bit safer).
Yes, I would like BJP to be defeated since the ideology of this party (Hindutva) strikes at the heart of a basic feature of our country, viz its plurality and diversity (since our country is broadly a country of immigrants), and it divides the Indian people on communal lines. We have seen its performance since 2014. Lynching of Muslims was a regular feature, obviously motivated by the Sangh Parivar's communal ideology. Muslims were often arrested on fake charges of terrorist attacks etc, and false evidence was fabricated by the police against them, because of which many innocents were convicted and had to spend long years in jail. Hate speeches against them were regularly given, and a communal atmosphere generated e.g. by talk of 'ghar wapasi', proposing erection of a 'shamshaan ghat' (cremation ground) wherever there was a 'qabristan' (graveyard), etc. Christian churches were vandalised in Delhi, and Christians were attacked in Odisha etc.
So this party is a Ravan, a monster whose 'vadh' is the order of the day for our people. But even if the BJP is defeated I have no illusions about the alternative which will emerge. The truth is that, with a few rare exceptions, Indian politicians today (of all parties) are a bunch of crooks, thugs, gundas, rogues, rascals, looters, deceivers, gangsters and murderers, who should have been summarily shot or hanged long ago. They have no genuine love for the country, but only an insatiable greed for power and pelf. They polarise society on caste and communal lines, and spread caste and communal hatred to get votes. There is not a single wicked deed they will not do to attain their nefarious ends.
So even if BJP is defeated it will make no basic difference in the lives of our people (except that the number of lynchings of Muslims will go down a bit).
If a non BJP coalition will be formed, it will be a motley collection of 'saanp bichchu gojar' (snakes, scorpions and centipedes). These parties will first fight for lucrative portfolios, particularly the Finance Ministry, Commerce Ministry, Industries Ministry, Telecom Ministry etc. where they can make a huge amount of money by corrupt acts. Later, they will keep fighting over other issues, like members of the Janata Party which was formed in 1977 after the Emergency.
So replacement of the present BJP Govt. by a non BJP coalition Govt. will be like going from the frying pan into the fire.
The present situation in our country is that our Constitution has exhausted itself and become a scarecrow, all or state institutions have become hollow and empty shells, while the people's distress is mounting. Unemployment has reached record heights (as the recent report of the National Sample Survey Organisation revealed), almost every second Indian child is malnourished (as reported in Global Hunger Index), over 300,000 farmers have committed suicide, proper healthcare and good education is almost non existent for the Indian masses, and feudal remnants in the form of casteism and communalism are rampant.
So a period of instability is shortly going to start in India, like that in the reign of the later Mughals ( 1707-1857).
The last strong Mughal Emperor was Aurangzeb who died in 1707. After his death a period of instability began, which lasted till 1857 when the Mutiny was suppressed and British rule consolidated. During this 150 year period there was great turbulence in India, with the British and French fighting each other, Maratha armies ravaging vast areas, Sikhs in revolt, etc. It was only from 1857 that relative stability came to India, and which continued till now (there were no doubt Partition riots, Indo-Pak and Indo-China wars etc. but these were of short durations in our nation's long history).
Now after the coming Parliamentary elections a period of instability will start in India, like the period of the later Mughals, and will probably last for 10 years or so. During this period there will be great turbulence and chaos. There may even be a spell or two of military rule, for even though our army claims to be non-political, historical experience has shown that when there is a political vacuum and chaos the army is forced to step in e.g. in England after the execution of King Charles 1 in 1649, Spain in 1936, in Chile in 1973 and in Pakistan in 1958.
However, a political and social vacuum cannot last forever. Sooner or later an alternative has to emerge.
It is obvious that a great turbulence in India, which is shortly coming, will have strong repercussions in Pakistan and Bangladesh. And it is here that the ideas propagated by IRA will spread like wildfire, and that will eventually lead to Indian Reunification under a strong secular modern minded government.
No one can forecast details of how this will happen, or when, or who will be our Bismarck, Cavour or Garibaldi (the leaders who will unite India). One cannot be rigid about forms. But it is certain that the reunification will follow a mighty anti-feudal upheaval in India, a revolution, under patriotic modern minded leaders who are determined to abolish poverty, unemployment and other social evils, sweep away the feudal filth of casteism, communalism and superstitions, and rapidly industrialise and modernise the country, using ruthless means if necessary.
As stated in my earlier Addresses to the Indian Nation, the Indian Reunification Association aims not just at reunifying India but even more to creating a prosperous India, with its people enjoying a high standard of living and decent lives.
I have pointed out the deplorable condition of our country today, with massive poverty, huge unemployment, appalling child malnutrition, widespread farmers distress, almost a total lack of proper healthcare and good education for our masses, discrimination against minorities, dalits, women etc.
Our aim must be to abolish these, but what is the way out?
The way out is science, and by science I mean not just knowledge of physics, chemistry, mathematics, biology, etc., I mean the entire scientific outlook, which must be spread to every nook and corner of our country.
I have pointed out how intellectually backward we are in some of my articles (e.g. 'The 90%' and 'Ten ways of being foolish' published in IndianExpress.com and on my blog Satyam Bruyat).
It is relatively easy to change the physical environment (by constructing buildings, roads, bridges, etc.). It is ten times more difficult to change the casteist, communal and superstitious feudal and backward mindsets of our masses (1320 millions in India and over 200 million each in Pakistan and Bangladesh) and make them modern. But unless we do so we can never escape from poverty and the other social evils which are plaguing our country today.
Being modern does not mean wearing a nice suit and tie, or a pretty frock, jeans or lipstick. It means having a modern mind, which means a rational mind, a logical mind, a scientific mind, a questioning mind. We must make our people's minds like that.
The ancient Greeks were so great because they questioned everything (see Will Durant's 'The Story of Civilisation: The Grandeur that was Greece').
Similarly, our ancestors questioned everything (see my article 'Sanskrit as a language of Science' online and on my blog Satyam Bruyat).
With the aid of science they built mighty civilisations thousands of years ago when most people in Europe (except in Greece and Rome) were living in forests. They made outstanding discoveries e.g. decimal system in mathematics, plastic surgery in medicine, etc.
However we subsequently took to the unscientific path of superstitions and empty rituals, which has led us to disaster (see my judgment Naresh Chand vs Distt Inspector of Schools online).
The way out therefore is to go back again to the scientific path shown by our ancestors, the path of Aryabhatta and Brahmagupta, Sushrut and Charak, Panini and Patanjali, Ramanujan and Raman.
In Pakistan there has been persecution and murder of Ahmadiyas (just as in India many Muslims are discriminated against). Let there be freedom to everyone to believe what he wants. I had said in some of my earlier Addresses that we must rapidly industrialize if we wish to abolish poverty, unemployment and other social evils in India. Spreading the scientific outlook goes hand in hand with rapid industrialization, as they complement each other. We have to patiently educate our masses so that they develop the scientific temper, and give up feudal, backward ideas.
No doubt there will be fierce resistance to this, and some of us may even have to face persecution ( just as great scientists like Galileo had to face persecution by the Inquisition for propagating the heliocentric theory as it contradicted a popular interpretation of the Bible) since most people are conservative and do not like to change their opinions. But we must do our patriotic duty, whatever be the personal danger in doing so.
Please read my following articles in this connection on the portal DailyO.in : (1) Eight steps to a revolution that can clean up the mess India is in right now (2) Why I say to Pakistanis, Hum bilkul tum jaise nikle (3) Parliamentary democracy has failed (4) India's liberals and their illiberal ignorance.
I regard all Pakistanis (and Bangladeshis) as Indians. But because Pakistan was created as a separate Islamic state by that historical British swindle called Partition, which was the greatest tragedy befalling our nation in its 5000 year old known history, it has been temporarily separated from India (and which we are duty bound to undo). So I call you Pakistani Indians.
What is Pakistan ? It is Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and the North West Frontier Province. These were all part of India since Mughal times. There is no such thing as Pakistan. We share the same culture, look like each other, and many of us speak the same language, Hindustani. When I meet Pakistanis I do not feel any different from them, and when Indians and Pakistanis meet abroad they socially mix with each other as if Partition had never taken place.
I have already mentioned in an earlier address that India is broadly a country of immigrants, whose ancestors came into this sub continent mainly from the north west (and to a lesser extent from the North East). Did a common culture emerge by the intermingling of these immigrants, or did they remain separate? The answer is that by the intermingling of these immigrants over thousands of years a common culture emerged in India, which can broadly be called the 'Sanskrit-Urdu culture' which we all share in common.
