“Divide and destroy” & “Divide and rule” are the prime weapons of Brahmanism. Racially Brahmins were never ever good in any skilled work without cheating & exploiting in the name of God and religion. They renamed others great work in their favor & in their name to promote their race. Brahmanism is nothing but con/knave/cunning people of every linguistic clans of India worked as organized those had promoted Vedic Purusha sukta certifying themselves as Brahmins i.e. number one social elites of caste based social system and preserved the King profession and traders profession for their created social class Kshatriyas and Vaishyas declining these professions to poor root natives. They are only the masters of cheating and all kind of social evils; altogether a race of crooks. They promoted illiteracy, ignorance, deceptions, delusions, blind beliefs, disharmony and discrimination etc. etc. to their followers so that they can be victimized ever and ever. They are actually stupid criminals those acts as parasites in the Indian societies and lives as jackal/fox and feed themselves by cheating to their followers in the name of religion & God. These days they know their demerits its the reason why they started to adopt those professions, by which they can control their followers and others. They have been trapped the governance in its all perspectives. They have been trapped almost more than 50% positions in executives, legislative and judiciary including fourth pillar of democracy i.e. mainstream Medias. They have been privileged many so called uplifted Shudras certifying them as Kshatriya those are populating positions in Indian Army so that they can be used as their force. No Kings or Kings descendants are there those populates our Army as Kings/Kshatriyas. Kshatriya are only Kings not soldiers. They started to upper caste hunger uplifted Shudras as Kshatriya so that they can be used as their slaved armed force. You can find even people those are so poor that they even don’t get three times meals in a day and says themselves as Kshatriya. Is a King or descent of a King had that so poor circumstances? How many Kings and their family members are there in India? Social so called Kshatriya proud themselves as Kshatriya though they don’t have no Kshetra i.e. land or Kingdoms and even any wealth without the surnames of Kshatriyas.
In many civilization classes are there i.e. rich and poor classes, but you can’t find any Varna system/Castes anywhere in the world except India. Brahmins stabilized or frozen the professions as Varna class that declined to others and even to each other Varnas. If you are poor then there is possibility of being rich but crook Brahmins frozen the professional classes naming it as varnas/castes and banned their preferred professions to others and made it hereditary to the racial Varnas with surnames. Stupid Brhmin’s son becomes “Pandit” with his birth. He got certificate of Pandit from his mother’s womb. His mother’s womb is his university of knowledge that gives certificate of Pandit/Scholar without any studies and examinations. Brahmin’s programmed Purusha Shukta with that evil intentions, that made Priest, King and traders profession stabilized or frozen so that poor classes can’t be the competitor to them. The great mass of Buddhist population even got certified as Shudra those don’t had priest, King and traders profession at the time of Purusha shukta implementation to different linguistic clans after 185BC. They banned education, right to equality, property, right to dignity, equal opportunity, fair life, fair and equal livelihood & justice etc. to Shudras by enforcing Brahmin’s code of Manusmriti; so that they can make them slaves for ever for which they can’t be rebellion to them in any circumstances and can’t be problem to their racial hegemony and organized benefits.
There is no definition of Hinduism in our any religious scriptures and even in our any laws though Article 25 (2)(b) of constitution and section 2 of Hindu marriage Act. 1955 recognize who are Hindus.
India’s Constitution does not give a definition of the term Hindu, but it does define to whom the Hindu Law applies. It has to do this because in spite of its pretence to secularism, the Indian Constitution allows Muslims, Christians and Parsis a separate Personal Law. In a way, this separate treatment of different communities merely continues the communal autonomy of castes and sects accepted in pre-modern Hindu states, but it exposes the credibility deficit of Indian secularism. At any rate, the situation is that Personal Law is divided on the basis of religion, and that one of the legal subsystems is called Hindu Law.
Article 25 (2)(b) of the Constitution stipulates that the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jain or Buddhist religion. The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 goes in greater detail to define this legal Hindu, by stipulating in Section 2 that the Act applies:
Section 2 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
2 Application of Act.
(1) This Act applies
(a) to any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj,
(b) to any person who is a Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion, and
(c) to any other person domiciled in the territories to which this Act extends who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion, unless it is proved that any such person would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by any custom or usage as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealt with herein if this Act had not been passed.
Explanation. The following persons are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion, as the case may be:
(a) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, both of whose parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion;
(b) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, one of whose parents is a Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion and who is brought up as a member of the tribe, community, group or family to which such parent belongs or belonged; and
(c) any person who is a convert or re-convert to the Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh religion.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the members of any Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of clause (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, otherwise directs.
(3) The expression Hindu in any portion of this Act shall be construed as if it included a person who, though not a Hindu by religion, is, nevertheless, a person to whom this Act applies by virtue of the provisions contained in this section. State Amendment Pondicherry: In section 2, insert the following sub-section:(2A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the Renoncants of the Union territory of Pondicherry . [ Vide Regn. 7 of 1963, sec. 2 and Sch. (w.e.f. 1-10-1963).]
This definition of the legal Hindu, though explicitly not equating him with the Hindu by religion, is exactly coterminous with the original Islamic use of the term Hindu: all Indian Pagans are legally Hindus. The Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs are explicitly included in the Hindus by law but separated from the Hindus by religion: at this point, the law follows the usage established by Western scholars, contrary to the original usage.
