Stephen Hawking is a world-renowned cosmologist and theoretical physicist. He is the recipient of innumerable awards and honours for his seminal contribution in the field of science and the latest he received was the United States’ highest civilian honour – The Medal of Freedom – last year. He vehemently denies the existence of God and fervently feels that it is unnecessary to explain the origin of the Universe. He believes that since there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. In sum, God did not create the Universe. For Hawking, law of gravity is the omnipotent and omniscient force if I have to put it in the language of the faithful.
Now, this goes against the very belief system of all religions of the world. The very foundation of any religion – Abrahamic, Sanatanic or its offshoots – is that God created this world and all are answerable to him on the D-day. Well, Sanatanis may say what they call by three letters – G O D – Hawking gives a different name – GRAVITY. It can be 1001st name of God whom they believe to be the origin, sustenance and destruction of the Universe. But the admirable side of Hawking is that he never questions the belief of the faithful nor decries them as unscientific or irrational.
Take for instance the official motto of the US. “In God We Trust”. The US law allowed the motto to be used on coins and currencies. The US Supreme Court upheld the motto because it has “lost through repetition any significant religious context” as Ram is not merely a religious symbol, but national identity. Otherwise, Gandhiji would not have dreamt of Ram Rajya.
Likewise, “God Save the Queen (King) is the sole national anthem of the United Kingdom and some of its territories. Hawking does not advocate that these motto and anthem should be removed since he has proved that God does not exist. “Faith” in God has become an accepted reality even in modern democracies governed by rule of law. In fact, Sri Krishna laid the foundation for such a belief system when he said in the Gita “A man is made up of his faith, he verily is what his faith is” (Ch 17 – 3)
Let’s contrast this with the secular fundamentalists in our country who are disguised as “eminent historians”, archaeologists, liberals, atheists and legal luminaries. Because they are the authors or abettors of distorted version of Indian history and as they have no love or respect for India’s civilizational values and culture, they would like every Hindu to believe that Lord Ram is just a mythical figure or may be an artefact. Everything has to be explained in terms of what they believe to be the scientific basis. There is no place for the word “faith” in their parlance.
Well, this is again selective and applies to only Hindu faith. In Shah Bano case, the very same secular fanatics wanted to uphold faith as enshrined in Sharait as against the law of the land. Law was changed to uphold faith. Now, after September 30th, when faith was upheld by law, (to borrow LK Advani’s phrase) there is cacophony.
According to these “seculars”, judiciary is at fault for recognising the faith of the people, and Archeological Survey of India for coming out with some “stupid findings” because the latter exposes the “seculars” decades long false campaign that was deliberately unleashed on the people. One such secular writer has listed out instances where ASI had favoured Hindutva forces as against the interests of the Muslim community. He has included Tourism sector also as an accomplice of Hindutva because it has been promoting places of religious significance. His attempt is only to reinforce the vilification campaign that is going on today against the ASI just because its report has shaken the very basis of the arguments of Sunny wakf board and the “secular pretenders”.
If you recall, Syed Shahabuddin, the key architect of the Babri Masjid Action Committee, said in the nineties that if ever it was proved that there was a temple beneath the mosque, he himself would take a hammer and pull down the mosque. Where will he and men of his ilk hide their faces today after the ASI conclusively nailed their oft-repeated lie. So, let’s call the dog mad before we kill it. That seems to be the spirit behind the campaign against the ASI.
“Eminent historians” and their cohorts would like the people of this country to believe that India was never subjugated by Muslim invaders, they did not destroy temples in order to humiliate the vanquished, they did not impose tax on non-believers and that rulers like Aurangazeb, Alauddin Khilji, Thuglak were highly benevolent towards their subjects. For example, the same author feels Chittor Rani Padmini’s self-immolation is a myth and it was invented to highlight Khilji’s atrocities. What did the ASI do? It just put a signpost at the location where Rani Padmini committed self-immolation.
