Once our historians are done with their contortions;

We, the Readers sit back and enjoy the inexorable

fallout, the outing of hypocrisy. The left outs the
hypocrisy of the right, and the right-outs the
hypocrisy of the left, and great column yards are
churned out as a result of such skirmishes. But we forget
that outing of hypocrisy is a virtue as long as it doesn't
turn one into a hypocrite. Well, it does every single time.
Villains are made into heroes and heroes into villains.
The derision is that we like it this way. Gandhi, Nehru,
Bipin, Jinnah, they are to be extolled, they are to be
made into Gods, into atlases who carry the weight of our
ideology and our biases on the nape of their necks.
History as folklore, folklore as history. It conforms to
what we are, ambivalent of our present and
pusillanimous of our future. The left wing does not want
to hear anything about Nehru that might put him in a
bad light.
Fear and palpitating, this is what this is, and the whole
nation chugs along on this dead yet shimmering cold. A
journey to nowhere, slowly, limping, enervating until
you realize what the grand plan always is to appropriate.
How else do we explain foreign destructive ideologies
and their proponents like Karl Marx, Mao, and
Leopold?
Do you now understand how reading a particular
history can languish a nation because when you
panegyrize these monsters like Gandhi, Mao, and Pol
Pot; you also decide to walk on their path and
incapacitate the nation.
Do I need to untangle what the communists did to
Bengal? Look what they did to anything they touched.
They marred anything they touch, and they still
aggrandize Stalin and Mao despite knowing everything
about these monsters.
Mao neutralized 7 crores of his people, 5 crores in 4
years flat. If you might conjecture that I am encrypting
abstract and metaphysical gobbledygook, then recall
who wanted to scuttle the Indo-US nuclear deal. Recall
who was against the Green Revolution, against the
setting of a blood donation camp during the 1962 Indo-
China war. Recall who admonished a fellow communist
Ashutanandan for setting up a blood donation camp.
Recall who hailed the Tiananmen Square massacre that
killed 11,000 innocents. Recall who was against
liberalization. These people and their political parties
are still among us in our societies, in our communities, in
our universities, and even in our own Parliament. The
more we are ignorant of our history, the more we are
taught it wrong and the more these monsters come to
power.
Let us now delve into the contemporary aspects of our
history. Here, this paper will only deal with the alleged
modern India. The damage that our institutions have
done in teaching this part of our history in expounding
various chronicles of it, the damage is much more. In
fact, the damage is catastrophic because it is shaping not
only the next generation but also the present one.
History is an account, but it becomes a weapon if it is
relevant in a contemporary setting and it has been
weaponized by Congress and the left to an unfathomable
extent which has enfeebled the nation.
I will illustrate this with examples because that is the
best way to explain it. This paper begins with Mahatma
Gandhi who more than anyone else repudiated us the
truth, disprove us with the ability to think, gainsaid us
the spirit to be critical of religion, and denied us
catharsis itself. The person who wanted us to be critical
only of the people and the things he loved.
This paper issues the animadversion of the Mahatma by
employing a Bhramastra in the shape of a man whom
the Mahatma feared the most, Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar.
Nations are not galvanized through sharing ancestral
genes, they are not shown the righteous path through
gene pool commandments. Nations need purity of the
mind more than that of the heart. Nations need
Catharsis and our nation hasn’t discovered this
catharsis. This is because we choose to follow the gray
and not the black and white. We choose to follow the
road traversed by Mahatma and not Ambedkar.
To put it bluntly, Mahatma Gandhi was a man of gray,
Ambedkar of black and white. History shows that man
who prefers black and white are abhorred by all because
this world runs on gray. Gray authorizes us to wash our
sins after we have committed them. It permits us to be
forgiven. Gray licenses us to worship and be
worshipped. Gray is religion.
Gandhi was not liberal, his beliefs on societal structure,
the economy, the concept state, on what Indians should
eat or drink would make even the most ardent of
conservatives blush. His theories were baseless on logic
