Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/gardenofindiaorc00irwi#page/n5/mode/2up

Download pdf Book : http://ia700300.us.archive.org/34/items/gardenofindiaorc00irwi/gardenofindiaorc00irwi.pdf

Not a bad place to live in, this Lucknow!

Gomti ke kinare! (on the banks of river Gomati) I had not realised that Hukkah was an inseparable part of the Lakhanavi lifestyle!

Actually Huqqah is quite a refined form of smoking tobacco - if one has to smoke (which I don't recommend). First, they used to add molasses ('shira') to the 'chilam' so the burning tobacco used to smell rather pleasant (I liked the smell as a kid watching my grandfather smoke). Second, the smoke from the burning tobacco is made to bubble through water so that many water-soluble hazardous chemicals (and there are at least 300 of them, some being carcinogenic) are removed as the water is replenished frequently (which I had to do). So, I think huqqah should be the choice for those who must smoke. It should be popularized in the West since cigarette smoking is rather crude and uncultured.

Haha, Assadbhai. If smoke you must, do it in style - in a "cultured" way! The Lakhanavi way.

There still are quite a few things the West can learn from us, huqqah being one of them. Historically, tobacco was introduced into India by Portuguese merchants who brought it to Emperor Akbar in court. Akbar passed the stuff to his hakims to study it. They came back with the recommendation that "it may be injurious to health". This recommendation was rediscovered in the United States 400 years later! Now every cigarette carton says so.

I beg to disagree Asad uncle but I believe the 'hubble bubble' or the hookah came from the Ottoman empire to India.India is today the world's largest producer and consumer of chillies and tomatoes (which came from Mexico), ginger(which came from the west Indies), Heeng or asoftida (which came from Afghanistan) and of course tobacco which came from the Americas.The whites first saw the red Indians smoking a pipe. They watched in bewilderment as smoke emnated from their mouths.

BTW to make the smoke thicker the hookah can be filled with milk instead of water.Nowadays there are no less than 25 varieties of flavoured tobacco available. In north Indian nobility both men and women enjoyed smoking the hookah. The base of which became elaborate of silver or brass with intricate carving or of cutglass from Bohemia.The pipe was covered with zari (thread of gold/silver) while the mouthpieces were of carved burnished wood or silver. The most elaborate hookahs came from Hyderabad with four chillums and five pipes emanating from a single large hookah !

Dear Digvijay: I am quite sure that a group of Portuguese merchants presented tobacco for the first time to Akbar in his Court and that his hakims advised against using it. I read this from an original source. Now its elaborate and "cultured" use in huqqah may have come from Turkey but there was not much communication between mid Mughals like Akbar and the Turks. (Babur did have advice from them.) I might add that "hookah" was also the word used for some implements of war introduced from Central Asia, and this confusion may have arisen from there.

Ah! And where did the potato come from? The pine apple? Americas were discovered even before Akbar was born (even before Babur). So it is quite possible that Portuguese visitors presented Tobacco to Akbar. But the adab and the comradeship which goes with huqqa doing the rounds must be pure;y India! How and why did we Indians lose track of our own famous soma rasa?:(

Potato came from the land of the Incas (south America) Pine-apple also from the Yucatan peninsula.Just as the papaya did from Hawaii. The famous galouti kebabs of Lucknow sold by Tunday (literal meaning amputee) were specially designed for a nawab of Lucknow. Legend has it that the nawab was very fond of kebabs but owing to his advanced health he had trouble digesting them well.Raw papaya juice was used as a meat tenderiser and the world famous 'galaouti kebabs' were born which dissolve in one's mouth.The art was application of just the right amount of juice as a tad more makes the kebabs sour. We in Rajasthan use kaachri (a kind of wild berry) powder as a meat tenderiser traditionally. The tradition of hammaam came to India from Turkey where in turn it may have come from ancient Rome as did the hookah which was an invention of the Ottoman empire. Tobacco may have been brought to India by the Portugese as suggested rightly by Asad uncle but the tradition of the 'hubble bubble' is an Ottoman invention. All the hookah bars had names like 'Arabian Nights', Sindbad or other mumbo jumbo while in point of fact Arabia has had nothing to do with the hookah ever.

Talking of Hammams, we cannot forget about our own "pushkars" and the great bath discovered on Harrappa. So, the point seems to be that world was always global. It is good to reinvent the wheel.

steam baths or sauna with oil massages (in case of the Romans probably with aromatic oils) is different from the tradition of open bath of the Indus valley civilisation. There is only one hamaam that survives in india to the best of my memory and it is run by Qaiser Bi in Bhopal.The flooring of the bath houses have a maze of pipes in which steam was passed through from a huge boiling couldron underneath. It would heat up the entire chamber.First a bath is administered by a trained attendent with a sound scrubbing with soap which is followed by a oil massage. This massage was administered by foot as well as legs alongwith hands.Through-out this exercise the bath chamber remains heated.

@Digvijay Singh Kushwaha: You have set some processes going. I will go out and register for Kerala massage (I have a Turkish towel of my own) and later look for some nice kabab joints. Huqqa I cannot try because I gave up smoking over three years ago. But I like the idea of reclining against a cushion and a take a dum from the gudgudi and may be then place a trunk call to Subbiah.

The hammam has played an important role in history. Chengiz Khan, on the rise in Mongolia, sent a caravan loaded with silk, carpets, musk, jewellry, and a massive ingot of gold 'the size of a camel's hump' as a gesture of friendship to the Governor of Samarkand, declaring that 'you be the Lord of the West while I shall be the Lord of East' and we should trade in peace and friendship. When the caravan arrived at the border (Samarkand or Tarar?), agents of the Governor looted the embassy and killed the entire delegation. However, one member of the delegation - who had gone to a municipal hammam for a bath - survived. He escaped, travelled back to Mongolia hastily, and told the entire story of this treacherous act by the Muslim Governor. This incident aroused the fury of the Khan - who declared that if this is the way he governs, he has no right to govern. To punish him, he started preparations for war and the Mongol horde - like a 'swarm of locusts' - proceeded westwards to destroy Transoxiana. Each 'hazara' (a body of 1,000 soldiers) had its own triangular flag, and there were 7,000 (or was it 70,000?) flags fluttering in the field that sunny day. The history of the world was thereby changed. Had the Mongol not gone for a bath that fateful day, history could have been different. Millions of lives could have been spared.

Two points: firstly, someone said that there a still quite a few things which the West can learn from you. I think there must be far more than 'quite a few'. You are so much more cultured than we; you are more tolerant - in fact I think India could almost be the definition of tolerance; you accept people at face value, without having to go through a judgement process. I think you are all wonderful!! And secondly, cigarette smoking is crude and uncultured. Oh dear. I knew I was going wrong in so many ways - now this as well. Perhaps I should begin using an elegant cigarette holder and try to be less crude. Can't do much about the uncultured bit. And I'm not going to stop - have reached the age when every new year is a bonus! This has been a fascinating discussion thank you all. About Lucknow - the first time I went there I was disappointed, having known for so long that this was one of the world's great centres of culture, literature, courteousness and all good things. But subsequent visits have levened the disppointment - such wonderful people. And in the end, wherever we go, it's the people who matter, isn't it?

and Subbiah - this is what I meant to say when I started the previous comment - thank you so much for this book - one of the best yet. And I love the illustration - it's exceptional.

If there ever was a copybook style of living, it must have been Lucknow. The picture says it all; as clear as a looking glass!

Thank you Philippa for your generous understanding of India...and you remind me so much of Fanny Parkes ! : )

I think that may be a step too far - I am squirming with embarrassment! I loved reading Fanny Parkes's journal. And I think that the only thing which she and I can possibly have in common is our Welsh ancestry!

Ms Philippa Waterfield has painted a rather rosy and flattering picture of India by saying that " India could almost be the definition of tolerance". I wish this was true but, unfortunately, it is not. There are many things besides materialism that we can learn from the West since we have duplicity, deception, intolerance, and corruption at all levels and in all walks of life. Such evils also exist in the West but not to that great extent. It is a common misconception in the West that everyone in India leads a life of purity like Gandhiji - nothing can be farther from the truth. If you are looking for these virtues, go to the Indian villages, and perhaps you may find them.