One may ask: what have Nagas, Tamilians or Pathans got to do with Sanskrit and Urdu ?Hardly anyone knows Sanskrit today, and people in South India or the North East do not know Urdu. The answer is that when I use the words 'Sanskrit' and 'Urdu' in the expression 'Sanskrit-Urdu culture' I mean the spirit of Sanskrit and the spirit of Urdu, not Sanskrit and Urdu literally. This needs to be explained.
I have written two articles which you must read to understand Indian culture. They can be seen on my blog Satyam Bruyat (1) Sanskrit as a language of Science, and (2) What is Urdu? In these articles I have explained that while in Sanskrit the emphasis was on reason, in Urdu it was on emotion.
Reason and emotion are the two basic features of man. Without reason, a man is blind. Without emotion, he is impotent. Hence both these qualities complement each other, and both are required to build a nation. In Europe, Voltaire stood for reason, and Rousseau stood for emotion, and these two are regarded the prime intellectual makers of modern Europe.
As mentioned in my article 'Sanskrit as a language of Science' (see online), Sanskrit was a language of free thinkers, who questioned everything. Even our atheists wrote in Sanskrit.
As regards Urdu, no poetry in the world (and I have read several) expresses the voice of the human heart in the manner, and with such power, as Urdu does.
To build a modern, prosperous India, in which all our citizens enjoy decent lives, requires both reason and emotion.
It requires reason, because science stands for reason, and the way to prosperity for India is by adopting the scientific outlook on a large scale.
It requires emotion, because building a prosperous India, which must be our goal, requires people with the selfless passion of serving the country.
This spirit of Sanskrit and Urdu is the true Indian culture, and it encompasses people from the North Western Frontier Province of Pakistan in the West to the North East and Bangladesh in the East, from Kashmir in the North to Kanyakumari in the South.
Many Pakistanis may express the apprehension that if Pakistan reunites with India, Muslims in Pakistan will be dominated by Hindus, as Hindus are in the majority, and parliamentary democracy runs on majority vote. My reply is that in reunited India we will not have parliamentary democracy. Experience in India has shown that parliamentary democracy largely runs on casteism and communalism, which are feudal forces. We have to destroy feudalism if we are to progress, but parliamentary democracy further entrenches them (see my article ' Parliamentary democracy has failed ' in the portal DailyO.in). Hence we must have an alternative system in which no community dominates over others. For that, a spell of dictatorship under patriotic modern minded leaders may be necessary (like that of Mustafa Kemal in Turkey). Too much democracy is also bad, for the vast majority of our people are intellectually backward, full of casteism and communalism.
Some people say that IRA has only a few thousand members, so it is irrelevant when millions (or tens of millions) of Indians belong to Hindu extremist organisations in India, and Muslim extremist organisations in Pakistan.
My answer is this: truth has great power. Even if I am alone in the world (and I am not), but what I say is true, it will gradually spread and be accepted by all. When Copernicus said that the earth goes around the sun (the heliocentric theory), and the sun does not go around the earth (the geocentric theory), he was all alone in Europe who said this. In fact the idea was met with great hostility at that time (as it contradicted the interpretation of the Bible popular in that time), and the great scientist Galileo who agreed with it was almost burnt at the stake in 1633 during the Inquisition, and survived only by recanting. But because the idea represented the truth, it was ultimately accepted by all. So even if we in IRA are presently only a small minority, if we represent the truth (and we are confident that we do), our idea of reunification will certainly be accepted by tens (or even hundreds) of millions in our subcontinent.
Some people say how can we reunite when there is so much hatred between Hindus and Muslims? My answer is: this hatred is artificially created by certain vested interests. In fact when Indians go to Pakistan they are overwhelmed by the love, affection and hospitality they receive, and the same happens when Pakistanis come to India.
Pakistanis may face one difficulty in joining IRA, which Indians may not. Even if they are convinced of the truth of what we say, they may find it dangerous to say so openly, since our view (that India and Pakistan are really one nation, and only artificially separated) challenges the very existence of Pakistan as a separate Islamic state. So the authorities in Pakistan may take some action against them, as it happened to a school in Karachi (Mama Babycare Cambridge School) recently whose registration was suspended because the children there waved the Indian national flag and danced to Indian songs.
