Gandhi was against Hindus as congress
Suryanarayana Ambadipudi
Markendeya Yeddanapudi
Just watch full Video and understand true face of #Gandhi and how गांधी who was made #జాతిపిత_ మహాత్మా by British न #Congress pittoos contributed to #Hindus n #Bharat !? The same गांधी gave #GandhiDynasty and Nation_Hindus is facing the left over sufferings in the hands of #నెహ్రూगांधी Dynasty!!??
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "societyforservingseniors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to society4servingse...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CAFBx%3DOdRHr5e9D5ekVhO-6vr%3D2_KGi2MnWMPWgZFSv6s9YXdCA%40mail.gmail.com.
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
HISTORY OF MAPLA MUSLIM REVOLUTIONS
KR Mahatma Gandhi did only a fair deal for the nation in GOOD FAITH. Nehru was different. As Dharma was different from Krishna, so too was Gandhi and Nehru. We all knew CHE GUEVRA REVOLUTION; for them it is a freedom struggle but for USA it is revolt. 10,000 people were dead where majority were Muslims. Hindu Jenmis returned back only after 5 years. DIVIDE AND RULE PRACTICE OF THE BRITISH DEFINING JENMI AND TENURE WERE QUITE GOOD INITIALLY; But TIPUSULTAN BEAT THE BRITISH AND MUSLIMS WERE GIVEN THE HARNESS OVER THE JENMISLSS LANDS, WHERE JENMIS RAN AWAY BUT AFTER THE BRITISH KILLED TIPU AFTER 5 YEARS RETUNED BACK. Now the jenmis, reaction with the British were awful and trouble-shouted the reactions. So, tenure raised their voice against the rulers which was a freedom struggle as per Gandhi. Hindus took advantage of the losses in their absence when Tipu was in which could have been avoided. It was a Kila fat movement where many tenures were dead than the owners which we shall think over. History was cru because of the British. Where M K Gandhi is to be blamed who took the struggle against British and legal and not a Hindu muslim revolution at all?
Land ownership in Malabar
Freeman Freeman-Thomas, 1st Marquess of Willingdon, Governor of Madras during the Rebellions and later Viceroy and Governor-General of India
Malabar's agricultural system was historically based on a hierarchy of privileges, rights and obligations for all principal social groups in what British administrator William Logan sometimes referred to as the "Father of Tenancy Legislation" in Malabar, describing it as a system of 'corporate unity' or joint proprietorship of each of the principal land right holders
Jenmi
The Jenmi, consisting mainly of the Namboothiri Brahmins and Nair chieftains, were the highest level of the hierarchy, and a class of people given hereditary land grants (''janmam'') by the Naduvazhis or rulers. The rights conveyed by this janmam were not a freehold in the European sense, but an office of dignity. Owing to their ritual status as priests (Nambudiris), the jenmis could neither cultivate nor supervise the land but would instead provide a grant of kanam (a form of land tenure) to a kanakkaran (holder of tenure) in return for a fixed share of the crops produced. Typically, a Jenmi would have a large number of kanakkarar under him.
Verumpattakkaran
The Verumpattakkarar, generally Thiyya and Mappila classes, cultivated the land but were also its part-proprietors under the kanakkarar. These classes were given a Verum Pattam (Simple Lease) of the land that was typically valid for one year. According to custom, they were also entitled to one-third or an equal share of the net produce.
The net produce of the land was the share left over after providing for the cherujanmakkar or all the other birthright holders such as the village carpenter, the goldsmith and agricultural labourers who helped to gather, prepare and store produce. The system ensured that no Jenmi could evict tenants under him except for non-payment of rent. This land tenure system was generally referred to as the janmi-kana-maryada (customary practices).