Continent sized country like India operates admirably like a country. India has the distinction of being one of the the most tolerant countries in the world and also the most plural.The sheer diversity in creed, languages, religions, ethnicities is astounding for any outsider. We are the only country where each religious community has a seperate set of code of laws that governs them in matters of inheritance, marriages ,adoption and divorce. There is a 'special marriages' act to safeguard couples in mixed marriages too. The federal structure affords each state to enact it's own laws.States have enacted controvercial laws.Andhra Pradesh has reservation for backward class Muslims, Jayalalitha in Tamil Nadu had enacted a law to prevent conversion to another faith.Modi's Gujarat has a proviso to keep people of one community buying property in a locality where another community predominates.Rajasthan has enacted a law to provide reservation in jobs to Jats who are the third largest land-owners in the state but are deemed to be economically backward and oppressed (there were two kingdoms there which were Jat which had a predominant Jat nobility!). Mayawati can get away with spending huge sums on self aggrandisement and spending state funds to the tunes of hundreds of crores on building parks and erecting statues of self in India's most popoulous and amongst the poorest states on all indices. We are a democracy as yet for just 63 years and are certainly not enacting laws like France which is a mature democracy which has banned the head scarf or Abaya of Muslim women and the turban for Sikh men citing the reason that "wearing one's religion on your sleeve" has no meaning in a democracy ! ( Nuns can wear their habit there is nothing wrong with that !) Suddenly their state decides that French school-children feel intimidated by a lady teacher in a head scarf and do not open up to to her ! A child that does not have a Christian name cannot be christened in a French Church ! Maturer democracy like the United states had thrown Acharya Rajneesh out on the grounds that his activities were threatening their faith and disturbing it's moral fabric !! There are laws about indecent exposure which are repeatedly flouted by Jain monks walking naked on our streets.Umbrella signifies sovereigity and can be used only exclusively by the president of India but the Agarwal community repeatedly flouts that law by carrying an umbrella in their marriage processions over the bridegroom. In India, Arundhati Roy can get away by saying that "Kashmir was never an integral part of India" without her public statement inviting libel on account of it being akin to sedition. Save for the brief period of emergency imposed by Mrs. Indira Gandhi India has remained steadfastly a democracy.Towards our west till Turkey nobody even understands the meaning of that word. Towards our north all the way upto Siberia democracy is a pipe dream and towards our east all the way upto South Korea there is nothing called democracy.Liberal democrats have remained continously in power for the last 40 yrs in Japan so even Japan's democracy is a sham. Asad uncle, man by nature is selfish that is why Communism failed .Village bumpkins are no less corrupt that the urban dwellers. There are honest and dishonest people everywhere in every walk of life.West has modernised the world and it thinks that the world ought to progress like them and conform to their standards which is a lot of bull. We have a right to evolve the way we want to as per our 4 millenia old civilisation which has evolved very differently from the west. Our economic take-off is not dependent on plundering the fortunes of other countries as they did for the west and Japan in the form of colonialism. You want the moon too soon for your country.Declaration of independence happened in 1772. Till the 1940's Chicago police was eating out of the hands of the mafia.Lynching was not un-common in the United states even till the 1960's.Indiscripances were reported in the election results of Florida in the presidential election of Mr. George Bush just a few years back.Who went ahead and invented the Electronic Voting Machine which has ruled out the scope of such indiscrepancies and wrongdoing? India. I'd rather count the HUGE strides we have made in the last 63 years. At least our democracy has matured to a level that affords us the ability to expose political and finanacial scams so what if we can't bring the guilty to book ?

I do not look through rose-tinted spectacles - I am here for so much of my life that I am surely able to observe realistically. And I am not unaware of the faults - but I think you have a far more democratic democracy (the world's largest!) than, say, that in the UK (the world's oldest!). I know about the corruption and all the rest, but still it works. I'm never quite sure how it works, but it does. Of course India is tolerant - despite all the examples of intolerance. As Digijay remarks,people are free, and encouraged, to follow whichever religion or practice they wish. Even when there is communal disturbance (and serious rioting and violence) it remains relatively localised, and within what seems to me to be a very short time, everyone settles down again. I find it remarkable - and reiterate my claim.

What Digvijay and Philippa have said about us warms the heart. What Asad said cautions the mind. What we are today is a result of many things, especially the recent past that s to say we are not a "natural product". We are moulded in a particular way through the years of our struggle to cast of the colonial yoke. All that what Digvijay and Philippa see in us is under a constant threat from very vicious forces bent of destroying the fabric of India. Hence we cannot shut eye to what Asad said. We need to conserve all our energy for dealing with the problems of poverty, health, education, prosperity, ecology and governance.