However, as Victor Hugo said "There is one thing more powerful than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come". The idea of Indian reunification is an idea whose time has come. So no amount of opposition to it or repression will prevail over this massive tide which IRA represents, and which is rising higher and higher every day, attracting more and more converts in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
"Kisne kaha hai toot gaya khanjar-e-firang?
Seene mein zakhm-e-nau bhi hai daagh-e-kuhan ke saath".
What I am going to say in this Address was really the job of Professors of History in JNU, AMU, BHU and other Universities and Institutes in India. I was basically a man of the legal world (20 years a lawyer and 20 years a judge), and explaining history to the Indian people was not my job. But since the Professors of History, who were enjoying high salaries and perks, were not doing their job I had to do it instead.
While pursuing my legal career I also studied deeply history, philosophy, economics, literature (of many countries), sociology etc. And I learnt that much of what our Professors in Indian Universities and Institutes knew and taught was humbug, and their heads crammed with bookish, sterile and useless knowledge, which I call gobar (cow dung), which they passed on to their equally stupid students. In this connection see my article 'Indian liberals and their illiberal ignorance' on the portal DailyO.in.
For instance there are many Professors of Economics in Delhi School of Economics, JNU, Delhi University, etc. flaunting Ph.D. degrees from Harvard, Yale and the London School of Economics. But if they are asked how the problem of unemployment can be solved not one can give the correct answer (which I have attempted to do in my Eighth Address--Glimpses of Reunified India).
Similarly, I had to explain to the Indian people (which was really the job of these Professors) about what is India (see my article 'What is India?' online and on my blog Satyam Bruyat), Philosophy (see my blogs 'Guru Purnima', 'Indian Philosophy', 'Nyaya or Vedanta' etc., and my article 'Indian intellectuals' on my fb page), Sanskrit (see my article 'Sanskrit as a language of Science' online and on my blog Satyam Bruyat), Urdu (see my article 'What is Urdu' online and on my blog), etc.
The problem of communalism is also something which our History Professors should have investigated deeply and explained to the Indian people, but they have not. So I had to do their job.
Why did our history professors not make the discoveries which I made, (which was really their job, not mine) e.g.
(1) India is broadly a country of immigrants, like North America, which explains its tremendous diversity (see my article 'What is India' online and on my blog Satyam Bruyat).
(2) Communalism arose after 1857
I have explained in my articles 'The Truth about Pakistan' and 'The Truth about Partition' (see online and on my blog) that there was no communalism in India before 1857. Hindus and Muslims lived together in harmony, with Hindus taking part in Eid and Moharram, and Muslims in Holi and Diwali. This state of affairs continued till the Great Mutiny broke out in India in 1857. In this Mutiny, Hindus and Muslims jointly fought against the British. After suppressing it, the British decided that the only way to control India was divide and rule (see my articles referred to above, and also BN Pande's 'History in the service of Imperialism' online). Details about how this divide and rule policy was implemented are given in those pieces, and hence I am not repeating them here. All communal riots and clashes started after 1857. The communal virus was injected into our society and body politic by the British and their agents systematically year after year, and decade after decade (see my article 'Truth about Pakistan' online) resulting in the greatest tragedy of India in its 5000 year old known history--the Partition of 1947.
(3) Though the Muslim invaders destroyed many Hindu temples (e.g. destruction of the Somnath temple by Mahmud Ghaznavi), the descendants of these Muslim invaders who became local rulers, far from destroying Hindu temples gave hundreds of grants to them (see my article 'Tipu Jayanti Celebrations' published on 10.11.2015 on my blog Satyam Bruyat). These Muslim rulers, e.g. the Mughals, Nawabs of Avadh, Murshidabad, Arcot etc., Tipu Sultan and others had 80-90% of their subjects who were Hindus. They knew that if they broke temples there would be revolts and disturbances which no ruler wants. Hence in their own interest they fostered and promoted harmonious relations between all communities, e.g. Nawabs of Avadh used to organise Ramlilas and celebrate Holi and Diwali, the Nawab of Arcot donated land for the temple tank of the famous Kapaleeshwar temple in Chennai, Tipu Sultan used to give annual grants to 156 Hindu temples, and gave grants to the Shankaracharya of Shringeri (see BN Pande's 'History in the service of Imperialism' online) etc. About Aurangzeb there is a controversy (see my blog on him in my blog Satyam Bruyat) and more research is required.
