After Sirf News cited last evening a Times Now report, quoting Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev as saying that a line should be drawn once Kashi and Mathura issues are resolved, the guru’s organisation Isha Foundation called to say that the web story based on the interview Rahul Shivshankar had with him was withdrawn by Times Now “ïmmediately”. While the link to the Times Now story leads to a “404 Page Not Found” message indeed, Sirf News puts it on record that the withdrawal could not have been immediate because it was picked from Google News hours after it was published by Times Now.
Isha Foundation sent an email to Sirf News that quoted the sentence, “Sadhguru told Times Now that a line must be drawn after reaching a conclusion on Kashi and Mathura,” to say, “Times Now had immediately withdrawn the article as Sadhguru never made this statement. As your story is based on that statement, we request you to remove the story from Sirf News.”
The Isha Foundation spokesperson said that the said interview was not at all on the subject of Hindu-Muslim disputes but on the soil activism that the foundation head is leading these days.
On being told that this was not the first instance of what Sirf News considers indiscretion on the part of Sadhguru and that he had displeased a large section of Hindus earlier with an intemperate remark on the relationship between Yashoda and Krishna, Isha Foundation said that the yoga guru had been quoted out of context. Sirf News told the spokesperson that the media house was aware of the fact that it was an old video, a few seconds of which had suddenly gone viral, tarnishing the image of Sadhguru.
However, when told that perhaps the greatest blunder that Sadhguru committed was furthering the disputed British-made conspiracy theory of Aryan invasion. Here is one of the several occasions when Sadhguru pushed the theory of central Asian ‘Aryans’ pushing indigenous Dravidians — branding them as “Rakshasas” — southward:
There have been other occasions when Sadhguru has vehemently defended the theory that was gradually developed since the 16th century by Europeans such as Van Boxhorn, in 1767 by Gaston-Laurent Coeurdoux, in the 1850s by Max Müller, cemented by a group of commissioned British civil servants who masqueraded as historians after the 1857 revolt and given a concrete shape by disputed interpretations of a 1920 excavation. The Marxist historians who clung to the theory themselves discarded the idea of invasion as no evidence of a battle or war could be found.
Worse, the head of the Isha Foundation says that Rama was an Aryan who fought with a Dravidian Ravana and defeated the king of Lanka somewhat unfairly. He calls the Ramayana and Mahabharata “cultural impositions”. The organisation’s spokesperson did not have an answer ready. The spokesperson, Richa Taneja, said she would get back to Sirf News with a clarification.
In another speech, Sadhguru had also narrated what sounded like the narrative of the first episode of BR Chopra’s Mahabharat, featuring Raj Babbar as King Bharata, not Veda Vyasa’s Mahabharata, which had tried to retrofit the modern ideal of democracy into the ancient epic. Sadhguru asserted this democracy business was true, 6 min 14s onwards in the following speech: