Reply to Tehseen Poonawalla's Open Letter to Prime Minister

Dear Tehseen,

Here is my open answer to your open letter to respected PM, Narendra Modi. Mr. Tehseen, I agree that Hunduism doesn’t prohibit from eating meat, but it prohibits from eating beef (Cow’s meat), like Islam prohibits eating pork (Pig’s meat). Prohibition of eating Cow’s meat has cultural and societal reasons. I will come to this later.

You mentioned that Dadri incident took place because Muslim family consumed beef. But, as per media reports, this reason was not cited in the report sent to Central govt. by the UP govt. If the media reports are to be believed, aren’t you spreading lies to fan communal atmosphere in the country through this open letter, and shouldn’t you be booked? You also said that RSS/BJP creating vegetarians and non-vegetarians hierarchy. Your statement/conclusion is right if you think that non-vegetarian food contains only beef (Cow’s meat). However, this is not the reality. No RSS and BJP leader ever said all non-vegetarian foods need to be banned, when these organisations may have many people who eat non-vegetarian food. Unless you provide an evidence to prove your statement/conclusion, you are nothing but a scare monger. 

Mr. Tehseen, you talked about secular fabric of the country, do you remember secular fabric only when a victim is minority? Where was your secularism, when Tuktuki, a dalit Hindu girl, was kidnapped and raped by goons belonging to minority community? Where was your concern for secular fabric, when goons brutally killed a Temple priest in UP? Why did you keep quiet when a police officer was killed for stopping a vehicle, which was smuggling Cows? Have you forgotten your secularism when WB govt. banned Durga puja in Moradabad district, at the behest Muslims? Have you become so secular that crimes committed by minorities have become secular? Did secularism teach you to outrage selectively? I can give many such instances where secular and illiberal brigades were quiet on crimes where minorities involved. Such people don’t have moral authority to question others.

Now let me come to eating cow meat. You mentioned few translations from Vedas, Mahabharata and Manu smriti. First of all your translation is immature and childish. It also displays that you don’t have any knowledge about Vedas, Mahabharata and Smriti, and you have taken these translations straight from internet without applying your mind. For example I studied two verses from Rig Veda you used in your argument that Indra and Agni eat meat. Nowhere in Veda it is said that eating cow meat is ok. Below is the full verse from Rig Veda 6/17/1 along with translation:

In the above verse there is no mention of cow leave alone Indra eating cow meat.  The real meaning as follows:

“O mighty and armed with weapon Indra, the one who is like sun for clouds, destroy all enemies. O Bold one, with the worship of cow, kill those deserved to be killed and drink juice of soma”.  

Below is the full verse from Rig Veda 10/85/13 along with translation:

The mantra states that in winter, the rays of sun get weakened and then get strong again in spring. The word used for sun-rays in ‘Go’ which also means cow and hence the mantra can also be translated by making ‘cow’ and not ‘sun-rays’ as the subject. The word used for ‘weakened’ is ‘Hanyate’ which can also mean killing. But if that be so, why would the mantra go further and state in next line (which is deliberately not translated) that in spring, they start regaining their original form. How can a cow killed in winter regain its health in spring? This amply proves how ignorant and biased you are on Vedas.

These wrongly translated verses are freely available on the internet and you choose to believe without actually verifying the original text being mythology student. Mr. Tehaseen, does mythology mean presenting wrong facts to the public? If you don’t understand the complicated Vedas, please for god sake don’t mislead people. If you do that what is the difference between you and Zakir Naik?

Mr. Tehseen, you also mentioned about use of cow flesh and fat as medicine in Charaka Samhita. I would like to mention other benefits of cow as mentioned by Vagbhat in his ‘Ashtanga Hradaya’. He talks about use of cow’s urine and ghee in Ayurveda medicine. Cow is also life line of rural economy, where it’s milk is used as major income, while dung and urine are used for manure and bio-gas. I hope u understand the importance, and hence ban on cow slaughter in 20+ states of the country. That is why the outrage in rural areas of UP where the secular government is not taking any action against the thieves in spite of repeated complaint by the local people.

You mentioned about a Muslim boy saving a drowning cow. I would like to give an instance where a RSS people serving flood affected Muslims by providing relief materials. Also, Muslims were allowed to do Namaj in a hall where Ganesh festival was celebrated. You mentioned ‘Garba’. Garba is a religious and social gathering of Hindus. Hindu organisations have their right whom to allow and whom not allow to Garba. If you want to involve in Garba, please convert yourself to Hinduism and seek entry.