Now the invasions by Muslim invaders have been mentioned in our history books. But the period of rule by the descendants of the invaders, in which communal harmony was fostered by the local Muslim rulers (which is of ten times longer duration than the invasions) has been deliberately suppressed from our history books by the British historians and their Indian disciples, obviously since that would go against the wicked British policy of divide and rule.
It is therefore obvious that communalism is not an intrinsic feature of our country but was an artificial creation, first by the British, and after 1947 by certain vested interests.
It is true that many people in India and Pakistan today are communal. However, this is not something intrinsic but is an artificial creation. Propaganda is something so powerful that it can temporarily make people blind to the truth. For instance, the Nazi propaganda that Jews are evil people made almost the whole German nation go mad, resulting in the horrors of the Holocaust, though Germans are mostly excellent people, highly cultured and good natured.
Similarly, it was the nefarious divide and rule policy, injected into our body politic for decades, and the bogus two nation theory, hammered into our heads by the British rulers and their agents like Gandhi and Jinnah, which created hatred between Hindus and Muslims. It did not exist before 1857 when Hindus and Muslims lived amicably. Even today a certain political party thrives on Hindu communalism, and projects constructing Ram Mandir and cow protection as real issues, when the real issues facing India (including Pakistan and Bangladesh) are poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, farmers distress, lack of proper healthcare and good education, etc.
When we talk of Indian reunification, many people say that it is impossible to reunite India in view of the hatred between Hindus and Muslims. They do not realise that this hatred was artificially created by the British, and continued even after 1947 by some vested interests. It is not natural or inherent. And the proof of this is that when Indians go to Pakistan they are overwhelmed by the love, affection and hospitality they receive, and the same happens when Pakistanis come to India.
India was divided and Pakistan created as an Islamic state so that hatred between Hindus and Muslims continues. So communalism will continue to plague our society until reunification of India under a secular modern minded government which while upholding religious freedom does not tolerate religious extremism or bigotry, and crushes it with an iron hand.
The Indian Reunification Association (See our website indianreunificationassociation.weebly.com and in particular our Mission Statement) aims not just at formal reunification of India but also at a reunified India in which all its citizens have decent lives and enjoy a high standard of living. We must have a reunified India in which all its citizens get employment with high incomes, nutritious food, healthcare, good education, etc. All that will cost a lot of money. How is it to be achieved? That is what will be explained in this Address.
The Industrial Revolution, which began in England in the 18th century and then spread all over the world, has created a unique situation in world history, that now no one need be poor and everyone can have a high standard of living.
Earlier, in feudal times, the methods of production were so backward and primitive that very little wealth could be generated by the same. Hence in the feudal era only a handful of people (kings, aristocrats etc.) could be rich, and the rest of the people had to be poor.
This situation has drastically changed after the Industrial Revolution. Now modern industry is so powerful and so big that enough wealth can be generated to give everyone a decent life and a high standard of living.
So to give the citizens of reunified India a high standard of living we must have a high level of industrialisation. How is that to be achieved?
Setting up modern largescale industry requires 3 essentials (1) a huge pool of technical talent (2) huge natural resources, and (3) a huge market.
Today we have the first two, but not the third.
India of today is not the India of 1947. In 1947 we had very few industries and very few engineers, since the British policy was broadly to keep India unindustrialised, backward and feudal. This situation has changed since then, and now we have thousands of bright engineers, technicians and scientists. Our IT engineers are largely manning Silicon Valley in California, and Indian Professors abound in American and European Universities in their science, mathematics and engineering departments.
We have immense natural resources, since India is not just a small country like England or Japan, but is a subcontinent.
However, the problem in industrialising India is lack of the third factor viz a huge market. No doubt we have a huge population, but most of our people are poor and so do not have much purchasing power. After all, the goods produced by industry must be sold. So the problem is not how to increase production (that we can easily do since we have the first two essentials for industrialisation) but how to raise the purchasing power of our masses.
In the imperialist era markets were captured by armed force e.g. the British conquest of India or the French conquest of Algeria and Vietnam. But the era of direct imperialism is over.
Acquiring foreign markets is difficult, since they are already saturated e.g. by domestic or Chinese goods.
So the only recourse left for us is to convert our huge population into a huge market, which means raising the purchasing power of our masses. How is that to be done?