and more on a bizarre sense of faith-based entitlement
which can only be described as an inextricable emulsion
of Homeopathy and spirituality.
Gandhi was an astute and Machiavellian godman.
Ambedkar, on the other hand, was the only true liberal
this nation has produced in the last many centuries.
Gandhi was a theologian, pretending to be a politician
while Ambedkar was a supreme polymath. Gandhi was
a social Darwinian while Ambedkar was just a
Darwinian. Mahatma Gandhi said that he would not
weep over the disappearance of machinery while
Ambedkar wanted an industrialized India.
FORMATION OF RAINBOW
Verse 15 of Chapter 35 of Brahma Samhita
सर्ू यस्र् वििधिर्णय: पिनेनविघविि्तण: करण:
सणभ्रे:।
विर्वत धनुःु सस्ं थणनण: र्े दृश्र्न्ते तविन्रधन:ु ।।
Definition: The multi-colored rays of the sun
scattered in the cloudy sky appear in the
form of a bow called a rainbow. White light
is not an invisible entity but a mixture of all
colors.
 SPEED OF LIGHT
Mantra 4 of Sukta 50 of Mandal 2 of Rigveda
तरवर्विश्विर्यिो ज्र्ोवतष्कृिवस सर्ू य ।
विश्वमण भणवस रोचनम् ।।
Definition: Oh Sun, creator of light,
salutations to you [O Surya] who traverses
2,202 yojanas in half a nimesh. Here we are
talking about the movement of the Sun. But
as the creator of light is in the verse's
interpretation, it is taken as the speed of
light.
We know that 1 nimisha = 16/75 seconds.
Thus 1 blink = 86400/(30×30×30×15) = 16/75
seconds. Thus half-blink = 16/150 sec.
Speed=2202×9×150/16= 185793 miles/second.
 SPEED
Verse 31 of Chapter 2 of Aryabhattiya
भक्ते विलोमवििरे गवतर्ोगेनणनुलोमवििरे द्वौ ।
गत्र्न्तरेग्र लब्धौ वद्वर्ोगकणलणितीतैष्र्ौ ।।
Definition: Divide the distance between the
two bodies moving in opposite directions by
the sum of their speeds, and the distance
between the two bodies moving in the same
direction by the difference of their speeds;
the two quotients will give the time elapsed
since the two bodies met or to elapse before
they will meet.
THREE LAWS OF MOTION
Verse 10 of Ahnika 1 of Chapter 1 of
Vaisheshika Sutra
सर्ं ोगविभणगिेगणनं कर्ममय समणनम् ।
न रव्र्णर्ं कर्ममय ॥
Definition: If two bodies have to collide or
move away, the cause is common which is
force & the force cannot come from the
bodies; it has to be external.
Verse 6 of Ahnika 1 of Chapter 5 of Vaisheshika
Sutra
प्रर्त्नविर्ेषणन्नोिनविर्ेषुः ।
Definition: Particular effort results in a
particular impulse.
Verse 14 of Ahnika 1 of Chapter 1 of
Vaisheshika Sutra
कणर्यर्यविरोवध कर्ममय ।।
Definition: The effort always opposes the
action.
 इरं धनुष कण वनमणयर्
ब्रह्म संवितण के अध्र्णर् 35 कण श्लोक 15
सूर्यस्र् वििधिर्णय: पिनेनविघविि्तण: करण:
सणभ्रे:।
विर्वत धनुुः संस्थणनण: र्े दृश्र्न्ते तविन्रधनु:।।
भणिणथय: मेघमर् आकणर् में विखरी िुई सूर्य की ििुरंगी
वकरर्ें धनुष के रूप में प्रकि िोती िैं विसे इन्रधनुष
किते िैं। श्वेत प्रकणर् कोई अदृश्र् सत्तण निीं िवकक
सभी रंगों कण वमश्रर् िै।
 प्रकणर् की गवत
ऋग्िेि के मंडल 2 के सूक्त 50 कण मंत्र 4
तरवर्विश्विर्यिो ज्र्ोवतष्कृिवस सूर्य ।
विश्वमण भणवस रोचनम् ।।
भणिणथय: िे सूर्य, प्रकणर् के वनमणयतण, आपको नमस्कणर
िै [िे सर्ू य] िो आधे वनमेर् में 2,202 र्ोिन पणर करते
िैं। र्िणं िम िणत कर रिे िैं सूर्य की गवत के िणरे में
लेवकन श्लोक की व्र्णख्र्ण में प्रकणर् के वनमणयतण के रूप
में इसे प्रकणर् की गवत के रूप में वलर्ण िणतण िै।
िम िणनते िैं वक 1 वनवमष = 16/75 सेकंड। इस प्रकणर
1 पलक = 86400/(30×30×30×15) = 16/75 सेकंड।
इस प्रकणर आधण पलक = 16/150 सेकंड।
गवत=2202×9×150/16= 185793 मील/सेकंड।
 गवत
आर्यभिीर् के अध्र्णर् 2 कण श्लोक 3
भक्ते विलोमवििरे गवतर्ोगेनणनल
ु ोमवििरे द्वौ ।
गत्र्न्तरेग्र लब्धौ वद्वर्ोगकणलणितीतैष्र्ौ ।।
भणिणथय: विपरीत विर्णओ ं में चलने िणले िो वपंडों के
िीच की िूरी को उनकी गवत के र्ोग से और एक िी
विर्ण में गवत कर रिे िो वपडं ों के िीच की िूरी को
उनकी गवत के अंतर से विभणवित करें। िो भणगफल िो
वनकणर्ों के वमलने के िणि र्ण उनके वमलने से पिले
िीतने के वलए िीतण िुआ समर् िेंगे।
 गवत के तीन वनर्म
िैर्ेवषक सूत्र के अध्र्णर् 1 के आविकण 1 कण श्लोक 10
संर्ोगविभणगिेगणनं कर्ममय समणनम् ।
न रव्र्णर्ं कर्ममय ॥
भणिणथय: र्वि िो वपडं ों को िकरणनण र्ण िूर िणनण िै, तो
कणरर् सणमणन्र् िै िो िल िै और िल वपंडों से निीं आ
सकतण िै; र्ि िणिरी िोनण चणविए ।
िैर्ेवषक सूत्र के अध्र्णर् 5 के आविकण 1 कण श्लोक 6
प्रर्त्नविर्ेषणन्नोिनविर्ेषुः ।
भणिणथय: विर्ेष प्रर्णस कण पररर्णम एक विर्ेष आिेग
में िोतण िै ।
िैर्ेवषक सूत्र के अध्र्णर् 1 के आविकण 1 कण श्लोक 14
कणर्यर्यविरोवध कर्ममय ।।
भणिणथय: प्रर्णस िमेर्ण कणरयिणई कण विरोध करतण िै।
Travancore curriculum also encompassed Ramayana and
Mahabharata which were not constrained or tyrannized by the
British. The fact is that the entire Budget for education in British
India was less than half the high school budget of New York. The
Rajas of Travancore and Mysore spent a lot on education. Hence
the much better results.

