A Hindu view on Gun control

Another shooting in the US, more hysteria from Hindu “right wing” on twitter and the pattern repeats itself.

It is interesting to note that these alleged Hindu “right wing” crowd don’t ever dare question India’s gun control over countless atrocities against Hindus by their Muslim brothers. It is also interesting to note how they selectively ignore countries such as Switzerland with very high gun ownership rates and very little gun crime, perhaps because it pokes holes into their shoddy theories.

They didn’t find it pertinent to ask how 26/11 could have happened if gun control worked. They never ask how well gun control worked out for Hindu Kashmiris or the Bodos.

The truth is that these are no Hindus or right wingers but arm chair liberals living in the safety of America or some other place of safety. They think the masses of Hindus are nincompoops and should be abandoned to their fate if Muslims attack them, in other words Hindus have no right to self defense.

But what do Hindu texts and tradition say about the right to bear arms?

Acharya Medhatithi (9th century CE) answers this question in his Manubhashya when he points out that a Kshatriya is to live by bearing weapons, but common people are also permitted to bear arms for self protection. In support of this he points out that the king’s arms cannot reach all men, and that there are some wicked men who attack the most valiant of the king’s officers, but are afraid of persons bearing arms.

The Hindu tradition from the earliest times has been that the right to self defense cannot be outsourced to the government and this has always been the practice of Hindu kings. Indeed this is how Hindus survived centuries of Muslim tyranny, the common people being armed would resist the tyranny of Muslims using their weapons.

Let us look at history:

These comprised mainly of two options – to fight with determination as far as possible, but, if resistance proved of no avail, to flee and settle down elsewhere. Medieval Indian society, both urban and agrarian, was to some extent an armed society. In cities and towns the elite carried swords like walking sticks. In villages few men were without at least a spear or bow and arrows, and they were skilled in the use of these arms. In 1632, Peter Mundy actually saw in the present day Kanpur district, “labourers with their guns, swords and bucklers lying by them while they ploughed the ground”.70 Similarly, Manucci described how in Akbar’s days the villagers of the Mathura region defended themselves against Mughal revenue-collecting officers: “The women stood behind their husbands with spears and arrows, when the husband had shot off his matchlock, his wife handed him the lance, while she reloaded the matchlock.”71 The countryside was studded with little forts, some surrounded by nothing more than mud walls, but which nevertheless provided centres of the general tradition of rebellion and agrarian unrest. Armed peasants provided contingents to Baheliyas, Bhadauriyas, Bachgotis, Mandahars and Tomars in the earlier period, to Jats, Marathas and Sikhs in the later.

http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/tlmr/ch7.htm

So how did weapons control & disarmament of Hindus begin?

It began with Muslim tyrants such as Aurangzeb who issued the following order:

In March 1695, all the Hindus, with the exception of the Rajputs, were forbidden to travel in palkis, or ride on elephants or thorough-bred horses, or to carry arms. (Muntakhab-ul-Lubab, ii, 395; Maasir-i-Alamgiri, 370 and News Letter, 11 December 1694).

http://www.aurangzeb.info/2008/06/exhibit-no_7371.html

Imagine the fate of our ancestors if Hindu rulers had practiced bow control, matchlock control, or sword control. The result would have been enmasse foreskin control of the unarmed population by Muslims.

Now we move forward a few centuries, the British were now the rulers of India and the 1857 rebellion breaks out which shakes British control. How was this rebellion made possible?

By an armed populace of course, Tatya Tope did not do Satyagraha but fired guns against the Christian British tyrants. Unfortunately the rebellion failed but the British had learned their lesson and began a systematic disarmament campaign of Hindus along with suppression of Hindu martial arts. In 1878, Lord Lytton helped pass the “Indian Arms Act” which made it illegal for any Indian to possess arms unless he was considered a loyal subject of the empire. Europeans in India were of course exempted from this act.

Even the ahimsa monger Gandhi had recognized this great crime of the British tyrants & commented:

Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.

— Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)

In fact before India’s independence from the British, one of the items on the Congress party platform was lifting the arms control imposed by the British. But the brown sahibs who replaced the gora sahibs thought the average Hindu was an idiot who cannot be allowed to defend himself, the same view held by fake Hindu “right wing” today.