Land reforms and Mappila outbreaks
During the Mysorean invasion of Malabar, the Jenmi took refuge in neighbouring states. The tenants and the Nair army men who could not escape were converted into Islam, as described in William Logan's Malabar Manual. Thus, Tipu Sultan's Kingdom of Mysore, having driven the Jenmi out of Malabar, reached accord with the Muslim Kanakkars. A new system of land revenue was introduced for the first time in the region's history with the government share fixed on the basis of actual produce from the land
However, within five years, the East India Company took over Malabar, defeating Tipu Sultan and ending his reign over the region. This allowed the Jenmi to return to their homes and regain the lands lost during the Mysorean invasion, with the help of the Company administration and its duly constituted courts. The Company introduced several Western juridical concepts, such as that of absolute property rights, into the existing legal system of Malabar. Up until then, such rights had been unknown in the region and as a result all land became the private property of the Jenmi. This legal recognition gave them the right to evict tenants, which was in turn enforced through the colonial civil courts] In the words of William Logan:
The [British] authorities, recognised the Janmi as absolute owner of his holding, and therefore free to take as big a share of the produce of the soil as he could get out of the classes beneath him... (Gradually) The British Courts backed up by Police and Magistrates and troops and big guns made the Janmi's independence complete. The hard terms thus imposed on the Kanakkaran had, of course, the effect of hardening the terms imposed by the Kanakkaran on those below him, the Verumpattakkar. The one-third of the net produce to which the Verumpattakkaran was customarily entitled, was more and more encroached upon as the terms imposed on the Kanakkaran became harder and harder. (Government of Madras. 1882, Vol. I: xvii, xxxi–ii)
As conditions worsened, rents rose to as high as 75–80% of net produce, leaving the Verumpattakkar cultivators largely "only straw". This caused great resentment among the Mappilas, who, in the words of Logan, were "labouring late and early to provide a sufficiency of food for their wives and children". Resentment among the Muslim tentant population due to being vulnerable to rack renting, insecure tenancy, and eviction at the hands of Hindu landlords (jenmi) sustained by British courts, the Mappillas responded in a series of outbreaks, in which they wanted their own death, 29 in number, between 1836 and 1919 were suppressed. These usually involved the violence against Nambudiri and Nair landlords. During the nineteenth century conversions to Islam heightened dramatically as the backward caste Cheruman serfs embraced Islam so that they got liberation from the caste system and support from fellow Muslims to protest against jenmi tyranny. The colonial government referred to the outbreaks as "Moplah outrages", but modern historians tend to treat them as religious outbreaks or expressions of agrarian discontent. The outbreak of 1921–22 sustained this tradition of violence in Malabar with one crucial difference: this time it had also a political ideology and a formal organization.
Khilafat Movement
Diwan Bahadur C. Gopalan Nair in his book, The Moplah Rebellion 1921,writes thus:
...it was not mere fanaticism, it was not agrarian trouble, it was not destitution, that worked on the minds of Ali Musaliar and his followers. The evidence conclusively shows that it was the influence of the Khilafat and Non-co-operation movements that drove them to their crime. It is this which distinguishes the present from all previous outbreaks. Their intention was, absurd though it may seem, to subvert the British Government and to substitute a Khilafat Government by force of arms.(Judgement in Case No. 7 of 1921 on the file of the Special Tribunal, Calicut.) ...
Nair noted Ali Musliyar rose to prominence at the instance of a Khilafat conference held in Karachi. Furthermore, Musliyar was not a native of Tirurangadi. He had only moved in 14 years earlier. So, according to Nair, there was not class revolt he was handling. It was a Khilafat edifice prepared and passed from distant Karachi, possibly controlled by spiritual leaders of Islam.
The Khilafat movement was introduced into the district of Malabar on 28 April 1920, by a Resolution at the Malabar District Conference, held at Manjeri, the headquarters of Ernad Taluk. On 30 March 1921, there was a meeting at which one Abdulla Kutti Musaliar of Vayakkad lectured on Khilafat, in Kizhakoth Amsom, Calicut Taluk. And at a second meeting held the next day at Pannur Mosque, there was some unpleasantness between the Mappilas on one side, and Nairs and Tiyyar, who resented the Khilafat meeting, on the other. The Mappilas mustered the strength to attack the place of worship belonging to the Hindu Adhigari of the village
Nature of attacks
The Malabar Rebellion witnessed many attacks on British officers in the region. The Madras High Court, which adjudicated in this matter, had passed judgements on each of the cases against the various Mappila rioters who were captured. The Madras High Court said on the matter,
It appears also that on the night of the 20th of August, at Nilambur 16 miles from Manjeri a police constable at Edavanna, were murdered and at Tiruvangadi in addition to Mr. Rowley and Lieutenant Johnston nine other persons were murdered. The police station at Manjeri was attacked on the night of the 21st; public officers at Manjeri on the 22nd. On the 24th of August Variyamkunnath Kunhahammad Haji who is described as the rebel leader arrived at Manjeri. All these incidents had occured when the respondent made the speech already referred to, and it was in such dangerous surroundings that he made it and the reference to Tiruvangadi in that speech has a consequence, a particular significance. Subsequent events are that on the 26th of August a retired police inspector was murdered at Anakayam near Manjeri by Variyamkunnath Kunhahammad Haji and his followers and on the 25th of August his head was paraded on a spear; and it was common ground that the respondent was at Manjeri from the morning of the 21st of August until the 30th of August.