The highest literacy regions Travancore, Cochin, and Baroda have

one thing in common. Yes, they were princely states all directed by
autochthonous Hindu kings who subsidized the education of the
people. Unlike the British bushrangers who engendered illiteracy in
the land they dominated. Even today, the regions directly
administered by the British have commensurately low literacy and
are proportionately poor. This is the real patrimony of British rule
in India.
The communist thugs boast 'We made Kerala literate'. Know that
they are merely embezzling credit. Kerala was already the most
literate region in the entire India even before Independence and
communist takeover. All credit goes to the Hindu kings of
Travancore and Kochi for the pedagogic setup. The next
governments merely continued the contrivance already in place.
This is for all the British fanboys who say the British instituted
contemporary education in India. Stats do not lie. And stats expose
propaganda. This is official data from 1941. Travancore was a
Princely state ruled by a Hindu king. It had a literacy of 47.7%.
United provinces (Uttar Pradesh) were directly regulated by British.
It had a literacy of 8%. Why? If the British gave education, why did
British-ruled Uttar Pradesh have poor literacy? Why did British-
ruled provinces were penurious in education in comparison to
autochthonous states protectorated by Hindu kings?
She says- "The British gave railways and infrastructure". Iran was
extremely impecunious in the 19th century. Before the advent of oil,
Iran was as poverty-stricken as Afghanistan. The Maharaja of
Mysore had more revenue than the king of Iran. Still, without
getting ruled by any colonial power, Iran managed to fabricate
Railways in 1887. It is ludicrous to think that India would need a
colonial master to mold railways. India did not need any colonial
masters to build an internet network in the 20th/21st century.
British ruled Nigeria too. Can these British colonialist fanboys show
us anything as big as Victoria Terminus that was built by the
British in Nigeria? Is anything close to it? No, all they could manage
to build in Nigeria was sheds. These dunderheads do not understand
that a colonial power is only as strong as the economy of the people
it rules. The economy of Bombay was strong enough to precipitate a
surplus to build Victoria Terminus. The economy of Nigeria wasn't.
Why are colonialists unrepentantly expropriating the credit of
economies of the base country?
When the British left, India was more pauperized than Congo,
Zimbabwe, Ghana, Kenya, Niger, ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Sudan,
etc. It was very hard to find any African country poorer than India
(except Uganda) then. This is the real patrimony of the British in
India. In 2021, despite 75 years of Brown Babu misrule, India is
marginally better than most Sub-Saharan Nations.
The stats don't lie. Here is a bombshell. Baroda was a princely state
ruled by an autochthonous Indian king. Patna was the most affluent
region of Bihar ruled by the British. In 1890, Baroda had a revenue
of 159 lakhs with a population of 19 lakhs.
The revenue of Patna was 110 Lakhs. Patna district had a
population of 1.6 Crores. It means Baroda (ruled by the
autochthonous king) was 11 times more opulent than Patna (ruled
by the British). This was in colonial times. In 1947, Bihar was
already craptastic in the entire world. This was before the advent of
brown babus and thugs like Lalu. This is the real legacy
of British rule.
The society of Urdu poetry was full of pedophilia, slavery, and opium.
Many of Ghalib’s poems commemorate Pedophilia and venereal
victimization of juvenile beardless slave boys.