In a way, that's missing the point. For many hundreds of years you have had forces 'bent on destroying the fabric of India' - and India shrugs off these forces, steps to one side, and sets off again. I suppose the modern-day attacks are more insidious, but they can only affect the 'upper' layers - the financial institutions, government, military, security etc. I say 'only' but it is so - the underlying strength is the 700 million plus people who just continue plodding through their daily lives - undisturbed (to a large extent) by the shenanigans on the surface. (And here I am talking generally of course, about what pertains as a whole. Of course Digvijay is right - every society, every group, every village has its good people and its bad, but surely it was ever thus, and local communities dealt with these problems in their own ways.) Of course the early forces 'bent on destroying' were here to conquer and rule - the most successful of whom were, I suppose, the Moghuls. And they did not so much 'destroy' as 'change'. And then only in parts of what is now India. You say that you are moulded in a particular way through the years of struggle to cast off the colonial yoke (gosh! I'm on dangerous ground here, aren't I?!). I would hypothesise that for 200 years prior to the 100 years or so of struggle, some moulding took place precisely because of the colonial presence (which at that time was trading rather than ruling - others were doing that!). And surely that is not necessarily bad. If one anylises the influences on any peoples in the world, their progress and development has surely come about because of the presence of invaders/conquerors/visitors over the millenia. For heavens' sake - Britain (often the bete noir in modern India) was herself conquered and invaded at different times. the Norse viking invaders, the Romans! We are what we are because of our past - and it is probably more elegant to accept it and move on than to resist it. I often get involved in 'discussions' about the so-called purity of the indigenous breeds of horses. The 'purists' become very heated - often failing to recognise that a hundred years ago other blood was probably introduced. The same is true of humans. Although India as a unified nation is a comparatively recent happening, I am sure that therein lies her strength. The glorious, wonderful amalgam of peoples, languages, cultures, traditions, religions - so diverse that there is almost no common link. And so secure within these different elements that nothing can destroy them. I think it is a wholly unique strength - which is why I believe India is probably the strongest - and yes, I repeat - the most tolerant country in the world. Dealing with the problems of poverty, health, education etc as you put it, I don't think can be done by deciding that that's what we do - and setting programmes in motion. It's been tried - and of course improvements have been made - but funds go missing and the whole beaurocratic mess takes over. I'm certain that this will work from the bottom up - when people demand improvement and begin to help themselves. We see it in the village initiatives already (I know they are often assisted - but people can only be helped if they wish it, and the most effective help is self-help). Forgive me to presume to offer opinions on your country. Such offerings are probably seen as impertinence by many of you. But I feel so involved, am happier here than anywhere, and am privileged to have such very good friends in India. And as many will attest, have great difficulty in remaining silent!

You have said so much Philippa without belabouring a point. Thanks. I do feel happy about the confidence in which you hold us.

It is a pleasure to read such generosity of the appreciation impulse enunciated so eloquently. Philippa, your sentiment should be expanded into a book or at least a long essay. It leaves such a warm glow as it builds up. :) India has much to be proud of. It is a large subcontinent with 800,000 square miles of fertile, arable land, the largest in the Eurasian landmass. And most of this land is in temperate region or the tropics. It is a pleasure to see new insights into this land's complex past, through the careful selections of RBSI's rare books and informative introductions.

Phillipa has raised certain very valid points. We are what we are because of countless invasions from Aryan, Macedonian, Huns,Kushans, Afghans, Mongols/ Mughals, Persians etc and as she points out each have contributed in shaping our culture and politics and thinking pattern. Just as new blood has been infused in horses whether of Arabian, Shire, Marwari , thoroughbred or old Mongolian stock... the simile is rather crude though but correct all the same All Invaders save for the British never left India and made it their home. You cannot then call them invaders in that sense.The only thing that binds us togather loosely is religion and a common shared past.We cannot deny that Hinduism is a sponge that absorbs all new ideas whether religious or spiritual or 'modern; howsoever new fangled they may appear and then transforms them to it's own advantage.Indian Chritians , Muslims ,Sikhs also have a caste system which is decidedly a Hindu legacy while in point of fact they never had any scopr for discrimination in those religions, Providing and upholding the rule of law ,building countless bridges, developing our railways, posts and telegraph services and our municipalities among several other public works I 'd say uniting the continent into a country called India and democracy is the greatest British legacy. We really do not have our double on the planet. We have 15 languages on our currency note alone. You just cannot compare India to anybody else.One language, one culture, one predominant religion and the desire to conform are the hallmarks of western democracy.India conversely is a unique experiment in the world. It was on the basis of India's functional democracy thar the European Union was envisaged so we are a role model of sorts. Another valid point that she has asserted is that the forces that could tear us apart were stronger in the past than anytime in the present.I for one am for accepting our colonial past gracefully and not live in a state of denial. Colonial past is a reality we must learn to accept and build upon. After all the grandest structures in India which are non-religious or royal even today hark back to the British Raj.

