Satire

Abby

rainbow-islamHe is not the typical Kifaya topi lungi clad Muslim they show on the TV. He is educated, smart and intelligent. His friends call him Abby, they often say he does not even look like a Muslim. Abby bounces the compliment back with a cheeky smile and a wink. Abby maintains a social media presence and he comes across as person who is well versed with politics and current affairs. Abby is a firm believer in anything and everything that is seen as progressive by his liberal mates.

Abby has just finished work, it was a busy day but Abby knows how to handle work pressure. Negotiating his way through the busy metro traffic Abby arrives at home and throws himself on the couch. Time for catching up with some news.  Disaster! There has been an attack on a gay pub in Orlando Florida. Every news channel is running ticker updating the news of this gruesome slaughter. Twenty people have been killed. Abby is nervous. But why would Abby be nervous about an event that is taking place half way round the world? After all mass shootings are a regular occurrence in the US.

Fifty killed! This is no ordinary incident. Abby is not religious man but still he makes a prayer “Oh God, Oh God, please, please let this not be another Muslim involved in this act of shame”, Abby whispers.  It is almost like when Abby was anxiously waiting to know about his results in the HSC exam, his future depended on it.

Abby knows the drill, he has done this many times before but still he is nervous. It is a never a pleasant experience. Abby switches off the TV and tries to forget about the whole issue. But Abby’s phone is beeping in ever increasing frequency.  Abby figures it out, his liberal friends are tweeting and posting on Facebook, this can only mean one thing. Abby’s fear has come true. The shooter is indeed confirmed as person with Muslim name. Abby takes a deep breath and gets mentally prepared for what is to come.

Abby changes his display Picture on social media to LGBT flag. There should be no confusion about where he stands. His friends are proud of him. He is that rare model Muslim that his friends once believed can never exist. Abby knows he has to be careful. An enthusiastic display of protest can be seen as an attempt to hide is homophobic Muslim existence but not Re-Tweeting his liberal friend’s tweets can also create an impression that he may just be another Muslim who is not worthy to be in the sanctimonious liberal circle.

It was a tough night, Sanghis on Twitter showered abuses on Abby while his liberal friends passionately discussed Islamic theology. Is it the Quran or are the Hadits to blame? Is it this verse or is it that verse that inspired the shooter? Abby, the enlightened soul is visibly uncomfortable; he knows his liberal friends have gently placed him in the box of the accused while they deliberate over Islamic theology. Poor Abby, he has not been exposed to such a high dose of theology even in the month of Ramadan! Or is it Ramazan instead? Anyway!

Abby has gone through this before but it never gets easier. It was a difficult night but he was more scared of the next day.  Casual office conversations discussing the sad news coming from Orlando.  “Abby! What do you think will be the impact of this attack on the US elections” asks one elderly figure in a thick Indian accent. “I am not following the US election but I think this will help Trump” replies Abby. “That is not good news for you is it Abby?” says the elderly man sneeringly.

Abby knew this was never going to be an easy day. Abby quietly buries his head in the papers pretending to focus on work. His liberal friend notices the discomfort and decides to step in. “Fancy as smoke Abby?” he asks, “sure why not?” says Abby and they both head of the designated smoking area.

Abby’s liberal friend is wise. He knows what Abby is going trough so he decides to switch the focus to something light. “What is your opinion about Triple Talaq Abby? “asks the liberal friend who has a passion for reforming Islam and Muslims. Abby is not sure how to respond. Abby is not even married. Last time when Abby found a girlfriend he spent most of his time convincing her how he was not the typical Muslim. Abby broke up some time later. Apparently the conversations were not going anywhere.

In his solitude Abby often wonders why. Why is he held responsible for the act of a person who he did not even know existed before he saw the news on that fateful day just like anyone else.  He was just as appalled and saddened by the loss of so many lives.  A guy born and brought up in the US by his parents who migrated from Afghanistan, a guy who has a history of personal problems, a guy who legally bought guns in US, a guy that Abby has no relation with other than the fact that Abby is also among 1.6 billion Muslims and the guy who carried out this despicable act also identified himself as a part of 1.6 billion Muslims.