To conclude, these fake Hindus & “right wingers” have more in common with Aurangzeb and the British than with the traditions of our ancestors. If they had been living under Aurangzeb they would have no doubt supported his efforts to disarm Hindus.

These people have no shame or conscience because they know they never have to face the guns of the terrorists as the common people did on 26/11 or Hindu Kashmiris during their ethnic cleansing by Muslims or more recently the Bodos at the hands of illegal Muslims. Many live in the safety of the West or in affluent non-Muslim majority areas in India while demanding that everyday Hindus be made defenceless.

People such as these are more dangerous to the survival of Hindu civilization than any Kasab & every right thinking Hindu should emphatically reject gun control.

Advertisements

18 thoughts on “A Hindu view on Gun control”

  1. The so called hindu right wing in india is just a bunch of glamorized liberal shitbags. They think they’re right wing just because they wash the feet of jews and white neo cons. I completely agree when you say these so called right wing hindus, internet hindus, etc are a bigger threat to the hindu civilization that mozlems, jeasus juice vendors, commies, liberals and all kinds of scumbags who spread their venom against hindus.

  2. Thanks for an excellent writeup. Its much needed. Unfortunately people refuse to see the truth. One suggestion: You should have also included how all our Gods & Goddess are AyuDhaBANis & how Hindus celebrate Ayudha Pooja.

    1. Yes that is another good point, I didn’t want to make it too long so I avoided it.

      But yes almost all the Gods & Goddesses possess Ayudha-s & Ayudha Puja is the tradition of warriors par excellence, these Hindu cowards today worship their laptops in the name of Ayudha Puja lol.

      Here is how Ayudha Puja was conducted just 200 years ago:

      http://dharmayuddha.wordpress.com/2010/10/29/a-description-of-dasara-celebrations-from-early-19th-century/

      It is also important to note that in 1947, while the Hindus and Sikhs were mostly unarmed the Muslims had stockpiled all kinds of weapons and used them to massacre the unarmed Hindus and Sikhs, so much for “gun control”.

      “Besides lethal weapons, there were fairly large quantities of firearms and means of incendiarism in the possession of Muslims. In the Punjab, besides smuggling arms from India with the help and connivance of the Muslim Police, the Muslims with the same facility to hand, could do successful gun-running from the tribal areas in the North-West. While a Hindu or Sikh carrying illegal weapons on him would be hauled up under the Arms Act, Muslims were comparatively safe in so doing, unless they happened to be detected by some non-Muslim police officer. Large quantities of petrol were obtained and conserved by the Muslims at a time when petrol rationing had been in force for several years, and this hoarded petrol was used in setting ablaze whole localities of non-Muslims with fiendish rapidity and efficiency, and thousands were trapped in the rapidly spreading flames and burnt alive.

      http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/mla/ch2.htm

      1. Please don’t think its going to be long .To make people open their minds, no amount of information is too much. Just links, if you prefer, will be suffice & if you have the time. Once again, thanks for a much needed perspective.

    1. So Hindus are to defend themselves with handguns & rusty old swords against AK 47s.

      I presume you too live in the safety of the US, why not go live in Kashmir or Assam or WB border, see how well the Indian govt is protecting Hindus.

      FYI Switzerland allows semi-automatic guns, I dont see any mass shootouts or ethnic cleansing there unlike the failed state of India which has 300,000 Hindu Kashmiris as refugees for the last 23 years despite its tyrannical gun control.

      Everyone who lives in safety is an expert on self defense.

      Go tell Bodos how their AK 47s are useless against Muslim mobs.

      When Hindus in these areas get massacred none of you gun control heroes will lift a finger to help them or put pressure on your great Indian govt to halt the massacre. Better for Hindus to be dispossessed of their land, women, and dignity than for them to have AK 47s, nice argument.

      You can go make a 1000 laws, it does not mean anything as Muslims wont obey them anyways. So first get the Indian govt to halt the demographic and other forms of Jihad being waged against Hindus everyday and then we can talk on limiting what Hindus can own.

    2. vish-was you skinny little piece of ugliness. what would someone like you know about guns and the right to self defence. you would probably run like the whimp you’re if the time for confrontation came. go and hide in the lab or behind the computer you shameless filth. people like you bring a bad name to us hindus.