Hadn't realised that concept of the European Union was based on India's structure. Oh dear - not sure that I think that is necessarily a good thing!! Maybe the concept is OK - the actuality and practice is far from satisfactory (from an insular Britisher!).

Well the EU was envisaged to balance the uni-polar world after the collapse of the Soviet Union.On their strength alone no Eoropean country can now stand up to the United States.It is a grand experiment in 'ganging up' against the world's sole superpower which has gone awry. European parliament remains titular.The financial implications of the EU are far more than than political and it is likely to remain so. A world that abounds in gangs appears a reality now. ASEAN will soon include China which is all set to rule the world economically in the latter half of this century.Pax Britannia and Pax Americana we have seen.At least Britain and the U.S. were democracies. It is anybody's guess what will the world look like when a country which is not a democracy rules the world ? A quarter century from now the super power status of the USA will be a thing of the past. You cannot be a military giant when you cease to be manufacturing behemoth.

If my aim was to test whether you folks are awake, I have been eminently successful. Most of the points raised can be understood if we realize that India is a land of contrasts. For a country of its vast size and diverse population, it works remarkably well. For example, Digvijay comments that 'In India, Arundhati Roy can get away by saying that "Kashmir was never an integral part of India" without her public statement inviting libel on account of it being akin to sedition'. This was not a libellous statement; it was simply an expression of her views and she has the right to do so. And this freedom of expression is only a recent phenomenon on account of an exceptionally educated and enlightened leadership we have - but this freedom can be snatched away at any time. There were also many calls for her arrest soon after her article appeared in the New York Times. Those making the calls were also Indian. Thus, we have extremes in every corner and that makes the country interesting. However, some of these extremes can also have deadly consequences.

Well Asad uncle many thanks for your acknowledgement that " For it's vast size and diverse population India works remarkably well" We have gone to war with our neighbour thrice on the issue of Kashmir, lost scores of both civilian and military lives and it continues to remain a nuclear flash-point. Ms Roy certainly has a right to her opinion but it needs to have a certain backing or substanciation.On that premise none of the 565 big and small princely states were an integral part of India because even at the height of British imperialism the British directly ruled over only 3/5th of India. The remaining 2/5th was 'princely India' where both diwani and nizamat were in the hands of the the potentates. Had the late Maharaja Hari Singh not procrastinated in signing the 'instrument of accession' and later the 'merger document', Pakistan would never have got the opportunity to infiltrate Gilgit and Skardu with Afghan mercinaries.But he harboured utopian designs of becoming an Asian Switzerland, the ill-effects of his dithering we are suffering for the last 63 years.Maintaining Kashmir in india is a HUGE hole on the state exchequer money which can be spent judiciously on employment creation , healthcare and poverty alleviation. We lost a golden opportunity in getting it vacated after the Bangladesh liberation when three hundred thousand prisnors of war were in indian army's possession, highest in the history of human conflict.Their release could have been made conditional to Pakistani withdrawl from POK. Without Soviet tacit support East Pakistan could never have got liberated into a seperate country.Such an opportunity will NEVER come our way again now that our esteemed neighbour is under the NATO umbrella

Mr Ahmed - you must know that Facebook NEVER sleeps.