Abby is hoping the news cycle will die down soon. But Abby is also prepared to be put in the box of accused once again for something he has no connection with. He loves his liberal friends.

Advertisements

An Interview With A New Atheist

imagesI have with me Mr Aaye Noitall, the popular and dear leader of the New Atheist movement. New Atheism is often misunderstood and defamed by people who don’t know any better. Today we hope Mr. Noitall will introduce us to the philosophical thought behind the New Atheist Movement.

Mr. Noitall, welcome.

Let us begin by understanding the difference between Atheist and Religious philosophy.

Unlike religion Atheists do not believe in the idea of God or that the Universe was created by some bigger power whose existence cannot be proved in any way. Everything that has ever existed can be explained by understanding the laws of physics.

How do you think the laws of Physics came into existence?

I knew this was coming. This is a common theist question. Of course I am not referring to you as a theist; you look like an intelligent man. Laws of physics are Supreme, everything that we can see or hear runs according to laws of physics, everything can be explained using laws of physics, everything started with laws of physics, everything will end with laws of physics. We don’t know how laws of Physics came into existence but until we find out we have complete faith that laws of physics are supreme.

Would you at least concede that human consciousness and the ability to define what is right and what is wrong cannot be explained merely by laws of physics? 

Of course, human consciousness is not in the physical domain. For that we have come up with a value system called Humanism. It is a set of ideas we know are right for humanity and we want everyone to follow those ideas. Anyone who does not follow our value system is a deluded idiot.

Do you believe in Alien life?

We should never shut our doors to ideas. The universe is a vast place, there is a possibility that alien life exists but we can’t say for sure right now. There is no harm is searching for alien life. We can’t possibly find alien life if we completely reject the idea of alien life itself…unless they find us first, which is scary. I admit.

If there is nothing wrong in believing in the possibility of unknown how you can reject the existence of God? Is it possible that God may be an alien form?

If you put it that way then yeah, I suppose we can allow some humans with lower intelligence to keep looking for God. But we cannot have any laws that are given by that God.

But as per your own ideals, God does not exist. How can there be any laws given by God?

When we say “laws given by God” we are actually mocking the religious belief. We don’t actually believe that any laws are given by God. (Haha) All laws are made by humans. God is only used to stop people from scrutinizing those laws. And we avoid scrutiny merely by suggesting that our laws are good because they are not made by God.

It is often said that Atheists are supremacists who want to impose their own set of moral and ethical codes on the society. How do you respond to that?

Atheism just means that we reject the idea of God. It is a belief in nothingness. How can that be called supremacist? Yes we believe in the values derived from Humanism and they are of course far superior to the values derived from religion. In fact it is quite insulting that you think it is alright to compare the higher moral values of atheists with lowly values of the deluded religious fools.

Since God does not exist and religion is a man made philosophy just like Humanism would it be fair to say that both religion and humanism should be open to scrutiny and the best practices should be determined after careful deliberation, experimentation and data analysis?

I take strong offense at you putting the superior Humanism on the same plain as religion. Humanism is the product of high intellectual thought. How can people of low intelligence understand or scrutinize Humanism? It is good because it is the best.

Do you have a book of Humanism?

The idea of book is appealing but if we write down what Humanism is then people may confuse us for religion. They may quote our text out of context and harass us on every internet forum available. We do that all the time to religious people. We can’t let that happen to us. We are superior and our concepts are superior and we don’t need a book to tell us we are right or wrong. It is in our good human nature to know what is right and what is wrong.

Would you also say the same for religious people? After all they are humans too.

They are humans, yes that is an unfortunate truth that we cannot deny, but not all humans are born with the same intellectual capacity. How else can you explain a healthy brain falling for stupid ideas like God?