The District Magistrate stated that reliable information had been received about 180 forced conversions of Hindus and the actual total may run into thousands.[36] Roland E. Miller estimates forced conversions as in the range of 200 and 2500 In the aftermath of this violence, the Suddhi Movement was created by the Arya Samaj. They converted over 2,000 Hindus who had been forcibly converted to Islam by the Mappilas. Sumit Sarkar in Modern India quotes an Arya Samaj source that claimed about 600 Hindus were killed and 2,500 forcibly converted during the rebellion. Variyankunnath Kunjahammad Haji claimed to have killed the alleged British agents and spies responsible for the forced conversion of Hindus to Mohammadanism and killing others. However, their leader, Swami Shraddhananda was stabbed on 23 December 1926 by an Islamist at his Ashram. Some newspapers reported that certain districts were 'empty of Hindus.'
Punishments of rebel leaders
The following were the various leaders of the movement, who were sentenced to death following the Malabar Rebellion:
Ali Musliyar, leader of the rebellion
Kunhi Kadir, Khilafat Secretary, Tanur
Variankunnath Kunhammad Haji
Kunhj Koya, Thangal, President of the Khilafat Committee, Malappuram
Koya Tangal of Kumaramputhur, Governor of a Khilafat principality
Chembrasseri Imbichi Koya Thangal, notorious for his alleged killing of 38 men by slashing their necks and throwing them into a well
Palakamthodi Avvocker Musaliar
Konnara Mohammed Koya Thangal\
In its magnitude and extent, it was an unprecedented popular upheaval, the likes of which has not been seen in Kerala before or since. While the Mappilas were in the vanguard of the movement and bore the brunt of the struggle, several non-Mappila leaders actively sympathized with the rebels' cause, giving the uprising the character of a national upheaval In 1971, the Government of Kerala officially recognized the active participants in the events as "freedom fighters".
K RAJARAM IRS 28825
Thanks Sir.M K Gandhi, Nehru were worse compared to even Jinnah.Hindu Drokis.Just read what M K Gandhi advised Hindus to do when the Mopla massacre of Hindus happened (it was distorted as freedom struggle) - M K G said to kill, maim and rape is in their religious teachings and we, Hindus, should understand it and offer no resistance.Just listen to Sai Deepak / Anand Ranganathan read from his writings to prove what a Hindu Droke he was.Pity is so many of us still vote for the INDI Alliance even though they pour venom on Hindu religion and deride Bharat. Kashmiri Pandits, the recent happening in West Bengal are all forgotten because it did not happen to us. But that day is not far off.S C castigated Nupur Sharma (when she asked ONLY for clubbing of the cases in one court) but others get ready bail and lecture to Hindus. Because our voice of muffled the S C hears ONLY the Left's voice and they are scared.Wakf Act verdict is still in abeyance. What is there to hear? Just say without proper documents of Title no property can be claimed by any one, including the Waqf. But we vote for the party which brought in the Waqf Act.We are our own worst enemies Sir. We will die preaching secularism even at the cost of destroying ourselves. I know there will be no support for this as we need to be seen to be " secular" while others ahve no such compulsion.N Sekar
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
I often used to feel that we would not have to undergo the hardships and go to a foreign country for a job, had it not been for the land reform system in Malabar, where I belonged. British as well as our own leaders are to be blamed, without mentioning specific names. Thanks, Mani
sundar iyer
Just watch full Video and understand true face of #Gandhi and how गांधी who was made #జాతిపిత_ మహాత్మా by British न #Congress pittoos contributed to #Hindus n #Bharat !? The same गांधी gave #GandhiDynasty and Nation_Hindus is facing the left over sufferings in the hands of #నెహ్రూगांधी Dynasty!!??
--
Inder Mohan Bhalla
Just watch full Video and understand true face of #Gandhi and how गांधी who was made #జాతిపిత_ మహాత్మా by British न #Congress pittoos contributed to #Hindus n #Bharat !? The same गांधी gave #GandhiDynasty and Nation_Hindus is facing the left over sufferings in the hands of #నెహ్రూगांधी Dynasty!!??