 Mr. Tehseen, you mentioned PM tweeting about the unfortunate death of Asha Bhosle’s son, but conveniently you avoided mentioning that Asha Bhosle had tweeted to PM regarding her inability to attend a function which she agreed by citing her son’s death. Do you think PM should have kept quiet even after receiving her personal tweet?  

Mr. Tehseen, you RSS/BJP/Modi haters have always been selective in reporting the crimes. When the victim belongs to minority community, you guys outrage and target RSS/BJP/Modi. When victim belongs to majority community you guys don’t even whisper. What credibility do you have to question the PM about his silence on Dadri incidence? You guys are threat to secularism of the country because of your pseudo-secular behaviour. 

Murti Puja or Idol Worship in Hinduism

There is a general misconception created by non-Hindus regarding Idol worship (Murti Puja) in Hinduism.

The most common verses used by the detractors of Idol worship are:

1. "Andhatama pravishanti ye asambhuti mupaste" [Yajurveda 40:9]

The twisted explanation of this verse, which they give is as follows :

"They enter darkness, those who worship the natural elements" (Air, Water, Fire, etc.). "They sink deeper in darkness, those who worship sambhuti."

2. "Na tasya pratima asti"
There is no likeness of Him.
[Svetasvatara Upanishad; chapter 4:19]

3. "Na samdrse tisthati rupam asya, na caksusa pasyati kas canainam."
His form is not to be seen; no one sees Him with the eye.
[Svetasvatara Upanishad; chapter 4:20]

 

4. "na tasya pratima asti"
There is no image of Him.
[Yajurveda; chapter 32:3]

 

5. "shudhama poapvidham"
He is bodyless and pure.
[Yajurveda; chapter 40:8]

 Let’s now discuss the above verses in detail. Yajurveda is one of the 4 Vedas in Hinduism. There two parts in Yejurveda:  Shukla Yejurveda and Krishna Yejurveda. Shukla Yejurveda consists of Isha(vasya) Upanishad and Brhaharadanyaka Upanishad. Isha(vasya) Upanishad forms the 40^th chapter of the shukla Yejurveda. The above quoted verse (1) is 9^th verse of the shukla Yejurveda chapter 40 and which is incomplete unless the following two verses are considered to make the complete meaning. So, verses 9 -11 of 40^th chapter of shulka Yejurveda are from Isha(vasya) Upanishad’s verses 12 – 14.   

The Rishi of Isha(vasya) Upanishad is Svayambhuva Manu. When he was in the danger of attack from some demons, who were intent to destroy him and as well the whole world, he praised the BHAGAVAN with these verses. Isha(vasya) Upanishad has 18 verses, in which verses 1 – 8 talk about the tenets and supremacy of the BHAGAVAN along with how to worship Him. Verses 9 – 14 talk about wrong way of worship, while remaining verses (15-18) talk about the realisation of the BHAGAVAN.  

Now coming to the above quoted verse (1), the complete sequence of verses from 12 – 14 is given below with actual translation.

Verse 12:

 andham tamah pravisanti ye'sambhutimupasate

tato bhuya iva te tamo ya u sambhutyam ratah -- 12

andham tamah = relentless, blinding darkness; pravisanti = enter into, obtain; ye = those who; asambhutim = `srstikarta na' = ``not Creator,'' having failed to grasp BHAGAVAN as the Creator; upasate = worship, meditate upon; tatah = and then, than that; bhuyah = greater; iva = undoubtedly; te = they, those who; tamah = darkness; ya = who; u = but; sambhutyam = as Creator only; ratah = engaged in, devoted to.

Those who worship [BHAGAVAN] with the understanding that He is not the Creator, enter dense, unrelenting darkness; to a greater darkness than that go they, who merely think of Him as the Creator alone [but not as the Sustainer or Destroyer].

Verse 13:

anyadevahuh sambhavadanyadahurasambhavat  

 iti susruma dhiranam ye nastadvicacaksire   

anyat = the other, different; eva = only; ahuh = they (the learned) say; sambhavat = by correct understanding as Creator; asambhavat = by correct understanding as Destroyer; iti = thus; susrumah = we have heard; dhiranam = dhimatam = persons of sound understanding; ye = who; nah = us; tad = that; vicacaksire = vyacacaksire = explained, taught.