What do you have to say to those Atheists who claim that your criticism of the religious borders on bigotry. In fact the name ‘New Atheist’ has been given to you by Atheists so they can disassociate from you. They claim you are not trying to win the hearts and minds of people, instead you are trying humiliate them into submission.

“If you’ve got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.” said Theodore Roosevelt. We are firm believers in this enlightened philosophy. Some Atheists don’t have the courage to take on the religious people as we do. In their cowardice they start bad mouthing courageous and noble Atheists like us.

Fair enough. Now let us move to another topic on which atheists often find them on shaky ground. How do you respond to those who say Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were immersed in atheist thought and their actions resulted in the death of hundreds and millions of people?

Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein all had moustaches. How many millions were murdered by militant Moustachism?

Stalin did not make learning of Moustachism compulsory in Schools, he made atheism compulsory, he closed down the churches and killed thousands of priests not because the priests were clean shaved he killed them because they were religious. He also had programs where youths were asked to convert their family members to atheism. If all this is done by, let us say, Khomeni you would certainly blame Islam. Then why should Atheism escape similar scrutiny?

Because Atheism is not even an ideology, it means nothing, we teach nothing, we know nothing…wait I want to take back the last claim. Atheism is simply a belief that God does not exist. What follows after that is not the responsibility of Atheism.

Then what follows after accepting God should not be the responsibility of theism. This essentially leaves us at a position where theism and atheism become completely irrelevant. So what is all the fuss about?

I don’t know.

Me neither.

Well thanks for talking to us Mr. Noitall.

 

 

How To Be A Good Indian Muslim

201518125436873734_20To be a good Muslim you have to believe that Islam is an inherently evil religion that will cause nothing but misery to anyone who follows it. Since Islam is an inherently evil religion a good Muslim will never discuss any aspect of Islam that may be seen as noble by people who are unaware of the evilness of Islam.

A good Muslim does not believe in victimhood narrative. He can see his father getting killed by mobs, his sister molested but he will still say “Saare Jahan se Accha Hindustan Hamara”. Complaining about the attack is a sure sign of victimhood while standing up and denouncing the perpetrators is a sure sign of radicalization.

A good Muslim has a visceral hate for all countries where majority of people are Muslim. Many of these countries may be far ahead on social indicators as compared to India but a good Muslim believes that these statistics hide the barbarism and cruelty that inherently exists in Muslim societies.

A good Muslim will stand for freedom of speech when people mock or abuse any aspect or personality related to Islam. A good Muslim will also denounce Akbar Owaisi for mocking and abusing Hindu deities.

A good Muslim will always vote for a secular party. All parties except BJP are secular and all secular parties either behave like BJP or can form an alliance with the BJP if required.

A good Muslim won’t complain about beef ban because eating beef is not compulsory in Islam but stopping others from eating beef is compulsory in other faiths and a good Muslim not only respects but follows the Sharia of other faiths.

A good Muslim does not say Allah Hafiz or Ramadan. A good Muslim says Khuda Hafiz because the word ‘Khuda’ is derived from the ancient Indian language called Persian.

A good Muslim looks down upon women who wear Hijab even if those women are more educated and more successful in life than he ever will be. A good Muslim should also ignore exceptions like a religious turban wearing man could be the Prime Minister of India for 10 years.

A good Muslim makes sure to tell everyone that he is supporting India when India is playing cricket. Failure to explicitly declare support is a sure sign of treason. Although an eagerness to declare support can also mean a conspiracy to hide the hatred towards India.

A good Muslim lets his secular non Muslim friends speak to and speak for him in a condescending manner. A good Muslim would not allow himself to be labelled an extremist by speaking for himself.

A good Muslim is clean shaven and prefers Indian clothing like the jeans, t shirts, suits etc. Wearing traditional attire or growing a beard is an early indicator of radicalization.

A good Muslim denounces animal slaughter in the name of religion. Although a good Muslim may choose to eat meat at any McDonald’s or any other outlets that serve non halal food. If a Muslim can’t appreciate the value of animal slaughter for commercial reasons then how can he be good Muslim?