Let’s be clear about one thing. It is the present government that wanted the ASI to take up the job of excavation at Ayodhya site when the (in)famous Liberhan Commission wanted a national commission of experts. Turning down this suggestion, the UPA government said that it was not necessary to appoint another national commission and that the ASI could do the job. Of course, the Allahabad High Court ordered such an excavation monitored by two judges and employing workers from both the communities.
Let’s accept for a moment that the ASI was wrong to conclude that there was a temple-like structure beneath the demolished mosque. What about the tell-tale evidence in Mathura and Kashi. Even a hard –boiled secular has to accept that the mosques were raised in the temple premises. You don’t need any expert nor the services of ASI. Will the “seculars” lobby with the Muslims and convince them to give up those two places?
You don’t need to be an “eminent historian” to understand the mindset of Moghal invaders. What their descendents, who operate under the tag “Taliban” did to the two colossal statues of Buddhas carved into the sandstone cliffs in Bhamiyan. They were destroyed unmindful of the world outcry and outrage. Mullah Omar said he wanted to get rid the land of all un-Islamic graven images. What did Osama bin Laden do? As a manifestation of the “clash of civilizations” he wanted to teach the US a lesson and humiliated the country by razing to the ground the imposing World Trade Centre. And now there is a proposal to have an Islamic Centre which in due course will be known to the posterity as “victory monument”.
What Taliban or al Quaeda did or is doing was done by the Moghal rulers some centuries ago. History is this, my dear eminent historians! Despots destroyed what their ideologies could not accept – Stalin’s destruction of churches, Mao’s cultural revolution that removed Confucius from the collective conscience of the Chinese, Hitler’s destruction of synagogues, Pol Pot’s destruction of schools and cities are all examples. Babar, Aurangazeb, Ghazni and invaders of their reputation should share this hall of shame, no matter to what extent you twist history to suit your agenda. Why make ASI a scapegoat?
Friday, October 8, 2010
Friday, October 1, 2010
CIVILISATIONAL REVIVAL
If there is one section which was greatly disappointed over the verdict of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabd High Court on the vexed issue of the ownership of the disputed land in Ayodhya, it is not the contending parties to the dispute, nor the general public but the secular fanatics of the vocal minority who were, in a way, responsible even in the eighties and nineties to push the faithfuls in the majority community to the wall.
Yes, Sunni wakf board is not happy over the partition of the land and so is the case of the Hindu Mahasabha. But their displeasure is basically confined to the issues related to the ownership and they are not trying to pick holes in the judgement. They said that they would respect the verdict of the High Court before the delivery of the judgement and they are sticking to that stand. But, as the law provides for an appeal to the apex court, they would like to exercise that right. Fair enough.
Even the Communist parties which do not spare any occasion to deride the majority community in the country were more restrained in their reaction. Of course, there were one or two discordant notes from the lawyer community whose allegiance to the ruling Congress is well known.
However, that is not the case with the secular pretenders in the media and a miniscule section of the so-called intellectuals. And that is where the danger lies because they succeeded in the past in ridiculing the aspiration of the majority. They are in a position, once again, to mislead the public at large with their warped thinking and borrowed concepts of secularism.
This section can be broadly divided into three groups. One is plain non-believers and according to them talking about religion in public discourse by itself is anti-secular exercise. Second group is anti-Hindu historians whose business is to distort Indian history and to lampoon Indian civilisational ethos, beliefs and culture. And the third group is those in the media who would like to compete with each other about their “secular” credentials.
Let’s take a few examples of these groups which are bent upon thwarting any negotiated settlement. They were appealing to the people, pre-verdict, that every one should respect the judicial verdict because they were hopeful that the judiciary cannot oblivious to the fact that a mosque did exist at the disputed site and hence the outcome of the judicial process could be in favour of the Muslims at least in parts. But when the Allahabad High Court felt that one should respect the faith and belief of the majority community on the issue of Janmasthan, they are unable to digest it.