Yes Philippa, this is true that the Sun never sat on the British Empire nor on the RBSI ! In writing about Arundhati Roy, it was not my intention to bring the contentious Kashmir debate to the RBSI. All I was trying to point out was the extraordinary courage of this famous Indian writer in pointing out something that is considered a taboo in India. Soon after she had written that N.Y. Times article, there were calls from the main opposition party (BJP) to have her arrested. Where was our tolerance? It was only because of educated, westernized people like Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh that she is not behind bars for expressing her opinion. I admire her courage. Now, Digvijay has eloquently and passionately presented the intricacies of the Kashmir situation and - as an Indian - I can understand that. However, this is only the Indian point of view. The Pakistanis are equally passionate about this issue but their position is just the opposite. So how do we make any progress after three horrible wars? In these discussions, the amazing thing is that no one seems to ask what do the Kashmiri people want? We had a similar problem in Canada when there was a strong movement in the 1970's for the separation of Quebec on grounds that they have a separate language and culture. When the subject became too hot, the Government of Canada decided to hold a referendum to ask what the people of Quebec want. The result was very close, but continued association with Canada won by approximately 0.4 % majority. This, I believe, is the civilized way to settle dangerous disputes of this nature. In the case of Kashmir, everything was done in the wrong way: The Indians thought they could silence the people by sending in troops, and the Pakistanis foolishly thought they could expel the India army by infiltration with terrorists. In the end, it is the Kashmiris who have suffered from both ends and, if their figures can be trusted, over 70,000 young men have been killed. To me, it is more of a human, rather than a political, tragedy that should be solved by peaceful means. Under the present circumstances, it seems that the best solution is through a referendum in which all Kashmiris (including the Kashmiri Pandits who were expelled) could vote and decide their own future. This 'bleeding sore' seems to be the main impediment for India in reaching its full potential as a great nation. I am certain that most people (even Digvijay) will disagree with me but I can only quote Albert Camus from his "Letters to a German Friend" written during the Nazi occupation: "And I should be able to love my country and still love justice". Finally, some technical corrections to Digvijay's note. The number of Pakistani prisoners captured and freed afterwards was 90,000, not 300,000. Mrs Gandhi did negotiate skilfully and was able to get the Pakistani claim on Junagadh removed forever. Digvijay was probably too young to know of these details about the Bangladesh War!

@Asad uncle :I will have to agree to disagree on this.Kashmir is not a Samoa,Sudan or Chechkoslovakia .Plebicite cannot be used on indoctrinated minds who have been subject to negative propaganda against India for the last 60 yrs.Kashmiri Pandits' vote in this referendum has no meaning given that they were always in a minority. They have been booted out 20 years back and most are settled in otherparts of the country. Nobody is now ever going to return even if the Kashmiri Muslims roll out the red carpet for them. Seperatist leaders like Sajjad Lone have joined the mainstream and contested elections.Three consecutive assembly elections have been held in the valley under supervision and watchful scrutiny of the international media. Forty four percent participation in elections is enough testimony of their faith in India and Indian democracy.We have to be mindful of the fact that this Voter turn-out has been despite terrorist threats to subvert the process.The presence of the Taliban there compounds the issue.subsidised rice sells at Rs 2 per kg for Muslims and other sops. This is not a hardlined BJP/VHP version but that of an extremely concerned Indian who has blood relatives in the valley who are natives of Kashmir.No Sikh or Kashmiri Rajput (Dogra/Jamwal) was ever harassed to leave the valley except in Poonch (which has now become a war zone and had to be abandoned )so clearly this is not strictly a Hindu-Muslim issue. Despite their best efforts no OIC country has ever supported Pakistan's stand on Kashmir. Gifting of uranium rich occupied North -eastern Kashmir called 'Aksai Chin' to China , No one including no media-person ever being allowed in Occupied Kashmir, no elections ever having been held there are enough proof to what degree successive Pakistani govts' espouse the so called Kashmiri plight / predicament. The asylum and state protection given to Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen for Lajja' by the Govt. of India as was accorded to Salman Rushdie in Britain is enough proof that India values freedom of speech and expression.Ms. Roy's comment was un-warranted and reprehensible in my opinion. On the POWs I stand corrected.You are right I was not too young but not even born when that surrender took place!

She will always be free uncle. In India Hindu bigots call Gandhiji names and hold him responsible for partition. Akbar is the most hated historical character among most Indian Muslims because of Din-ei-Ilahi. They detest him because he allegedly attempted to play God by attempting to start a new religion.Few Hindu bigots praise Nathuram Godse and extol his act of assasination.They also roam free.The BSP wallahs of Mayawati descecrated the shrine of Gandhiji.( defeacated in his mausoleum !) They also roam scot free.A large section of both Hindus and Muslims hate Nehru for Kashmir being a festering wound.So everybody is free to air their opinions even from public platforms and get away with it. Today's insults and headlines are tomorrow's has beens and are conviniently forgotton. public anger and memory is too short-lived Many Thanks for sharing the link. Cheers

Gandhiji was the only person who could have reversed the tragedy of partition. Would it not be nice if India had remained one undivided country in which everyone could have lived in peace and harmony? But, alas, it was not to be. Thanks Digvijay.