A good Muslim believes that Islam has a special problem with women and it can only be solved when Muslims undergo reforms like Hindus did in the past. A good Muslim should conveniently ignore the fact that 50 million females have been killed in India due to selective abortions, the greatest genocide of females in the history of humanity after the supposed awakening of the Hindu society.

Despite religion inspired dietary restrictions and anti conversion laws a good Muslim has steadfast belief in the secular nature of India. A good Muslim also believes that India is secular only because of the inherent attributes of compassion and tolerance enshrined in Hindus and Hinduism.

In spite of their ongoing connections with the Mughal army, in spite of their involvement in the partition which resulted in Hindu land going to the Arabs, Hindus have allowed Muslims to live in India. A good Muslim acknowledges this and is always indebted to Hindus. A good Muslim is a thankful Muslim.

A good Muslim writes long articles on how secular political parties are in fact the communal parties and the only option left with Muslims is to vote for the BJP.

A good Muslim takes responsibility and apologizes for any wrong that is done by any Muslim in any part of the world. Also he makes sure to highlight non religious factors while explaining any problem that lies with India. Although it is advisable to ignore the faults and focus on the greatness of India.

You can either be a practicing Muslim or a good Muslim. The choice is obvious or perhaps you don’t have much of a choice. Be a good Indian Muslim.

Black Money Returns

The maid didn’t turn up and I slept in. Lazily I stretched for my phone, there was one SMS from the bank. “Oh! How could I forget to clear the credit card bills yet again?” I began grumbling like an old man when suddenly I realized that I had cleared my credit card bills only last week. “An amount of Rs. 15, 00,000.00 has been credited to your account” read the SMS. With panic ruining my lazy waking up routine I thought “This has to be some mistake, I need to call the bank and notify them”. But before everything else I need a Coffee, maybe I am still asleep and dreaming.

I lazily dragged myself into the kitchen and made myself a cup of Coffee. What a dream “It would be so nice to have 15 lakh in my account” I thought smiling. It was not long before I realized that there was an eerie calm on the street outside. This is the rush hour, why isn’t there any traffic on the road? Maybe it is a public holiday. I am bad at remembering public holidays and they often come to me as a pleasant surprise.

The eerie calm did not last long. My phone rang. It was my friend Maria on the other end of the line. Not unusual for her to call this early in the morning to ask for a lift to the office but it is a public holiday today. Why would she call so early in the morning? “I am so happy I just received a SMS from my bank, 15 lakh Rupees have been credited to my account” she said. So that was not a dream after all. “This has to be some kind of a prank by those Nigerians” I told her at the risk of ruining her happiness. Dismissing my cynicism she burst into a joyous laughter and said “This is the money our dear leader had promised we would get once he becomes the Prime Minister. He has fulfilled his promise. This is the true manifestation of Achche Din”.

Still not convinced I began thinking if this was some elaborate prank being played by my friends. I did not want to spoil the fun so I played along. I told her how happy I was to receive the money. As soon as my conversation ended I rushed to my laptop and tried to log into my bank account. I couldn’t. Error 429: Too many requests.

Things started to add up. The maid did not turn up because she no longer needed the job, there is no traffic on the streets because people are either busy celebrating or simply trying to come to terms with the fact that they are suddenly richer by 15 lakh Rupees. The bank website is down because too many people are trying to log in to confirm if they have really received the money. Hallelujah! Dear leader came good on his promise. India will never be the same again.

In a few minutes excitement gave way to anxiety. Has out dear leader, like Robin Hood, distributed all the black money among the citizens? “Hope he has kept some money for addressing the issues arising out of India’s black money revolution” I began to think. Now everyone can afford a car. There will be massive traffic jams and massive increase in pollution levels. The road network needs an upgrade and quick. Increased pollution levels and relatively lazy lifestyle for citizens will increase health risks. Is India’s health system ready to cope? I wondered.