--
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
Mohandas Gandhi was called “Mahatma” (meaning “great-souled”) by the common people, who viewed him as India’s national and spiritual leader. The title was conferred by Rabindranath Tagore. He is considered the father of his country. He was born in India on October 2, 1869. As a young man, Gandhi studied law in Britain. Practicing briefly in India, he then traveled to British-controlled South Africa on business. Observing oppressive treatment of Indian immigrants there, he held his first campaign of passive resistance. Gandhi would later become very well known for this method of protest, called satyagraha (meaning “firmness in truth”). This movement is world-wonder appreciated and followed by leaders like Mandela etc.
Back in India as of 1915, Gandhi organized a movement of the people against the British government there: Britain had taken control of India during the 1700s and remained in power. After World War I (1914–18), Indian nationalists fought what would be a long and sometimes bitter struggle for political independence. While Gandhi’s protests took the form of nonviolent campaigns of civil disobedience, such as boycotts and fasts (hunger strikes), he was more than once arrested by the authorities for causing disorder, as his actions inspired more extreme measures on the part of his followers, whose protests took the form of rioting.
As a member and, later, the president of India’s chief political party, the Indian National Congress, Gandhi led a fight to rid the country of its rigid caste system, which organizes Indian society into distinct classes and groups. In Gandhi’s time, not only were there four varna, or social classes, but there was a fifth group of “untouchables” who ranked even below the lowest class of peasants and laborers. Improving the lot of the untouchables was of tantamount importance to the leader, who by this time had abandoned Western ways in favor of a life of simplicity.
Beginning in 1937 Gandhi became less active in government, giving up his official roles, but he continued to be regarded as a leader of the independence movement. During World War II (1939–45), he was arrested for demanding British withdrawal from the conflict. Released from prison in 1944, Gandhi was central to the postwar negotiations that in 1947 resulted in an independent India. A believer in the unity of humankind under one God, he remained tolerant to Christian and Muslim beliefs. Amidst an outbreak of violence between Hindus and Muslims, Gandhi was on a prayer vigil in New Delhi when a Hindu fanatic fatally shot him in 1948.
All the world leaders are accepted by many but criticized also by a few entrenching them into controversial status. Gandhi is not excluded from it. Gandhi followed the Santana dharma as advocated by the Vedas; and followed the Hindu religious principles; he was a good HINDU; he was entrenched in the words of Krishna in B G; he never encouraged the caste, creed or Race though true follower of dharma. In that respect, he was for India and all races and all kinds of people of India as a living being in Bharath. Thus, his actions tended the staunch HINUS to have a suspicion on his behaviour towards minorities. His freedom movements were also not a revolution as witnessed as wars on the earth; but acceding to the Govt but demanding the freedom; hence satyagraha terrorized the British. Sai Deepak and Anand Ranganathan accused Gandhi as a supporter of the minorities and against the HINDUS and aspired for leadership. The political and the diplomatic revolts from his own high-level clan, like Jinna and Nehru was unfortunate . Gandhi was a Dharmic but not a diplomat or a politician. He advocated to disband the congress which Nehru adopted it. Jinnah played a bad role behind. Congress used the minority and untouchables as vote bank and not the Gandhi. Had he wished for the leadership was there anyone who could have refused, if he were to become a president or PM? If Jihadi is to be condemned, then staunch Hinduism is also Jihadi movement only. A STHITHAPRAGNAN WAS GANDHI ADOPTING NEUTRALITY WHICH BECAME ANTI GANDHI AND ANTI PEOPLE. Jalian Wala bagh was British torture; kilafat was divide and rule of the British. Sai Deepak defended the Trivandrum Royal Family and Padmanabhaswamy temple treasures. There is a similar Sai Deepak who said only that wealth attracted the royal family and books are written. Opinions must be evidence based and not twisted interpretations. If Gandhi were so different why Modi adopts him? K RAJARAM IRS 29825
Inder Mohan Bhalla
indirapriyadarsini m
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CAL5XZoowZK1n8WhwWLN0_PG8L_DD6RsCsiF-PFPPdw0suF9Meg%40mail.gmail.com.
Markendeya Yeddanapudi
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CAK0m%3DTdSi2p8c4-%3D%3D_xOo%3D9%3DTz4cddgN9zpiEseBR%3D788CUBww%40mail.gmail.com.