We have heard from the wise, who explained to us that the result of having knowledge of Him as Creator is different from the result of knowing Him as the Destroyer.

Verse 14:

sambhutim ca vinasam ca yastadvedobhayam saha

 vinasena mrtyum tirtva sambhutya'mrtamasnute

sambhutim = knowledge of BHAGAVAN as Creator; vinasam = knowledge of Him as Destroyer; ca = and (in conjunction with); yah = who; tad = that; veda = knows; ubhayam = both; saha = together, at the same time; vinasena = by means of knowing Him as Destroyer; mrtyum = death (and other undesirables such as suffering and ignorance); tirtva = having overcome, crossed over; sambhutya = by means of knowing Him as Creator; amrtam = moksa characterized by enjoyment; asnute = obtains.

One who knows BHAGAVAN as Creator, and also as the Destroyer, for him, by knowledge of Him as Destroyer, he overcomes death/suffering/ignorance, and by knowing Him as Creator, he obtains mukti.

Therefore, from the complete translation of the verses 12 – 14 from Isha(vasya) Upanishad shows that no where these verses say Idol worship leads to blinding darkness. One might argue that how does ‘asambhutim’ mean destroyer? It is very clear from Verse 14 where vinasam is used in stead of asambhutim (‘sambhutim ca vinasam ca’). Therefore, those who do not know the vedic (etymological) meaning of the Sanskrit words and depend only on the dictionary meaning can only form wrong and incomplete translation to suit their purpose. 

Let us now look at the above quoted verse (5) from 8^th verse of Yejurveda chapter 40. The complete verse and its translation is given below:

sa paryagacchukramakayamavranamasnaviram suddhamapapaviddham

kavirmanisi  paribhuh svayambhuryathatathyato'rthan vyadadhacchasvatibhyah
samabhyah -- 8

sa = he (the qualified seeker who understands as previously indicated); paryagat = (having) attained; sukram = sokarahitam = free from sorrow; akayam = liñgasariravarjitam = lacking a subtle body; avranam = complete, not suffering from limitations of time, space or capacity; asnaviram = lacking a physical body (literally: lacking sinews, lacking muscles; lacking a body of the kind that includes sinews and other physical features); suddham = being the source of all purity, the purifier; apapaviddham = untouched by sin; kavih = one knowing all, omniscient; manisi = one who controls the minds of all; paribhuh = omnipresent and the controller of all, ``the best there is''; svayambhuh = self-sustaining, lacking any dependence on any other; yathatathyatatah = having the quality of yatha tatha or ``as is,'' i.e., ``in reality,'' ``truly and properly,'' as distinguished from ``deceitfully,'' ``in a dream or illusion,'' &c.; arthan = entities, objects; vyadadhat = created, ordained; sasvatibhyah = eternally, since time immemorial; samabhyah = years, ages.

He (the one who knows as previously described in previous verse) attains the BHAGAVAN who is completely free from sorrow, lacking the subtle body (linga sharira), and the gross body (sthula shariara that is the cause of physical suffering), but He (BHAGAVAN) is pure and untouched by sin. That omniscient self-sustaining BHAGAVAN, the controller of all minds, has eternally created all entities (in an infinitude of cycles of Creation) in reality.

The gist of above verse is that the BHAGAVAN does not have a form with deficiencies such as sorrow, limitations of time, space or capacity. But He has a pure body without any sin, and He is omniscient, self-sustaining, omnipresent and controls all.  

Now let me go the above quoted verses 2 and 3 (quote 4 is same as 2). These two verses come from Svetasvatara Upanishad, which is part of Krishna Yajurveda. Let me start with a summary of svetasvatara Upanishad. In the 1^st chapter, the seekers who know the Vedas started discussing among themselves questions such as who is that Brahman - the root cause of this world, from what have we been born, due to what we live, under whose command we undergo pain and pleasure and from what set rules are we being governed?

They discovered the creative power, belonging to the Lord Himself or Brahman was the root cause for the universe and concluded that this Brahman has to be known and beyond which there is nothing to be known.