How will TwitterSphere deal with the astronomical increase in the number of aunties bellowing about the fact that maids are impossible to find and the fact that they have to do all the house work all by themselves without any support from their partners? Now that everyone can afford expensive schooling for their kids it will be very difficult to get admission in good schools. These schools were only available to the rich before dear leader made everyone rich. Banks are offering easy loans to buy houses that costed 25% less before dear leader flooded us with money.

There are going to be significant international ramifications. China will flood India with cheap exports to rob every rich Indian in the name of consumerism. There will be a massive increase in illegal migrants from Bangladesh. After all someone has do to serve the rich Indians, who else other than poor Bangladeshis? Pakistani Army and Nawaz Sharif will have to deal with the popular demand of merging Pakistan back with India so our dear leader can become their dear leader too. Every country in the world will offer Visa on arrival to Indians so they can boost their tourism trade by exploiting rich Indians.

Suddenly the doorbell rang. “Perhaps it’s the neighbour wanting to share his excitement about the windfall” I guessed. I opened the door, it was the maid, and then the phone rang, it was Maria she wanted a lift to the office. The world was sane again. Phew! What a dream.

Takedown and Rest

Controversy erupted on social media after DNA took down Rana Ayyub’s article critical of the government. Responding to this criticism the editor of DNA decided to blog an explanation which I found rather amusing and decided to do a spoof on it. Unlikely, but if the editor ever reads this spoof, I hope it is taken in a good spirit. I hold no ill feelings towards the editor.

This spoof contains the original text of the explanation along with the satirical addition in italic font. So here we go.


Takedown and Rest

There has been a fair amount of traffic on my twitter TL on an article that was taken down in the DNA. People have, rightly, asked for an explanation. And since this issue has gone viral on the internet let me write something to confuse you.

Fact checking, misrepresentation of facts etc all good excuses/explanation to give when u pull down an article. However, they all sound rather silly – especially given that you have published it. Since you have already noticed that I call these excuses good in the first line and silly in the next, this will help me set the tone for the rest of this good-silly explanation.

Sometimes silence is better than a hastily cobbled together justification. And, everything doesn’t have to be a conspiracy theory. Nor does everything have to be high drama. Sometimes there are simpler explanations. Only this time I have none.

I could say editorial prerogative. But, that would be arrogance and since I am trying to do damage control here it won’t be wise to look arrogant (Damage Control 101 hehe).

I could blame the author, but that would be cowardice. (Actually I just blamed the author without looking like a coward *Lulz*) 

I could blame the government or my ‘bosses’ but that would be a lie. And if I speak the truth I won’t have a job because that will totally destroy the credibility of the website. Also notice how I wrote ‘bosses’ in quotes, this is to give you an impression that we don’t have a boss culture at DNA, we are all friends (Until you formally join us as an employee *Hehe*) .

I could say I didn’t know it went up, but that would be cop out and also a lie because in the next paragraph I am going to admit that I read the article before it went online *chuckles*.

Fact remains, I should have caught onto something that was in the piece, but I didn’t. I did exactly what I have ranted about, and outraged about for the last decade – that is in the need for speed, the desire to be first, to put out a piece, I didn’t look at it with the attention that it deserved. It was not a breaking news story which could have waited for few days, this was an opinion column which had to be published with utmost urgency.  Being an editor is a busy job because of which I hardly get any time for editing.

We have run far more scathing pieces by the author on Mr.Shah and they are still on-line. If I pulled down this one, it was for a good reason, and that reason is not fear. At this point I know you are very curious to know what the real reason is but I won’t tell you just yet because like I mentioned earlier in this good-silly explanation, not everything has to be high drama.

I can understand readers ire on this, and appreciate the author’s anger – i would have felt the same way if i was in her place. If I had the time on the day to make a call and sort it out, I would have. Unfortunately, I didn’t.  I was in a very long conference, where our phones were tucked safely away in our bags. Which is also the reason why I couldn’t respond to newslaundry. Nowadays it is common practice for senior editors to remain incommunicado for the whole working day because there are obviously others who can approve news that goes online and if something goes wrong, I have a blog.