Suryanarayana Ambadipudi
Suryanarayana Ambadipudi
Gandhiji was addrrssed " Father of The Nation " by Subhas Chandra Bose at INA congression from Singapore in 1942.So called Hindu chauvinists were busy that time to get cozy with British.Indrajit Ghose
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CAG7gAh8JSkt1fcqXd6ZkKr_r7TYBNiac0qDMKdSesxFeMJmC%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
Guha, Ramachandra (2014). Gandhi Before India. Penguin Books. p. 349. It is mentioned in this book that he may be a mhatma by Mr P. It is like Stalin or Modi being eulogised by close followers. But Title came only in 1915. KR
Suryanarayana Ambadipudi
Gandhiji was addrrssed " Father of The Nation " by Subhas Chandra Bose at INA congression from Singapore in 1942.So called Hindu chauvinists were busy that time to get cozy with British.Indrajit Ghose
On Fri, 29 Aug, 2025, 7:49 pm indirapriyadarsini m, <indirampr...@gmail.com> wrote:
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CAG7gAh8JSkt1fcqXd6ZkKr_r7TYBNiac0qDMKdSesxFeMJmC%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.
Surendra Varma
I vaguely remember that there was an RTI (Right to Information) request submitted by someone in U.P. to the Govt. seeking information on how Gandhi ji earned the distinction of being known as ‘The Father of the Nation’.
The response from the Govt was that there were no records in the government files on this subject.
Given that Sri ASN will never place a post here that cannot be verified, it is quite possible that Netaji did call Gandhi ji ‘Father of the Nation’ in his address but that was a personal compliment to Gandhi ji. Gandhi-bhaktas probably snowballed it.
I was about 2+years old when India became Independent, and history was not one of my subjects in my fields of study from KG to Ph.D. So, I have no credentials to comment on this subject with any degree of academic background and authority. But once upon a time in my 40s I watched a video that showed the file carrying the verdict to hang Bhagat Singh to death presented to Gandhi ji for his approval. He signed his approval.
Whenever I remember that video, my blood boils.
There was no AI then, so the video I watched was genuine, so I believe.
My limited knowledge of history is that, even after Pakistan was carved out of India, it was Gandhi ji who said that those Muslims who wanted to stay back in India were most welcome. This was the seed he had sown for India to never ever live in peace and face constant threats to its progress more from within, by Muslims, supported by Pakistan, and more from some other Islamic devils, namely, Turkey, Maldives, Turkmenistan, etc.
I see myself as a KG student when poking my nose in history here! Please read my post with sympathy for, not anger about, my ignorance.
Suren
Added well, SA Sir. Studied a bit of Netaji's INA while staying in Japan, where he had a vast following. Mani
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
Who would not agree with you on your thoughts? Thanks, Mani
Rajaram Krishnamurthy
Thank youM K Gandhi's shenanigans did not stop with asking Muslims to stay back only.The so called Mahatma brazenly overruled the Congess Working Committee's (or whatever it was called then) 13 to 0 vote in favor of Sardar Patel to be P M. He " persuaded " the Sardar to withdraw and the so called great Democrat Nehru, who was sulking, gleefully and greedily accepted the P M' s post.How an ungrateful Nehru, because he saw the Sardar as a threat, treated the latter is history.Patel's daughter died in penury while we all know how the Nehru clan looted our country.Problem is our distorted history and even text books have hidden or downplayed Netaji and Patel and others while singing one family's glory - sort of " Hail to the Chief".M.K G did not offer legal assistance to the great V O Chidambaram, as the latter was not his trusted, blind follower.Those who rever M K G should read the statement of the great patriot Nathuram Godse in the court, defending his killing of M K G. Not that I support the assasinstion.But the so called great Democrat Nehru banned it as it was too truthful for his comfort.M K G did not support Netaji, ostensibly because the former was not following his so called pacifist agenda and distorted ahimsa.Needless to say his asking the Hindu women to submit to the Mopla atrocities on them which I have already described was so abhorrent.Those who defended M K G should ask their conscience whether they would have asked their own women folk to submit themselves so.One has to read the letters Patel wrote to Nehru while serving as Bharat's Home Minister to see what a great P M he would have been but for the fraud that denied him what was legitimately his right, as he was the elected leader. He warned Nehru, as early as 1949 not to trust the Chinese but Nehru as usual, in his arrogance, did not heed the wise counsel but Bharat paid a heavy price, the clan still follows that path as shown by the still secret Agreement signed by them during the sad U P A Era. The party has not denied signing such an agreement but would not disclose its contents, for obvious reasonsStill there people in this country who tho think the present avatar of Congress as that of INC.Nehru's and Cingress' gift is,Article 370Waqf ActControl of Hindi temples and Hindu religious affairs onlyJust to name a few.We are a hypocrite Nation Sir, we will mouth platitudes so we can bask in secular glory. Forget Kashmir, forget the happenings in W Bengal, forget the iunrestricted influx of foreigners, forget the rampant conversions.Hail to the one and only family.N Sekar