“Assailant arya Brahmins discarded the name 'Hindu' given by Muslims-but today they are propagating the slogan of 'Proudly say we are Hindus'.”
- Mr. Waman Meshram
Mr. Waman Meshram said that the people who are in minority in the society are trying to be in majority in the name of “Hindus”. In democracy only majority can rule. Hence the minority are utilising the Hindus coin to fool the backward class and are becoming majority. The topic had two specific words, mulnivasi and bahujan. Bahujan means those who are majority is society i.e. SC/ST,OBC and converted minority constitutes 85% of the population, hence they are in majority. Also these SC/ST,OBC and converted minorities are the indigenous inhabitants of this country, hence Mulnivasi Bahujan.

Now the question arises-Are Mulnivasi Bahujan Hindus? To know this, we will have to understand the vertical varna system first. The varna system speaks of brahmin at top, then kshatriya, then vaishya and atlast backward (shudra) class. Shudra varna is kept rightless, the only right they were having was to serve the upper three varnas. The 3743 castes, included in mandal commission are shudra caste. SC/ST’s are already outside the varna system, hence there is no question of them to be hindu. The converted minorities had converted their religion from SC /ST’s, hence the minorities are also not hindu. Also the tribal community was living in forests. The rules and regulations of Hindus were not imposed on tribes. They were having their own rules. Another simple example that SC’s are not hindus, is that, those who called themselves as hindu don’t touch these castes (as they are untouchables). Hence untouchables can’t be hindu. Instead of saying anything by untouchables, the upper caste arya brahmins themselves discarded untouchables and said that they are not hindu.

Now, the only question remains is that are mulnivasi bahujan hindus? The social revolution is not taking place in India, he reason is only because of this question. If this is proved that the shudras are not hindu, then there will be no time lag in social revolution. Adv.J.N.Verma, who is in Allahabad high court had proved from the brahminical vedic literature itself that OBC’s are shudras. In his book “Who is OBC -Kshatriya,Vaishya or Shudra?, he had elaborated how the arya brahmins had behaved with shudra’s (OBC). For those whom the world says slave, in India they are called as Shudra.

Shudras were kept rightless. For them the so called holy Gita says that “Karmanya vadhi Kariste Ma Phaleshu Kadachan”, which means, you should do all type of hard work but don’t ask for any wage (salary). In Bihar the laborers are not getting any daily wage as the land owners are implementing the saying of Gita in practical.

The religion of slave and who made them slave can’t be equal. But in practical it is observed. Why is it so, we must know. If shudras are slave then they can’t be Hindu.

The upanayan ceremony is not performed for shudras. Upanayan ceremony is that ceremony in which the sacred thread is worn by the person through brahmins. Brahmins had not given the right of upanayan ceremony to Shudras. For example the biggest shudra of UP is Charan Singh. Had Charan Singh gone for Upanayan ceremony? Or Mulayam Singh also didn’t perform this ceremony. Nor any yadav or Kurmi or any backward wores sacred thread. If shudras are kept away from Upnayan ceremony, then it proves beyond doubt that Shudras are away from brahmin religion. Today brahmin religion is called as hindu religion as previously it was vedic religion. When anybody utters the hindu word, it not only reflects the brahminical oppose, but also of OBC’s. Hence if Brahmin religion word is propagated instead of hindu word then backward class will not fool themselves and instead will polarise with their co-brothers, SC’s and ST’s. Hence brahmins are projecting the hindu word more rather than Brahmin word. Above cited all examples proves that Shudras are not from brahmin religion hence are not hindu.

When Mandal commission was going to be implemented, which was reserving seats for 52% OBC’s all the Brahmins stood against OBC’s. The basic question arises, if OBC’s are considered as hindu by arya brahmins, and also if brahmin and Shudra both are hindus, then why did arya brahmins stood against the reservation right of 52% OBC’s. There were 31 % OBC advocates who were handling the mandal commission case and giving anti reservation opinions and there was not a single OBC advocate to speak infavour of mandal commission, hence Laloo Prasad yadav was left with no option rather than taking Jethmalani as an lawyer. So if OBC’s are hindus and brahmins are also hindu, then brahmins instead of opposing the reservation should have come forward to after reservations to OBC’s. But the case was reverse which proves that OBC’s (Shudras) are not hindus.

