Hindu religion survived due to social reformers like Narayana Guru : Dinesh Amin Mattu
Belthangady, September 16: Senior journalist Dinesh Amin Mattu said that Hindu religion was survived today because of revolutionary social reformers like Narayana Guru and not because of Shankaracharya.
Speaking at the 164 Jayanti of Sri Narayana Guru, organised by the Sri Guru Narayana Swamy Seva Sangha, Billava Youth Association and Women Billava Association here on Sunday, he said that the movement started by Narayana Guru was not just a religious movement. It was a cultural movement and there was a need to continue it even today, he said.
“Varnashrama system is a curse to the Hindu society. If people say it is the Hindu religion, I will strongly oppose it. Everybody loves Narayana Guru. But his ideologies are not being emulated. Now, the patriotism has become the biggest political commodity of the country. But we can see the real patriotism among soldiers. There is no relationship between the soldiers and those who speak about patriotism and do politics in their name”, he said.
Billava community has the tradition of soldier and doctors. Koti Chennayya of this land had fought for truth, justice and self-respect and it was the first class conflict. His ideals should be emulated to the society. He had not fought for the entry of temples, but had brought the temples to the door steps of exploited classes. He had advocated simple rituals. But now, lavishness had got place due to which, the exploited class was lagging behind in all aspects, he said.
The person who accepts the ideologies of Narayana Guru would not become communal. Instead, he would love everyone. The Elava community which was an exploited class in Kerala has got all positions from Chief Minister to other higher positions. But in Karnataka, the representation of the Billava community was decreasing. At one time, there were six MPs. But now, only one MP was there in the community, he said.
Former MLA K Vasanth Bangera who inaugurated the programme said that only education could improve the condition of the exploited classes in the society.
Brahmananda Saraswati Swamiji of Kanyadi said that religion should be the lifeline of the society. The ideals of Narayana Guru should be adopted in real life instead of restricting them just for speeches. Gurukul education system was the best education method, he said.
Former presidents of the Association, Vasanth Salian, Padmanabh Maninja, Raju Poojary, Yogesh Kumar, Bhagiratha G, Jayaram Bangera, Women Billava Vedike president Rajashri Raman, vedike founder president Sujitha V Bangera, Yuva Billava Vedike president Santosh Uppar and others were present.
Association president Somanath Bangera Varpale presided over the programme in which 12 ex-servicemen and 12 soldiers of the community were felicitated. A sum of Rs 6 lakh scholarship was distributed. Sanjeeva Poojary Mooda and Dayananda Poojary Mittabagilu who have contributed for the agriculture sector were felicitated. Village Committees were given Brahmashri medals. Dinesh Suvarna Rayi, association secretary Rakesh Kumar Mudukodi and others were present.
“The ideology of Sri Narayana Guru was completely neglected at the Dharma Samsad held at Kanyadi. Forget me, my slipper would not go to such Dharma Sansad where the ideologies of Narayana Guru are neglected. When I listened to the speech of Kanyadi swamiji, I surprised whether it was Narayana Guru Jayanti or Shankaracharya Jayanti. Those who opposed the previous swamiji when the latter had established the mutt, were present at the programme which is a tragedy”.
-Dines Amin Mattu
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