The 2^nd chapter dealt with the means of knowing Brahman It started with a prayer to the Sun Bhagavan and elaborated on the practice of yoga to have the vision of Bhagavan. It was pointed out that the yogi, who realizes the truth of Atman, becomes one with the non-dual Atman and attains the goal and is free from grief. This chapter concluded with an appeal to adore this Self-luminous Lord who pervades the whole world.

The 3^rd and subsequent chapters of this Upanishad deal with the nature and different aspects of the Lord, prayers and eulogies to Him and the state of a seeker on knowing Him. Therefore, the quoted verses (2 and 3) eulogise Bhagavan. The complete verses along with the meaning are given below.

 

Verse -4.19 (svetasvatara Upanishad)

 Nainamurdhvam na tiryancham na madhye parijagrabhat

 Na tasya pratima asti yasya nama mahad yashah - 19

 Urdhvam – above tiryancham – across madhye – in the middle enam – Him na parijagrabhat – no one can grasp. Yasya – whose nama – name mahad yashah – is great glory tasya pratima na asti – there is none equal to him

No one can grasp Him above or across or in the middle. There is none equal to Him whose name is great glory.

Since this verse is about praising Bhagavan, the word ‘pratima’ should be translated as equal or likeness. This word does not refer to image as it goes against the wish of the seeker i.e praising/eulogising Bhagavan.  

Verse - 4.20 (Svetasvatara Upanishad)

Na samdrashe tishtati rupam asya na chakshusha pashyati kashchanainam/

Hrada hradisyam manasa ya enamevam viduramrataste bhavanti - 20

Asya – His rupam – form samdrashe – in the field of vision na tishtati – does not stand. Enam – Him chakshusha – with the eye kashchana – anaybody na pashyati – does not see. Ye – who enam – Him hrada manasa – by the heart and mind (i.e. through intuition) evam hradisyam – as thus seated in the heart vedhuh – realise te – they amruta – immortal (moksha) bhavanti – become.

 

His form does not stand in the range of the senses. No one perceives Him with the eye. Those who know Him through the intuition as thus seated in their heart become immortal.

From the translation of the first part of the first line the above clearly emphasise the all pervading nature of Bhagavan and His omnipotence unlike the twisted meaning given to it by the detractors. Therefore, Bhagavan can take any form and size which cannot be perceived by human beings.

 

Now, I would request those who comment about Idol worship by presenting incomplete meaning to read the Veda, Upanishad, Gita and Purana properly before making such comment. Otherwise, this will only shows their ignorance and place for them is delusion or sorrow according to Veda. Also, I challenge them to prove they don’t worship/respect any image, emblem of their religion.          

Rebuttal to 'Modi's Gujarat model: Much ado about nothing'

Mr. Tehseen Poonawalla is a Congress person, so one can expect criticism against Modi/BJP in his blog. But he made some factual error in his comparative analysis. First of all he should have made very clear where did he take his data from? What is the basis of selecting the sates in his comparison study? Even I have done the similar comparison study. My study is based on the latest data taken from the planning commission website, so nobody can point finger at me of fudging the data. I considered the data between FY02 and FY12, since longer period of data analysis provides the better overview of economic activities.

Let me start with per capita income. If one considers the per capita income on absolute term as of FY12 first and second place is occupied by Delhi and Goa. However, I selected six states based on industrialisation, size, SGDP, politics etc. Those states are Andra Pradesh, Haryana, Gujarat, Maharshtra, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Among these states Maharshtra (Rs.64951) and Haryana (Rs.62927) comes 1^st and 2^nd respectively while Gujarat (Rs.57508) comes 3^rd on per capita income as on FY12. When I closely looked at the growth of per capita income between FY02 and FY12, Gujarat grew by 3.2 times, while Maharshtra and Haryana grew by 2.9 and 2.5 times respectively from their FY02 per capita income. At the same time national per capita income grew by just 2.3 times from its FY02 value. Therefore, I can confidently say that author hasn’t done his per capita income comparison study properly.

Now, coming to the state GDP growth rate comparison, author again didn’t make clear which GDP growth data he is using in his study. There are two GDP growth data one is based constant price and another is based current price. Based on constant price GDP growth data, Gujarat growth rate for the period between FY02 and FY12 is 10.1%, which is maximum growth rates out of the for the six states selected. While the same for Maharshtra, Haryana, AP, TN, Kerala and India is 8.85%, 8.94%, 7.83%, 7.76%, 7.98% and 7.71% respectively. Therefore, again the author is incorrect in his analysis.