    3. imagine vishwas if I came to your house, with dubious intentions after seeing you with your immediate family at the mall would you rather have a rifle with you or a handgun or sword. cos you wont get far with a handgun and i will snatch the sword from you in a microsecond. its going to be downhill for you and your family after that!

  3. They are a numerous industrious and brave race. Every village has a small fort.
    They never pay revenue to the hakim (=jagirdar) without a fight. The peasants
    (ri’aya) who drive the plough keep a musket (banduq) slung over the neck, and a
    powder-pouch at the waist. The relief-loan (taqavi) they get from the hakim is
    in the form of lead (and) gunpowder.

    – Irfan Habib quoting a 1650 manuscript on Bhadauriya Rajputs

    It frequently happened that a wretched little fortified town surrounded by
    nothing but mud walls and defended by a few hundred peasants (‘campagnards’)
    armed with a few wornout matchlocks, was able to hold out for months against the
    attacks of a host of assailants.

    – Abbe Dubois writing about 18th century South India.

    The examples continue from pg. 8 on here of ordinary civilian resistance to the
    Mughal tyrants:

    http://books.google.ca/books?id=SrdiVPsFRYIC&pg=PA6&dq=peter+mundy+guns+bucklers
    &hl=en&sa=X&ei=RSrPUNneHuqs2QXrs4CgBg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%20dubois&f=fa\
    lse

  4. A great article, that one hopes serves as a catalyst to Hindus who have been languishing under the tyranny of pacifism and non-violence, imposed on them by the mundaka since the founding of the modern artificial state of India, based not on Hindu identity and the tenets of Kshatra dharma as it should be, but on a masochistic and deceptive doctrine that is as false as those of the nAstikas of yore who were driven away by right minded dhArmikas.
    Now even assuming that the martial races theory of the British is true, let us look at how we Hindus perceived ourselves and how the White Sahibs defined the parameters of the rights of Hindus to defend themselves. A writer, sympathetic to the cause of the tamils and their ideology, writes thus.
    “The reaction of these groups was marked by a compulsion to emphasize the martial credentials of their cultures. Opposition to British rule which emerged among classes affected by the shift in recruitment toward the ‘martial races’ of North western India took shape into an ideology that asserted a national spirit which exalted military virtues and ideals as the cure for the ills of Indian society under the British yoke. Bal Gangadhar Tilak who emerged as a spokesman for the disfranchised military groups became the ideologue of this nationalist Indian militarism.
    Stephen Cohen has attempted to define Indian militarism in terms of Indian attitudes towards the British-Indian military structure and recruitment.
    “There are two fundamentally different sets of Indian attitudes towards the British-Indian military structure, both of which may legitimately be labelled Indian militarism: modern militarism and traditional militarism…emerged in Bengal and western India and spread to other regions. Modern militarism stressed the value of the military as a national universal solvent; as an expression of the national will and demanded equalitarian recruitment. ‘Traditional militarism’ resulted from regional traditions and the recruiting practices of the British. It was confined to those castes and classes which exercised the use of arms as matter of birth right and was unevenly distributed throughout India…”
    At the turn of the [20th] century there were two groups in the Tamil region which had a decidedly militarist and anti-British outlook. (a) the adherents of modern Indian militarism – the terrorists – and their sympathizers. (b) the disfranchised traditional military castes.
    The dispersion of modern Indian militarism’s basic tenet – that the revival of India’s ‘heroic age’ and its war-like traditions and values was necessary for national emancipation – invested the heroic past and martial cultures of the disenfranchised traditional Tamil military castes with a nationalist significance . Modern Tamil militarism – the political idea that military virtues and ideals ‘rooted in Tamil martial traditions’ is essential for national resurgence and emancipation – was enunciated at this specific conjuncture in the school of Tamil renaissance established by Pandithurai Thevar – a noble belonging to the Sethupathy clan of the dominant traditional Tamil military caste – the Maravar.
    [Selected Writings by Dharmeratnam Sivaram (Taraki),On Tamil Militarism – a 11 Part Essay
    Part 2: Tamil Military Castes; Lanka Guardian, [pp.17-19] [prepared by Sachi Sri Kantha, for electronic record, 15 May 1992]
    http://tamilnation.co/forum/sivaram/920515lg.htm

