Raj Vs Loot

I have a genuine objection to anyone putting the word ‘Raj’ or ‘rule’ after brits or mugal. My objection stems from the fact that such a person is clueless- he/she either, has no idea what the word ‘Raj’ means or is blissfully ignorant of what brits or mugal did to Bharat. (Though I won't blame them, as they have been deprived of the truth.)

The education system introduced by british is so biased and untruthful, that its a crime to call it ‘education’ at all. It can at best, be called ‘Propaganda-system’. Sad part is, it continues till date, completely unchecked. And even after so many years of ‘independence’, we have neither a plan to change it nor we have a way to identify and punish ‘the intellectuals’ who kept us in dark, for the last 7-8 decades.

But I am tempted to course-correct such Sanatanis who have become completely cut-off from their roots and also, have been fed lies in the name of ‘history’, all their life.

What does Raj mean? In Bharatiya context, Raj means to rule justly. A Raja was supposed to be like a father or a mother figure for his Praja (subjects). He thus was entrusted with all the responsibilities a parent has toward his ward. He was bound by Dharm, to treat his Praja as his children.

It is the foremost duty of a parent to protect and to provide for their child. In a way, a parent prepares the ground for their child to grow uninhibited. This includes protecting a child from external threats, maintaining peace and order within the household, giving the child all that is necessary for him to achieve his full potential, so he grows to become a healthy, well-intentioned, skilled and wise individual.

On similar lines, a King or Raja was to protect his subjects from external threats, to maintain internal peace and order and to give all that is necessary to make his subjects self-reliant.  These Kings were highly commited people, who kept the interests of their subjects above their own.

In Ramayana, Ram ji and Sita ji go to seek blessings of their Guru and under his guidance, observe fast the night before Ram ji is to be announced as heir-apparent. All through their lives, both Ram and Sita were super aware of their public image. They did not want to give even a slightest chance to anyone, to question their integrity. In Mahabharata also, there is a particular stress by Yudhishthir and the rest of Pandava brothers, to keep their image and conduct, above reproach. This is not to be confused with ordinary people bothering about “log kya kahenge?!” The issue here was to be a King or a Queen, who is genuinely respected by the masses such that his/her word will prevail. What does this suggest? It suggests that Kingship was regarded as a sacred and grave responsibility.

These Kings were remarkable. They were great statesmen, diplomats and nation-builders. They knew their job was not just to protect their borders. Their job was to promote scientific enquiry, all forms of arts, and culture etc. High premium was placed on brains over brawns- “Svadeshe pujyate Raja, Vidvaan sarvatra pujyate.”- this shloka speaks volumes about the mindset of our ancestors. They knew the value of  right thinkers and right thought, as right thought will translate into right reality for the subjects, some day. 

And I am not talking in abstract. There are countless accounts of foreign travelers to Bharat, where they have mentioned in detail, about beauty and opulence of Bharat. With well-planned cities, broad roads, mammoth temples, stunning palaces, majestic forts, palatial houses, granaries, exceptional irrigation and sewage systems, state-of-the-art Gurukuls, well-stocked and spectacular libraries, Bharat was a go-to place for seekers of knowledge and traders alike. What this speaks of, is the might and vision of our Kings of yore. (For all those who dismiss this as some conspiracy theory, I have only one question. Do you really believe that  mugal or brits came here to civilize us? Can any people undertake such an exercise? Can they have so much human and financial resources at their disposal, to send it to some faraway land to ‘civilize’ the natives there? No. They came here because they heard accounts of a glorious and opulent land called Bharat. But it was our misfortune that we failed to fathom their true intentions and opened our doors quite unsuspectingly and generously.)

Contrast this with brits and mugal. These were the invaders who came and like a parasite, looted Bharat through and through. Under their tyranny, there was no question of protecting and upholding the dignity of the Bhartiya people. Our people were in fact treated as sub-humans. 

During mugal period, among other things, dignity and honour of Hindu women and children was at stake. The so called shehenshah, akbar is said to have hosted mandis, were cultured and beautiful Hindu women were sold for a few rupees. It was in this period that the human trafficking, hetherto unheard of in Bharat, had become rampant. And as if this humiliation was not enough, it became criminal for Hindus to profess their religion in their own lands! Some morons argue that during mugal ‘raj’, Bharat continued to contribute to 1/3rd of world trade. That means nothing as the money would go to maintain the harems of these rascals. There are actual accounts of once glorious Bhartiya cities reduced to slums with only the sultan's palace-when he was alive and his makbara-when he had kicked the bucket, looked resplendent in the entire landscape. Is this Raj? 

If mugal crossed all boundaries of humanity, civility and decency, brits did not trail far behind. From stealing wealth of knowledge contained in Sanskrit manuscripts, shamelessly translating it to latin and then ridiculing the very language, looting the resources of Bharat, dumping their sub-standard goods on impoverished masses of Bharat,  brutally silencing any voice that spoke of Swarajya, sowing the seeds of division among Hindus by creating imaginary oppressed caste-list, openly claiming superiority of their own faith over others, proselytising arrogantly by ‘harvesting’ the souls of poor and emaciated Hindus in lieu of a few grains of rice, stripping and raping Bhartiya women, selling them as slaves to various colonies, orchestrating artificial famines by directing the resources of this land to fund their stupid wars, promoting voices of sold-out brown sahibs, leaving these very stooges to ‘rule’ Bharat after 'independence’, dividing Bharat mercilessly and there-by allowing brutal massacre of Hindus and horrific rapes of their women to ensuring Bharat never again becomes a super power, these looters did it all. Is this Raj?

Don't go by what the west or bollywood wants you to believe. Raj or satta is never to exploit the masses. Rather, It is meant to protect them and give them everything that will help them grow. True progress is possible only when there is peace and contentment, which comes from absence of fear. The fear and insecurity that gripped Bharat since the invaders came, is what aborted and distorted our progress as THE greatest and oldest living civilisation. Never forget.

Now the question remains- Can we really call those who exploited our ancestors and gave them untold torture, as ‘Raja’ and their period of loot as ‘Raj’? Would it not be a colossal wrong on our part, on two counts- firstly a huge disrespect to our own great Kings and secondly, giving a clean-chit to the deranged invaders who were nothing but looters and rapists?