Now to something else  – when other TV editors/websites write about this, they obviously suffer from selective amnesia.  they have pulled out, pulled back, changed tack on issues. Was it fear, favor or fickleness? Or all three – that made them do this? Did I just list all the possible reasons for the disappearance of a piece from a news website? *Hehe* Please ignore.

And I am not even going into other areas of breach of ethics such as the cash for votes sting, or Radia tapes (hehe I just did exactly that and took the moral high ground too), I am simply looking at spiked stories, and stories that disappeared. As journalists we are supposed to look after each other. I won’t write anything when they screw up and I expect the same from them. What they have done breaches every aspect of professional journalism.

Seriously, I can appreciate reader ire, I can’t figure the hypocrisy of other media professionals. They know exactly what they had suppressed in their entire career. Am sure if you follow any good news monitoring website you will know some of what has been taken off, what they have changed tack on, and where they have spiked their own stories. I have followed such good news monitoring website for ages but never said a word because I understand what professional journalism is. The primary duty of any journalist is to protect the mistakes of fellow journalists and I will never compromise on this principle.  

I have not responded to this on twitter as  there are no 140 character explanations for things like this. Hence, this blog. But I wont tweet a link to this blog because there are some nasty trolls out there who may write a spoof on my carefully crafted good-silly explanation. Better to be safe than to be sorry *Hehe*.   

And finally, far as the TOI piece  is concerned – cute, very cute. Must be the first time that the ToI has run a piece naming a competitor without routing it through medianet. I just have one thing to tell TOI, watch your back. The favor shall be returned.

– Your Truly,

Editor DNA (Do Not Admit)

An Interview with a Savarkarite

veer-savarkarVinayak Damodar Savarkar, popularly known as Veer Savarkar among his followers, has played an influential role in shaping the modern politics of India. I have with me Shri Satya Prakash, a well known Savarkarite who has agreed to shed some light on the legacy of Savarkar. So let’s begin with the first question related to the partition of India.

Arguably Savarkar was one of the early proponents of the “two nation theory”. In 1923 Savarkar through his book ‘Hindutva’ defined Hindus as a separate nation and in 1938 he said that Muslims and Hindus would choose differently given a plebiscite. According to Savarkar, nationality did not depend so much on a common geographical area as on unity of thought, religion, language and culture. Would it be fair to say that Savarkar laid the foundation for the partition of India?

It would be intellectually dishonest to quote Veer Savarkar out of context and hold him responsible for the partition of India. Veer Savarkar was strongly against the idea of partitioning the country. In his letter to Sir Stafford Cripps, the British envoy negotiating with Gandhi and Jinnah, Veer Savarkar wrote that Hindus would welcome the Congress-Muslim League pact only if the vivisection of India clause were omitted. His idea was always about having one strong Hindu nation. In one of his speeches Veer Savarkar said:

“A Nation is formed by a majority living therein. What did the Jews do in Germany? They being in minority were driven out from Germany”

So you can see the idea was to drive Muslims out and have one strong Hindu nation. Clearly this is a one nation theory not two.

That sounds very extreme. I mean if the western countries decide to apply Savarkar’s principle on the millions of Hindus settled there then these Hindus will either have to completely embrace western culture or be driven out. That is certainly not something you would propose. Would you?

These western nations are formed on lands that are stolen from others so Veer Savarkar’s principles don’t apply there.

In light of his grovelling mercy petition to the British in which Savarkar referred to himself as an “obedient servant” of the British and pledged to distance himself from politics, don’t you think that conferring a title like “Veer” is simply unreasonable?