With regard to state debt, author is not consistent in his selection of states for comparison. This was least expected from one who is analysing the economic parameters. The better way of analysing state debt is considering the debt as a percentage of GDP. On absolute debt value one can’t make any conclusion on health of state’s economy. Therefore, when I had a closer look at the state’s debt as a percentage of GDP for the above six states Haryana has the lowest debt with 17.06% while other states have 20.51%, 25.84%, 18.14%, 19.89%, 28.37% respectively for AP, Gujarat, Maharashtra, TN and Kerala. I also studied the % drop in state debt between FY02 and FY12. Gujarat showed highest drop in debt with 12.94% while the same for other states is 10.53%, 10%, 10.61%, 6.36% and 9.53% respectively for AP, Haryana, Maharashtra, TN and Kerala. A study of fiscal deficit also showed that Gujarat performed better than the other states with 2.16% of GDP. Below table gives the overview of economic parameters for six states considered in the comparison study.

Now coming to the 2002 riot, author should keep in mind that no court so far held Modi guilty of anything, rather SC appointed SIT given clean chit in its report submitted to the court. Therefore, I would rather believe in the SC monitored agency and wait for the court verdict than the opinion of a Congress person/supporter. Similarly, in case of fake encounter cases, why Congress government is objecting the court’s decision to set up SIT to investigate all the fake encounters took place in the country? Why is this double standard? Congress proclaims to be secular why its leaders always defend the alleged terrorists and belittle country’s intelligence agency? 

Response to: ‘Am I anti Hindu?’

Dear Digvijaya Singh,

I read your blog on ‘I am I anti Hindu?’ I out rightly appreciate for clarifying that you are a practising Hindu. However, why did you choose to clarify your faith now? If Sanghis or paid professional’s propaganda is the reason, then you shouldn’t have waited so long to clarify your position.

Mr. Singh, you begin by saying you are the most abused person on social media. I tend to disagree with your claim and also no person in public life has abused you so far. On the contrary you and your party abuse your political opponents openly by calling rat, monkey, snake etc. Your follower Amaresh Misra calls for murder and rape on social media and comes on TV to defend his call. I haven’t seen any of such acts by Sanghis or paid professional propagandists.  

Dear Mr. Singh, I am also a practising Hindu and was given Diksha by Shankaracharya Math in Coastal Karnataka. As I learnt from Sanatan Dharma, it becomes my duty to protect my faith when my faith is denigrated and false propaganda is spread. You claim yourself to be given Diksha by His Holiness Jagadguru Shankaracharya of Dwarka, that I respect, but you go on to make comments about Hindu/saffron terror after every bomb blast. Aren’t you disrespecting the saffron cloth worn by great Jagadguru Shankaracharya of Dwarka and other maths? Being a Hindu does Sanatan Dharma teach you to make such irresponsible and disrespecting comments?

You said that as a good practising Hindu it is your duty to stand up to all the falsehood the Sanghis and their paid professionals are spreading against Muslims Christians and other Minority Groups. Mr. Singh, I come from coastal Karnataka where literatures and books on denigrating Hindu Gods and Goddesses are spread by certain minority group. Why did you fail to stand up to such false propaganda against Hindus? I am sure you are aware of Dr. Zakir Naik, who spreads false claims and propaganda against Hinduism through peace conference and TV discourses. You turned blind eye to his blatant propaganda, not only that you came to his TV programme to appreciate him. Why didn’t you stand up to Dr. Zakir Naik’s false propaganda against Hinduism? You proclaim yourself as a good practising Hindu, but you only stand up to the falsehood spread against Muslims, Christians and other Minority group. Why didn’t you stand up to the falsehood spread against Hindus by certain minority groups? As a good practising Hindu, I don’t think you should be having such a double standard. Because, Sanatan Dharma teaches Hindus to stand up to any falsehood against anyone/any community/any group.

Mr. Singh, you make derogatory comments against Lord Ram and claim yourself to be a good practising Hindu, isn’t it contradictory? As a Hindu I am really appalled to see such a comment from a responsible public person. Hindus have seen such double standards from you and your party, and there is a silent disquiet among Hindus. It is this disquiet making you to clarify your position and trying to project Hinduism and Hindutva are different. However, there is no difference between the two.  

