BJP and Congress: Is this true?

Question

Many conspiracy theories exist regarding the death of Bhagat Singh,especially the events surrounding his death:

One of the most popular ones, one that actually has some contemporary evidence to it is that Mahatma Gandhi had an opportunity to stop Singh's execution but did not. This particular theory has spread amongst the public in modern times after the creation of modern films such as The Legend of Bhagat Singh, which portray Gandhi as someone who was strongly at odds with Bhagat Singh and did not oppose his hanging. A variation on this theory is that Gandhi actively conspired with the British to have Singh executed. Both theories are highly controversial and hotly contested. Gandhi's supporters say that Gandhi did not have enough influence with the British to stop the execution, much less arrange it. Furthermore, Gandhi's supporters assert that Singh's role in the independence movement was no threat to Gandhi's role as its leader, and so Gandhi would have no reason to want him dead. However, supporters of the argument that Gandhi conspired claim Gandhi had a full motive to want Bhagat dead since he was a staunch supporter of the Arya-Samaj, and a few years before he was hanged, the Congress had faced bitter backlash from the Aryas because Gandhi had called Dayanand Swamis book Satyarth Prakash "an evil work of ignorance"! Now what kind of "Mahatma" would allow one India's most beloved Freedom fighters to hang at the gallows just because of his affiliation with the Arya Samaj.

Gandhi, during his lifetime, always maintained that he was a great admirer of Singh's patriotism. He also said that he was opposed to Singh's execution (and, for that matter, capital punishment in general) and proclaimed that he had no power to stop it. On Singh's execution, Gandhi said, "The government certainly had the right to hang these men. However, there are some rights which do credit to those who possess them only if they are enjoyed in name only."Gandhi also once said, on capital punishment, "I cannot in all conscience agree to anyone being sent to the gallows. God alone can take life because He alone gives it." So what he is saying is that the killing of Bhagat was an act of God and okay.

But wait it doesn't stop here. Lets let the truth be unleashed: Lala Lajpat Rai was an Arya and Congress, but after his death, the Aryas and the Congressis maintained a slpit. The few remaining Arya Samjis in Congresss left to protest Nehrus approval of the arrest of 15 Aryas on allegations that thier rites known as shuddhis were promoting communal conflict between Hindus and Muslims. Infact, Congress has a history of harrassing the aryas. Since independance, it has been involved in the assassination attepts of many of the arya gurus, and accused Arya Samaj of leaning towards the favour of right-wing groups like RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, ABVP and supporting BJP and Shiv Sena . The truth is most of Congresses allegations are baseless and false. But they havent been rewarded much sympathies from The Hindu Rigth-wingers either. Although, during the time the Khalsitan movement was targetiing hindus, Shiv Sena and RSS protected them, they soon afterwards the mantained a slpit. Naredra modi, CM of Gujarat, lashed out at the aryas for thier call for hindu nationalists to end their practices of idolatry. Modi, who like, many hindu nationalists, is an idolater, could not accept their call. The aryas even got a backlash form VHP.

So my question to you guys, is that, is this all true? Did we Aryas deserve this from Congress and other parties?

Answer 1

Hi Congress and BJP can not be considered as any authority about their evaluation of the Hindu practices or followers of any Movement like AS. But as you said, Mahatma's view about the Muslim invaders desecrating Hindu worship places does not lend to logic. He seems to have antagonised the Jews also preaching non violence against the perpetrators of genocide. Our scriptures do not teach non violence across the board. Bhagawad Geetha clearly spells the duty of kings to uphold justice even if the violators were one's kin.



But then even the best of men have erred in the past and Idealogues who subscribe logically and emotionally to certain values originally, get so much bonded to the ideals emotionally over time and lose the urge to exercise logical tools in even special cases requiring fine tuning of the best of values.



About the act of the Mahatma not helping out Bhagath, I confess I don't know much about the background and have to go with what you said here, to make a comment that would not hold water, if facts were different:



Bhagath Singh or Subash C Bose or any great patriot did deserve a support from people at the forefront of Freedom Movement, regardless of the stark conflicts between the methods chosen.. This is the basic expectation of any average citizen who loves his country, like my simple self.



But friend, I would like to go beyond my limited feelings - at the cost of my own hurt - to try to see what could have prompted the great leader like Gandhi to opt out of a probable support to the 'violent' patriots:



Fist we must know the mental state of the leaders, in our own balanced mood.. They had already subscribed, nay surrendered, to some ideals - like the Jihadis, to say crudely, though the language of the Gandhis may be less hostile in their most rude decisions, where they think their ideal is at stake.



We must note that these people neglected even their family - you know about the spoiled son of the Mahatma, given to evil habits - and their feelings are hardened like the Kings of yore, who would not hesitate to kill their 'errant' son / Prince for serious wrongs; or leave their beloved family like the Buddha tormented by thirst to reach an Ideal.



So it would be serious blunder to try to grill the beliefs of Gandhis on scales not applicable to their (in our estimate 'skewed') levels. The problem was we didnt have a powerful alternative to Gandhian idealism, as Bose had to work from hide out and we had to depend on the other extremes working at home.