Instead they came out with opinion that why reservation is at all necessary for OBC’s. They were saying that OBC’s don’t have merit. It indirectly means that OBC’s are not eligible for reservation. They are unfit or worthless. This type of brahminical behavior itself proves that OBC’s are not hindu.

Further Mr.Waman Meshram said that there was marriage of Mr.Mulayam Singh Yadav’s son with a brahmin girl. But there was not any proposal from the brahmin family to Mr.Yadav. Instead it was a love marriage. This example proves that if brahmin is a hindu and OBC’s are hindu then why not any brahmin approaches OBC family for his daughter’s /son’s marriage proposal. This proves that OBC’s are not hindu.

If there is any sort of atrocity against christans, then all christans in the world raise a voice against it. Same is the condition of muslims. But if there is any atrocity against hindu (OBC), then even Indian hindu’s (Brahmins) don’t raise any voice against it. Why is it so? Here one hindu is creating atrocity on another hindu. These all examples proves that OBC’s are not hindu.

Brahmins want OBC’s, in the name of hindu, to burn the muslim houses. If there is a problem of making Atal Bihari as prime minister or if any babri mosque is to be demolished then arya brahmins call the indigenous people as hindu. Brahmins make the indigenous people monkeys in the name of hindu. (Brahmins called Advani as Ram and Kalyan Singh as Hanuman, during the babri mosque demolition period.) whenever, there is a question of giving reservation right to OBC’s then they are unfit for it, but fit for demolishing babri-mosque and burning muslim houses.

In none of the vedic brahminical literature i.e. Vedas, Shrutis, Purans, Upnishadas, or any other literature the word hindu appears “Hindu” word was given by muslim rulers to arya brahmins. Brahmins abuse Babar, Humayu while demolishing babri mosque, but now they had accepted it and are proud of the name given by them. If the babri mosque is an stain then the name “Hindu” given by muslim is also a stigma to arya brahmins then why they are proudly uttering the word hindu. The hindu word also doesn’t appear in Gita. It says “ Yada Yada hi dharmasya, gla nir bhavati bharat”. Here Bharat word appear and not hindu. So why they are praying the word hindu.

Muslims came to India in the 12th century. In this period brahmins got defeated and for defeated people, they gave the name of hindu. But brahmins refused the name. This can be proved by an example that brahmins were excluded from the Jijiya tax, which muslims imposed on Indians. Brahmins discarded the word hindu as muslims gave the hindu word for the defeated people, means slave. The same person who opposed and discarded the hindu name given by muslims are now propagating the same word, why this change had happened?.

In 1875, Dayanand Saraswati formed an organisation in the name of Arya Samaj. But suddenly in 1925 R.S.S was formed. It means that upto 1925 the arya brahmins were calling themselves as arya samagist but from 1925 suddenly they start calling themselves as hindus? Why this sudden change happen ? In the book “Arctic home in Vedas .” Tilak wrote that arya are supreme and brahmins themselves are arya. The reason of this sudden change was that in 1917 the adult franchise movement was started. The movement was started in England but there was repercussions In India. As at that time, India was a british India, so brahmins got alerted that at any time this movement can come to India, then what will happen to the aryan supremacy. Because arya brahmins are in minority and SC/ST,OBC in majority. So majority will get voting right and rule will be of majority. For this reason arya brahmins stop calling them as aryans and instead started saying hindu. Once who were hating the word hindu, started propagating it from 1925. The minority aryans brought the hindu word to become a majority in co- operation with OBC’s. The caste based census was stopped in 1931. This resulted in, those who were slaved and who made them slave both became hindu. These all examples proves that Mulnivasi Bahujan are not hindu.