    Thus though we have differences with the current adherents of dravidian supremacy and the crypto-christian conspiracy, we see the constant sporadic emergence of Hindus arming themselves when they feel threatened. The most recent example being V. Prabhakaran and his LTTE. If they had not defended themselves, they would have been decimated by the sinhalese sthAviravAda supremacists of Srilanka. Many of the moral hypocrites, who hide behind their twitter handles and preach to the Srilankan tamils, shameful call themselves “Hindu Right-wingers”, while they are swift to condemn prabhakaran for his activities. While we may hold the late V. Prabhakaran accountable for certain errors of judgment and violence against Indian Jawans as well as a Indian Head of State, we cannot but appreciate what he did to protect the dignity of his people by recognizing the fundamental right of Self-Defense using the latest weapons.
    Let us hear what the tiger himself said in his interview with a leading Indian newspaper:
    “In other words, the biographies and histories of those who hit back at the perpetrators of injustice, those who counterattacked (the unjust foe) were my special favourite. Because in our land, the Sinhalese behaved so cruelly towards us. we would hear stories about this and read about these cruel acts in books and newspapers. Later I read about this particular episode that took place during the 1958 attacks on Tamils. They broke into a temple at Panadura, found a Brahmin priest sleeping, tied him to his cot, poured petrol over him and burnt him alive. Ours was a god-fearing society and the people were religious-minded. The widespread feeling was: when a priest like him was burnt alive, why did we not have the capability to hit back? That was one atrocity that made people think deeply. In another episode, they threw a child into a drum of boiling tar. This left a very deep imprint on my mind and in the minds of those around me. If such innocent lives could be destroyed, why could we not strike back?”
    http://www.hindu.com/nic/prabakaran-interview2.htm

    Hence we see that though the Hindu heathens of jambudvIpa may be misguided often by perverted ideologies and religions, the underlining thread of dharma, bursts forth now and then when it is invoked.
    May Indra unite us under his banner and may the vajra strike terror in the hearts of the dasyus..

    1. Another reason of a dim view of Prabhakaran by others is because he first murdered all his TAMIL opponents.Used kids as human shields. Has any Tamil military caste engaged in using kids as shields? Not to change the focus of the discussion.

      1. first of let us keep this caste nonsense aside. can you tell me what the guy was supposed to do? stand besides his tamil opponents and sing umbaya. look man, i am not surr how much you know about millitary stratergies but those who threaten a movement have to go, prabhakaran was no different. its not like hindu kings, including tamil ones, haven’t killed their opponents in the past. as for suicide bombing, would you rather have prabhakaran fight a regular war against a far superior enemy with far greater resources?

  5. imagine if all hindus were weaklings physically and mentally like this vishvas. do you even know what a semi-automatic weapon is? you moron. do you expect hindus to use muzzle loaded antiquated pieces of poop? have you ever shot a weapon before? by the mere sight of you, i can tell that the answer is a resounding NO.

  6. //these Hindu cowards today worship their laptops in the name of Ayudha Puja lol//

    What’s wrong with that? Is there any rule that an Ayudha be only a destructive weapon? Today laptops, tablets and cellphones have become part of one’s life and there is nothing wrong in worshiping them. By doing so, it will increase their bhakthi towards them and will help prevent abuse to a larger extent. In my opinion Ayudha pooja should be made a global festival to increase the Bhakthi towards one’s tools and devices. It will create an emotional bonding between them which will in turn help prevent enormous crimes.

    1. Yes, there is something greatly wrong with this practice. If you want a puja for laptops and small tools, go ahead. Create a new festive day for that. But to do that on the day meant for weapons is not sensible. Ayudha puja must bring out the virility of the community. It must be a day for worship of strength, valor and even bloodshed. A community needs such characteristics to even survive in the long run. Hindus are losing them very easily and very quickly. If the same trend continues, then we will become extinct.

      And then, bhakti towards tools will help prevent crimes? A person who steals from credit cards using fake payment gateways could have bhakti towards his computers. But it will not stop him from perpetrating crime.

  7. Interesting. So there are other people with similar views? I thought I was the only one with this sort of view.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s