Note that the changes in Hindu Law imposed by an Act of Parliament (on top of the very existence of separate Hindu and Muslim Law regimes) constitute a further measure of communal inequality. The secular government would not dare to touch the other religion-based law systems, as has repeatedly been shown in the past decades regarding items of Christian and Muslim Personal Law. An interference in Hindu Law by a national legislative body only makes sense in an avowedly Hindu state; in a sense, therefore, the Hindu Marriage Act constitutes an admission by Jawaharlal Nehru that ultimately India is a Hindu state.
India was a demography of many kingdoms till unified as a federal Nation as India. It had originated many faiths and many philosophies. Ajivika, Chauvaka, Buddhism, Jainism were the major opposer of Brahmanism/Vedism/Polytheist idolism priesthood for pagan deities with Vedic pursha shukta philosophy. Brahmanism was the major evil faith ever in this land but politicians of federal nations were major followers of Brahmanism. They put all faiths originated in this land in a single umbrella named “Hindu” which is not only stupidity but also it shows height of their nonsense and idiocy with foolishness. It was crookedly and intentionally made to promote vedic purusha shukta in our federal governance to promote Vedism. Its the reason why Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya represented as General caste and Shudra as OBC and Atishudra as Sc & ST. Being only 14% of the Indian population as General caste enjoy 50.5% of reservation i.e. 50.5% seats in government reserved for general category and rest for lower caste origin i.e. 86% of Indian population enjoy only 49.5% as reserved for other non-General category.
See these Maps you can’t find any single place named “Bharat”
More than 99.99% Muslims of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh doesn’t know about their origin. Most of them thinks they are belongs to out of their countries because Islam is a foreign religion; where truth is more than 97% of Muslims of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are root natives to their own land and their linguistic race; where only 3% or even less than even 3% Muslims are from other origins, but not from Arabic origin. Islamic Invaders those invaded India like Persians, Afghans and Turko-mongols once upon a time had practicing some other faiths before conversion to Islam and Invading to Indian Demography. Islamic invasion majorly happened in 700AD its because Prophet Muhammad born in 570AD and reveled his faith Islam in his forties i.e. in 609/610AD and got died in 632AD, so after 610AD his followers embraced the Islam and propagated to other land. When Islam came to our Indian demography in that time Brahmanism was the major religion, because Buddhism and other major faiths like Ajivika, Charuvaka, Lokayata etc. etc. had been destroyed by Vedic promoters after 185 BC and after wards. Many kingdoms had been converted to Vedic caste systems its the reason why major population from different linguistic Kingdoms had converted to Shudra castes those had been exploited by Vedic upper castes due to their Brahmin’s code of Manusmriti. When Islam came to Indian demography they forcefully converted many root natives to Islam irrespective what they were practicing in that time. When Shudra got a better faith than even Vedism/Brahmanism many lower castes even converted themselves in to Islam; it does not mean Brahmans, Viashyas and Kshatriyas had not converted in that time. Islamic Invaders amalgamated to root natives of India and lost their origin identity but their embraced art of living style i.e. Islam became a major part of Indian race. Here everybody must remember that the founder of Islam Prophet Muhammad was a non Muslim or polytheist believer till his forties i.e. he lived as a non Muslim for 40 years and rest 22 years as Muslim. Anybody can study what he did in his 40 years and rest 22 years. His non-Muslim life was more better than his rest 22 years life as he lived as an identity of violence and sins. When his faith came to India our root natives embraced the faith only due to Vedic persecution of caste system by upper castes. So the Muslims we see in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh majorly our root natives those had converted to Islam due to faiths persecutions. Muslims of different states are only the root natives of that State or linguistic race i.e. Muslims seen in Gujarat are belongs to Gujarati linguistic clans those had converted to Islam after 700AD. Like this the Muslims seen in our different states are originally belongs to that States or linguistic race excluding interstates migrations. Andra Muslims are from Telugu linguist clans, Maharashtra Muslims are belongs to Marathi linguist clan, so on and so forth. They changed their mother tongues as Urdu due to maintaining uniformity of community in Indian Muslims. Urdu is an Indian language whose 99% verbs are from Nagari language. Muslims of different States of India were root natives to their land its the reason why they could not leave their root native land even after partition its because they didn’t have any relatives out of their root natives, but evil dirty politicians forced them to leave their own land due to their dirty political hegemony. India got divided by few politicians according to their selfish desires on the basis of major religions Hindu and Muslim for their political mileage, organized benefits and racial hegemony. The consents of the root natives had not taken in to considerations or had their plebiscites for division. Few hegemonic crazy politicians decided what will be the name of our country, National anthem and song etc. etc. according to their favor; Is not it political gundaism in the democracy by so called self claimed politicians of majority?
(Download this video from YouTube because some knaves criminals trying to stop promoting & spreading the truth of this video. They banned the previous video calming copyright infringement. lol If Osho had said it for social reformation and had exposed the truths about Brahmins then why it should be banned? Thousands and thousands of Osho videos are published on YouTube without the Osho international they are not violating copyright infringement but only this video violates copyright infringement which they ban often. lol If preliminarily they had intention to ban this video, then we would not have this video on public domain. The ban would have been due to suppression by Vedic promoters/Brahmins or by their undue influences or by bribe to some stupid & Idiots Osho International employees those do not want to promote this video. Stupids, idiots and criminals resides everywhere in controlling positions those do not wants to be exposed )
These are only Mental disorders nothing else.