And finally, I am preparing to receive your brickbats for the 'all religions are true' stance of whatever outfit from Hindu community. Yes, sir it is true albeit the problems it brings in a situation where people may change track against persuasion. Great Ones like Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Yogananda, Sri Saibaba.. have all said that all paths led to the same Divine state, though they chose the ones best for themselves and had their disciples follow their Faiths. That is how the adage: Ekam sath, vipraha bahudha vadhanthi - is said to be explained also.



Then you doubt that the paths are so conflicting and can not be telling about the same goal. It is logically deficient argument. Even in secular sphere like medicine, you find Allopathy conflict with basic premise of therapy with Homeopathy. Even among Hindus, there are people subscribing to such diverse and mutually conflicting paths like Sankya, Advaita, Dwaitha, Bhakthi alone etc.



Just because the acceptance of the basic unity of Faiths makes Hindus vulnerable to change religious tracks, we should not disown our vedic declarations that all Faiths are holy. We may deepen people's perception about Faiths to avoid any commercialisation of Faiths.



I had only presented my perceptions without any hostility to any member, Arya samajis, Gandhians, or congress or BJP. I would like subjects of this nature are best left to the tests of time, rather than discussed in a forum where more emotions than reason are likely to rule, causing avoidable heartburns to every side. God bless.

Answer 2

If Gandhi didnot have influence with the British the Congress cannot claim him as the architect of freedom either. They cannot have it both ways, claiming him to be the one who influenced freedom the most and yet at the same time when it comes to stopping the execution of Bhagat Singh they say he had no influence on the British.



Arya Samaj while it does good work is in some ways delusional. They are the biggest force in spreading this illusion amongst Hindus that all religions are truth and a path to God. Religions are defined by their ideologies and some are diametrically opposite to others. This kind of stupidity that all religions are equal is one that is responsible for the apathy amongst Hindus toward fighting for what is right. There is no right or wrong now. They have skewed all sense of morality. What we have are confused Hindus as a result who have become champions of moral relativism just like Gandhi. Just like Gandhi said the Moplahs were following their religion when they killed Hindus and Hindus should follow their religion by practising non-violence against such naked aggression. This is a skewed morality that does not require certain common human values to be honoured and be applicable to all parties.



Well, what do you think of Swami Agnivesh then? He advocates the same nonsense you call of Congress origin and he's an Arya Samaji. I have no problems with Arya Samaj and i've myself spoken several times against idol worship here. My problem is with deluded people who say all religions are a path to God. That is simply ludicrous. That only creates more gullible Hindus when that respect that we give to other religions is not reciprocated by them. They insult our beliefs, prey on our believers converting them and we sit there saying all religions are equal.



If i've offended you in any way, i apologise. I do like the no idol worship, casteless society and the vedic message. But we need to be practical aswell against religions that are predatory like Islam and Christianity.



Hindu reformists should be careful not to become tools for Christianity and Islam to bash Hinduism.



@ Sampradayik Hindu if the Arya Samaj has nothing to do with that moron Agnivesh then in light of this evidence i guess i do owe them an apology. I have no other problem with them and like the work they do.



We must be careful of these pretenders who bring disrepute to a good Hindu organisation. The ordinary Hindu is not aware that Agnivesh has been boycotted by Arya Samaj. Thanks for the info.

Answer 3

Yes I respect Arya Samaj or any Hindu Samaj. Aadhe Nange Gandhiji ne Hindustan ko poora Nanga kardiya.

Answer 4

Gandhi want is name to be appear in history so he did not helped Bhagat Singh. Gandhi always walking with girls observe in is old videos, he is a bull-**** man. Because of him only we got freedom very late. With the help of bhagat singh,subbhas chandra bose we would get freedom early. Gandhi told muslims can stay in india while our country was divided. see today we are facing such a problems from muslims. they are acting as evils,terrorists, harm makers to us. Today we need a leaders like narendra modi only actions we need not words.

Answer 5

https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20100501102544AALZJEP&show=7#profile-info-ODBYgahPaa







@ V - You are completely mistaken; thanks to indian media. I might help in dispelling this doubt.



Satyarth prakash so vehemently criticises islam that muslim organisations asked for a ban on satyarth prakash. You can check it here, it's interesting -



http://www.aryasamaj.org/newsite/Light_Of_Truth.pdf



Maulana Agnivesh is a self proclaimed follower of Swami Dayanand who deliberately negates most of his teachings. He is a stooge of congress and Islamists. He has been expelled from the Samaj due to his anti-hindu acts but he is still loyal to his masters and is portrayed by anti-indian media as an "arya samajist".



http://news.oneindia.in/2008/08/25/swami-agnivesh-has-nothing-to-do-with-arya-samaj-raghav-1219671248.html



http://www.aryasamaj.org/newsite/node/372



http://www.hvk.org/articles/1005/140.html



Arya samaj is a time tested revolutionary organisation and has inflicted great damage to islamists in past hence plan of anti-hindu forces is to ruin such organisations which are capable of bringing a revolution in hindu society and they have succeeded in their plan, as yet.



That's why you see many treasonist hindus with tacit support from anti-hindu forces and petro dollars from arabia, zealously opposing such reformist organistions and they are portrayed as heretical among general populace, not by non-hindus but by so called hindus (like mohammad agnivesh) themselves.

Answer 6

this is your mistake. we don't bother if you don't worship idols. you are free to follow your faith but you should not advice us what we should do. the backlash from VHP and mr. modi is just because of that.

Answer 7

No.

Answer 8

dk...2pnts