Rebuttal to 'The Moral Ambivalence'

Mr. Sanjay Jha’s writing on moral ambivalence coming from a person who belongs to a party which doesn’t have morality at all. He starts the article with narratives on Mrs. India Gandhi. But conveniently forgets that same Gandhi imposed emergency in the country and put thousands of people behind bar. He conveniently forgets to talk about Mrs. Gandhi’s decision to hold election in Assam after horrific the killings of innocent Muslims in Nielle under centre’s watch in spite of the opposition from the election commission. Again he forgets to add in that Mrs. Gandhi famously told while campaigning in north eastern state that state will be run as per Bible. Look at Mr. Jha’s moral ambivalence here, he proudly states that allegation on Mrs. Gandhi regarding misuse of the official machinery was cleared by SC, but at the same breath he wants to pronounce Mr. Modi guilty in spite of not a single court in the country found him guilty even after 11 long years of investigation. I want to ask Mr. Jha, did Mrs. Gandhi resign based on moral ground or Allahabad HC’s judgement? If it was based on the court judgement, which court pronounced Mr. Modi guilty of any wrong doing? Does country has separate legal system for Mr. Modi, where he is presumed to be guilty until proven guilty in a court of law? What kind moral ambivalence Mr. Jha is talking about?

I am really baffled by the argument that since riot took place under Mr. Modi’s watch; he is not eligible to talk about the good governance. If I extend the same argument even Congress CMs like Tarun Gogoi, Ghelot and Pratviraj Chavan are not eligible to talk about the Good Governance. However, BJP ruled states have not seen a single riot after 2002, which is contrary to the Congress ruled states. If I take pre 2002, horrific killings of minorities took place under Congress’s watch whether it is 1984 anti-Sikh riot, 1989 Bhagalpur riot, 1983 & 2012 Assam riots etc. This list is endless and these riots show that the Congress pathetically failed protect the citizens especially minorities. Unlike other riots, 2002 Gujarat riot has been investigated thoroughly by SC appointed SIT, which gave clean chit to Mr. Modi. By rejecting it and questioning the integrity of the SIT, Mr. Jha displaying his disrespect to institution and his way is the highway. In addition Congress even failed take any action against their leaders involved in the any of the riots and continuously disrupting the legal process.  

Now coming to Rambo act, BJP spokesperson has rightly said it is rather good to be a Rambo than to be a Dumbo and Scambo. If 15000 was not the right number of pilgrims rescued by the Gujarat government, why didn’t Mr. Jha present the right number in his article? The fact is even UK state didn’t know how many pilgrims were there, how many died, how many are missing and how many are buried? Funny thing is Congress party’s ‘YUVA RAJ’ went to UK in spite of HM’s suggestion of not to allow VIP’s visit. Look how bad omen this ‘YUVA RAJ’ is, the day he visited, IAF aircraft crashed, which resulted in loss of life. Also, ITBP had to evacuate their jawans from their guest house to provide security the ‘YUVA RAJ’. Is this the kind of morality and ethics Mr. Jha is talking about?   

Mr. Jha’s observation on Mr. Modi’s idea on ‘less government and more governance’ is totally misunderstood. I would advise him to listen to the speech given by Mr. Modi in the ‘Think India’ discussion conducted by TV18. Mr. Modi clearly mentioned that he didn’t mean ‘Less Government’ as reducing the size of the government, instead having right size of government at right place/department. Mr. Modi explained this with an example as well. But people like Mr. Jha don’t get these ideas because of their intellectual bankruptcy.  

Now coming to malnutrition, farmer suicides, poverty ratios, woeful education levels, and other social and human development indicators. Mr. Jha is presenting as if only Gujarat has these problem. In most of these parameters Gujarat performed better than the Centre governed Congress. I am presenting comparison of some of these parameters which were taken from the Planning Commission website. I don’t have to comment anything on these since the data speaks for itself. I expected at least a data based analysis than mere rhetoric from Mr. Jha. I will do more comparison studies based on some more parameters in the coming days.