By late 19th century, Urdu society became so depraved that Urdu poets
like Hali made it their mission to purge all the vulgarity and "boy-love
poems" memorialized by the likes of Mirza Ghalib.
Hindustani-Urdu society of 19th century became so depraved that
Hindus inculpated Muslims for pedophilia and vulgarity. Sunnis blamed
Shias. There is no wonder why British and Marathas opined they could
easily pulverize the Awadh Nawabs. They were known to be always
high on drugs and pedophilia.
Humayun's mom Mahan Begum was a Persian.
Akbar's mom Hamida Banu Begum was a Persian. Aurangzeb's mom
Mumtaz Mahal was a Persian. And yes, the Mughals unequivocally
knew of their Turani homeland and conceived of getting it back which is
why Shah Jahan regulated the expensive Balkh annexation at no profit
whatsoever. Even a late Mughal like Aurangzeb considered himself a
Turani and not a Hindustani. He said that Hindustanis are naturally
menial and egotistical.

In Aurangzeb's India: Foreign Muslims such as Iranis and Turanis

superintended high status and occupied high positions. Mughals
abhorred native Indian Muslims for being tenebrous and grotesque. That
is why, these indigenous Muslims married women from Kashmir so that
their children could look fair and pass off as veritable “Mughals”.
In Mughal India, Foreign Muslims like Iranis and Turanis were around
1% of the population. Yet, they enjoyed most of the higher positions.
Out of 51 Mansabdars within the rank of 5000: 45% were Persians, and
17% were Turani Turks. Only 7% were Indian Muslims.

The Indian Christians used to take gratification in publicly Christian

untouchability and vaunting their birth status in religious festivals like
Easter. This is how Easter was celebrated in Kerala before 1947: After
Easter Service, Christians had to take out a public procession with the
idol of Jesus. However, they contemplated the shadow of a Dalit to be
extremely feculent and wanted to ensure the obliteration of any such
thing from their path. Christians clamoured "poyin, poyin"("Go
away. go away") before they took out their procession in the street. This
was an admonition to Dalits to keep off the streets and not "infect"
Christians by their presence. In some churches of Kerala, this custom
survived until 1970.
The British were not the first to interdict sati in India. Hindu Peshwas
embargoed Sati 29 years BEFORE Lord Bentinck. Hindu Maratha
Kingdom Savantvadi extirpated Sati by an official order dated May 6,
1821. 8 years BEFORE Lord Bentinck. Shri Swami Narayan was
crusading against Sati in 1801. Anybody who says the British were the
first to annul Sati is either perfidious or airheaded.
A cannon fodder named Mangal Pandey vociferated this at his mates as
he fired shots at British imperialists. Thus commenced the first war of
Indian independence.
The practice of burying children alive under the Stupas took place till
1959. And no, this is not communist propaganda. Many European
travelers witnessed such practices live