In the Soviet Union after the policy of rapid industrialisation was adopted in 1928 the broad methodology which was followed was this: prices of commodities were fixed by the government, and these were regularly reduced every two years or so by 5-10% (and sometimes wages raised by 5-10%). This way the real wages of workers went up, (since real wage is relative to the prices) and hence the people could buy more goods. Thus by state action (and not laissez faire) the people's purchasing power was increased.
Simultaneously, industrialisation was rapidly stepped up, and the goods manufactured could be sold ( as the people's purchasing power had gone up).
At a time when the Great Depression was going on in the world (following the Wall Street Slump of 1928) and one out of every three worker in the USA was unemployed, the Soviet economy was rapidly growing and millions of jobs created in Russia.
I am not saying that we must necessarily follow the method adopted in Soviet Russia. We can devise our own method of raising the purchasing power of the masses, but unless that is done we can never industrialise on a large scale, and can therefore never eliminate poverty, unemployment and other social evils.
I make it clear that I am not against private enterprise. But I am certainly against the crony capitalism practised in India which has resulted in 7 Indians, who bribed politicians and bureaucrats, owning more wealth than the bottom 50% of India's 1320 million population.
Rapid industrialisation of India is possible only under strong patriotic political leaders who are determined to rapidly industrialise the country. Under the present system of parliamentary democracy that is not possible, as our political leaders are only interested in winning the next elections, and have no interest in rapid industrialisation. In fact Indian parliamentary democracy runs largely on caste and communal vote banks. Casteism and communalism are feudal forces which must be destroyed if India is to progress, but parliamentary democracy further entrenches them. China has no parliamentary democracy and so has progressed rapidly, while we are still embroiled in Ram Mandir and cow protection issues. So reunified India will not have parliamentary democracy but some other system under which India rapidly industrialises (see my article 'Parliamentary democracy has failed' in the portal DailyO.in).
The reunified India will strongly support science and scientific thinking. While supporting religious freedom, it will suppress religious extremism or bigotry, whether Hindu, Muslim or Sikh, and crush it with an iron hand. It will not tolerate discrimination against minorities, dalits or women.
In particular, it will repeal all laws against cow slaughter or beef eating. This may antagonise many Hindus, but so be it. We are not in a popularity contest.
It will abolish the outdated sharia law, and enact a common civil code for all communities. This may antagonise many Muslims, but so be it. We are not in a popularity contest.
Reunified India will have a huge market for the products of our modern large scale industry, and will have huge natural resources. The huge amount we currently spend on purchasing weapons from foreign countries will be spent on the welfare of our people and giving them decent lives.
"Hazaaron saal nargis apni benoori pe roti hai
Badi mushkil se hota hai chaman mein deedawar paida"
The truth is that the real Father of our Nation is the great Mughal Emperor Akbar, and its grandfather is the great Emperor Ashoka. I have written two articles, 'Emperor Akbar--The real Father of the Indian Nation' which is on my blog Satyam Bruyat, and 'Emperor Akbar, not Mahatma Gandhi, is the real Father of the Indian Nation' on the portal DailyO.in so I will not repeat what I have said there. A good father protects and teaches his children. Small children are immature, and usually do not know what is good for them. A good father has to teach them what is in their interest. He is loving of his children, but that very love sometimes makes him use strong measures to prevent his children from going astray.
He compels his children to go to school, knowing that it is vital for their prosperous future, though most children would, if given a choice, prefer to play at home.
Similarly, the father of a nation loves his subjects, but that very love makes him sometimes use tough measures and enforce discipline. The people are mostly backward and with little understanding of what is good for them. In India, most people are casteist, communal and superstitious. But a good leader is intellectually ahead of the masses, and understands what is good for them (the masses being like children cannot). And for that he sometimes has to use tough measures.
A good example of this is Mustafa Kemal of Turkey (1881-1938), who was given the title Ataturk (Father of Turkey). I have written about him in my article 'Parliamentary democracy has failed, we need a dictatorship', which is on the portal DailyO.in.
Under the feudal, backward rule of the Sultans and Caliphs, Turkey became the 'Sick man of Europe', with European powers kicking it around. The Ottoman Grand Vizier, under instructions from the Sultan, even signed the shameless Treaty of Sevres in 1920 with the Allied powers for partitioning Turkey. Mustafa Kemal refused to accept partition of his country, and with his associates staged a military coup against the Caliph, defeated his army (which was backed by the European Allies) in the Turkish War of Independence, and set about modernizing Turkey by sweeping political, economic and cultural reforms for setting up a secular modern state.