Sate	Avg_GDP_Growth (%, FY02-12)	Per Capita Income as on FY12 (Rs)	Unemployment Rate (per 1000 persons)	Literacy Rate Growth (%, btwn 2001 to 2011)	Safe Drinking Water (%)	Malnutrition (%)
Gujarat	10.10	57508.00	10	10	90.3	38.77
India	7.71	38037.00	38	9	85.5	41.16

Mr. Jha talks about Mr. Modi making frequent visits to FICCI/CII. Why does PM attend annual CII meeting every year? Who is stopping ‘YUVA RAJ’ from making frequent sojourn to FICCI/CII and project himself as messiah of middle class? When he was invited to give speech in CII, he made mess of it without giving any hope to industries and telling them that if industries have any problem don’t ask for PM’s help. If this is the kind of leaders projected by Congress, definitely any sensible person wouldn’t be excited/happy. The reality is even after the country is headed by an economist PM MMS, growth is going down, foreign exchange reserves is going down, inflation is high, rupee is depreciating, current account deficit is high, fiscal deficit is high, unemployment is growing, PMO is not aware of the decisions taken by his ministers etc. On the contrary in the past decade Gujarat’s growth is above the national average, agriculture growth is nearly 10%, 72% of the country’s employment was created by Gujarat etc. If Congress leaders lost the opportunity and Mr. Modi provides the hope for good future, Mr. Jha should be blaming his party itself not Mr. Modi. One more point I wish make here is that most of the corporates have businesses in Maharastra, which is ruled by Congress for past 14 years. What was stopping Congress CMs to get the confidence of these corporates? Is Mr. Jha saying that people of the country are fools to be hoodwinked easily by a leader who shows close proximity to the corporates?

The fact is Congress fooled people of the country through vote bank politics. Mrs. India Gandhi came up with slogan ‘Garib Hatao’, she couldn’t achieve anything but entitlement based schemes. This divided the country based on caste and religious line. According the Planning Commission date 29.8% of the population is below poverty line which includes Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Parsis. India can’t be a developed country until every citizen is brought above the poverty line. Why couldn’t Congress come with a holistic approach based on income for the poverty elevation instead of caste and religion based schemes? Can Mr. Jha through some light on this?   

Economy Comparison: NDA vs. UPA

This week UPA completed 9^th year in the office and general election is less than a year. Therefore, this is a good time to have a look at the economic performances of the current UPA government at the centre and compare against the previous NDA government. This comparison is required because various opinion polls conducted across the country showed that NDA is ahead of the UPA and it gives an opportunity for the people to make an opinion of their own based on the comparative data. The present article discusses the GDP growth, consumer price index inflation, fiscal deficit, current account deficit and external debt. These parameters broadly define the economic condition of any country. Data used in this article are from planning commission website for the financial year from 2000 to 2012. Data from Financial year 2000 to 2004 are considered for NDA regime and same from financial year 2005 to 2012 are considered for UPA regime. 

The comparison of GDP growth and Consumer Price Index (CPI) Inflation between NDA and UPA government is presented in Figure 1. During the NDA period average GDP growth was 5.9%, while same during UPA period was 8.3%. The growth comparison between NDA and UPA clearly shows that the GDP growth during UPA period is 2.4% higher than the NDA period. However, the comparison of consumer price index inflation between NDA and UPA regime gives an interesting result. The average CPI inflation during NDA period was 3.9%, while same during UPA period was 7.7%. This shows that NDA government did good job in controlling the inflation, which resulted higher wealth creation than UPA government since the difference between the GDP growth and the CPI inflation for NDA government is 2 % as against the same for UPA government is 0.6%.

 

 Figure 1: GDP and Consumer Price Index Inflation Chart

 A comparative study of fiscal and current account deficit and external debt was also carried out between NDA and UPA governments, which are presented in Figure 2. The average fiscal deficit during NDA regime was -5.3 % of the GDP, while the same for UPA regime was -4.6 % of the GDP. However, the average current account deficit during UPA government was -2.0 % of the GDP, while the same during NDA government was 0.5 % of the GDP.  From this comparison it is clear that UPA government maintained lower fiscal deficit than the NDA government. In case of current account deficit, NDA government maintained surplus cash for short term expenses unlike UPA government. The average debt to GDP ratio during NDA government was 22.9%, which is lower than the same during UPA government with 29.8%.

Figure 2: Fiscal and Current Account Deficit and External Debt Chart

Overall, NDA regime resulted in creating more wealth by maintaining lower inflation, surplus cash for short term cash expenses and low external debt. On the contrary, UPA regime resulted in lower wealth creation due to high inflation, more borrowings for short term expenses and high external debt.