This mercy petition is often misused to malign the good name of Veer Savarkar. If you understand the full context in which this mercy petition was made you would understand the genius of Veer Savarkar. After spending several years in jail Veer Savarkar realized that his immense potential would go unrealized if he did not make it out of jail in time. As a well thought out strategy Veer Savarkar pretended to be a loyal servant to the British but in reality he was only loyal to the cause of the Hindu nation.

But after his release from cellular jail, Savarkar never opposed the British, never took part in the freedom struggle and he even assisted the British in their war efforts when Subhash Chandra Bose was recruiting an army to fight against the British.

Just goes to show that Veer Savarkar was not only brave but he was also a man of his word.

As we know that other leaders like Gandhi and Nehru were jailed many times by the British but they never asked for mercy from the British nor did they pledge that they would stop opposing the British. Don’t you think that was a real act of bravery?

Are they known as Veer Nehru or Veer Gandhi today? No. Goes to show that Veer Savarkar was smarter than this lot. He had the vision to trick the British and he kept tricking them till the very end.

Savarkar’s detractors have argued that Savarkar sensed Dalit alienation and hence made token gestures against casteism whereas in reality he was a strong believer in Brahmin supremacy.      

Nothing can be further from the truth. Savarkar argued that caste system was put in place to regulate the flow of high caste noble blood to the lower castes. He said:

“is not the very presence of these present castes a standing testimony to a common flow of blood from a Brahman to a Chandal?”

In fact Veer Savarkar was a strong proponent of Anuloma and Pratiloma marriage institutions (inter-caste marriages). He believed that such marriages helped purify the lost souls by passing them the noble blood which refreshed and reinvigorated more than ever.

He said:

“All that the caste system has done is to regulate its noble blood on lines believed-and on the whole rightly believed-by our saintly and patriotic law-givers and kings to contribute most to fertilize and enrich all that was barren and poor”

So you admit that Savarkar endorsed ancient scriptures like the Manusmriti which has been a subject of severe criticism due to its treatment of women and the lower castes?

Yes of course! Veer Savarkar said:

“Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law.” (Savarkar, V. D., ‘Women in Manusmriti’ in Savarkar Samagar, Vol. 4  [New Delhi: Prabhat], 416.)

So you see the allegations that Veer Savarkar believed in caste superiority are unfounded. Clearly he believed that even lower castes have some noble blood in them and hence he wanted to open the study of Vedas and Vedic rituals to all castes.

Savarkar dedicated his life to the study religious scriptures like Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas and Smritis. The influence of religion in his life is quite evident from his writings in which he has quoted extensively from these books. This clearly contradicts with the claim that he was an atheist. How do you explain this contradiction?  

Hindutva is much wider than the narrow definitions of religion. It is a way of life. This way of life allows people to be an atheist. Yes it is true that Veer Savarkar spent his life studying the religious scriptures and that is why he was able to understand that Hindusim is only a small part of Hindutva. While Veer Savarkar opposed traditional Hindu rituals his ideology was firmly based in the essence of wider Hindutva.  It is the moral duty of every Indian to follow the way of life dictated by Hindutva or they have the choice to leave.

Does this way of life allow the consumption of beef?  

Of course not! How can we allow consumption of beef in a way of life dictated by Hindutva?

But Savarkar was a beef eater!

There is a reason the ancient Gurus have stopped us from crossing the seas. Veer Savarkar crossed the seas and picked up some nasty habits. He was human after all.

Savarkar had stated in his will that he should be cremated without any religious rituals yet he chose to end his life himself by following a religious ritual of atmarpan (self-sacrifice). Is it fair to say that he stopped pretending to be an atheist in the last stage of his life?

Why do you assume that he can’t swing between atheism and theism within the confines of Hindutva?

On the scale of Theism to Atheism how Savarkar are you?

The interview is about Veer Savarkar not me. So I will let this one pass.

Thank you for valuable insights into the life of Savarkar.  

Thank you.

 Disclaimer: The interviewer and the interviewee are fictitious. Any resemblance to real life characters is coincidental but highly likely. The interviewer was not harmed during or after this satirical interview.