He abolished the Caliphate and sharia courts, suppressed the reactionary clergy, introduced free and compulsory education (including education for girls), gave equal civil and political rights to women as men, set up technical institutes and industries, and replaced the Arabic alphabets with Latin ones.
Mustafa Kemal's programme of modernisation was sought to be emulated by King Amanullah of Afghanistan (see my blog 'King Amanullah' on my blog Satyam Bruyat), and had he succeeded today Afghanistan would have been a modern country with its people enjoying a high standard of living, but unfortunately he was deposed by reactionary elements in Afghanistan in a coup engineered by the British.
Emperor Akbar's genius was in realising that India was a country of great diversity, and hence the only way to keep it together was by giving equal respect to all its communities (I have explained this in detail in my two articles on Akbar referred to earlier). Hindus like Raja Man Singh, Todar Mal and Birbal were appointed to the highest posts. It was because of his wise policy of sulh-e-kul that the Mughal Empire lasted so long and made India prosperous. In this respect Akbar was far ahead of his times, for at that time Europeans were massacring each other in the name of religion. It is because of Emperor Akbar that today we are Indians, and not just Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis, Jains etc.
Like a true father, Akbar, could also be tough when the situation required such a disposition. In 1562, when he was only 20 years old, Adam Khan, son of Akbar's foster mother Maham Anaga, murdered Akbar's Prime Minister Atka Khan. Furious at this, Akbar had Adam Khan thrown down from the ramparts of Agra Fort so that his brains came out.
This sent the message throughout the Empire that while the Emperor is a fair and reasonable man, he will not tolerate indiscipline or outrageous behaviour.
Similarly, the modern minded government of reunited India, which will be created in the future, will not tolerate religious extremism or bigotry, whether Hindu or Muslim, or caste hatred, or discrimination against minorities, dalits or women, and crush it with an iron hand. Too much freedom is also bad.
I have said earlier that while Emperor Akbar is the Father of the Indian Nation, Emperor Ashoka is its Grand Father. There can hardly be found greater rulers than these two in the whole world's history.
In 'The Outline of History' H.G. Wells writes "Amidst the tens of thousands of names of monarchs that crowd the columns of history, the name of Ashoka shines, and shines almost alone, like a star."
To describe the greatness of Ashoka I need not refer to all his rock and pillar edicts (they are all available online), but will quote just a few.
In his Kalinga Edict Ashoka says:
"Directly after the Kalingas had been conquered arose the remorse in His Sacred Majesty for having conquered the Kalingas, because the conquest of a country involves slaughter, death and carrying away captives. That is a matter of profound sorrow and grief to His Sacred Majesty".
One may read all of world history, but is there a single example of a victor expressing grief over his victory? Did Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon or Hitler express grief after a victory? Ashoka stands alone in this respect.
Rock Edict 6 states: "Beloved of the Gods King Piyadasi speaks thus: In the past, state business was not transacted, nor were reports delivered to the King at all. But now I have given this order : that anytime, whether I am eating, in the women's quarters, the bed chamber, the chariot, the palanquin, in the park, or wherever, reports must be given to me about the affairs of the people, so that I may attend to them wherever I am. I am never content with exerting myself or with despatching business. I consider the welfare of all to be my duty, and the root of this is exerting myself and prompt despatch of business. There is no better work than promoting the welfare of the people, and whatever effort I am making is to repay the debt I owe to all beings to assure their happiness".
In other edicts Ashoka refers to the medical centres he established, wells he ordered to be dug, mango and banyan trees he ordered planted besides roads etc.
Thus Ashoka was perhaps the first ruler in the world who attempted to set up a welfare state.
In Rock Edict 12 Ashoka says "Whoever praises his own religion due to excessive devotion, and condemns others with the thought 'Let me glorify my own religion' only harms his own religion". (See also my blog 'Emperor Ashoka and religious tolerance' on my blog Satyam Bruyat).
This edict is even more relevant today than it was in Ashoka's time.
Justice Markandey Katju is the Chairman of the Indian Reunification Association (IRA). In the past, he also served as the former Chairman of the Press Council of India. Prior to his appointment as Chairman, Press Council of India, he served as a Judge at the Supreme Court of India. Before being elevated as a judge to the Supreme Court, he had earlier served as the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, Madras High Court and as acting Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court.