That is the reason one could hear statements, immediately after the verdict was delivered and even before one could lay his hands on the full text of the three judgements, that the judiciary has exceeded its brief and has treaded on an area that belonged to faith. In a way, the secular lobby wanted the judgements in terms of their definition of secularism and faith. It was said that “secular” court tried its hands on “non-secular” areas. The very same section might not find anything wrong in shariah courts. Had the verdict been wholly in favour of the Wakf board, the “secular” lobby would have been in its orgasmic best.
A national television channel said that the verdict is an “assertion of Hindu majoritarianism”. The majority judgement said that the land should be divided into three parts and one part should go to the Muslims. On one hand the media was crying hoarse that there should be no attempt to wrongly interpret the verdict or make any statements that could be provocative, but on the other, what they were doing in practice was just the opposite.
Yet another “intellectual” who once edited the “most powerful daily in the world”, reacting to the statement of RSS sarsangchalak, said “how can we accept Ram as a symbol of national identity in a secular democracy?” According to him, it was quite “disturbing”. These are the people who vitiated the atmosphere two decades ago with their statements that “Lord Ram” was only a myth and there was no historical evidence for his existence. In fact, they should be taken around the countryside to know what exactly is the soul of India. Lord Ram is not just an idol worshipped in temples, but part and parcel of social, and spiritual life of the population even centuries before they were enslaved by invaders.
Strangely, people were also trying to find a difference between Gandhiji’s “Ram” and “Lord Ram” worshipped by others. A secular fanatic also suggested that there should be a multi-faith centre in the disputed area. Remember? In those days, there was a suggestion from the same lobby that we should construct a “urinal” in the Janmasthan. It is not the reluctance or absence of “generosity” on the part of Muslims alone that drove the majority to go to the extreme. What frustrated them was the public discourse of these secular fundamentalists questioning the existence of Ram.
And now there is action re-play. A political analyst says in a national daily that “force of faith has triumphed over law and reason in Ayodhya case”. He also suggests that “if left unamended by the Supreme Court, the legal, social and political repercussions of the judgement are likely to be extremely damaging”.
Historians of Aligarh Muslim University and Jawaharlal Nehru University - I don’t have to be explicit about their mindset - are rubbishing the Archeological Survey of India report on the existence of the temple prior to the mosque. They attributed motives to the ASI since the excavation was done during the NDA regime. For them, ASI report was not foolproof and inscriptions found in debris might have been planted.
Biased historians and secular fundamentalists can go on arguing whether Tulasidas talked about Ramjanmasthan or whether the central dome of the mosque was the exact place where Ram was born or whether faith can be the basis for judicial resolution of disputes. But civilisational issues cannot be settled by such inane discussions by those who have no respect for India’s civilisational values.
As Girilal Jain wrote some twenty years ago, “Civilisational revival is a gradual, complex and many sided affair...The heart of the matter is that if India’s vast spiritual energies, largely dormant for centuries, had to be tapped, Hindus had to be aroused, they could be aroused only by the use of a powerful symbol; and that symbol could only be Ram, as was evident when Mahathma moved millions by his talk of Ramrajya” To quote Jain again, “it is natural that Indiana culture should seek to recover its genuine self. Surely this is neither an anti-Islamic nor anti-Western activity”
Yes, Sunni wakf board is not happy over the partition of the land and so is the case of the Hindu Mahasabha. But their displeasure is basically confined to the issues related to the ownership and they are not trying to pick holes in the judgement. They said that they would respect the verdict of the High Court before the delivery of the judgement and they are sticking to that stand. But, as the law provides for an appeal to the apex court, they would like to exercise that right. Fair enough.
Even the Communist parties which do not spare any occasion to deride the majority community in the country were more restrained in their reaction. Of course, there were one or two discordant notes from the lawyer community whose allegiance to the ruling Congress is well known.
However, that is not the case with the secular pretenders in the media and a miniscule section of the so-called intellectuals. And that is where the danger lies because they succeeded in the past in ridiculing the aspiration of the majority. They are in a position, once again, to mislead the public at large with their warped thinking and borrowed concepts of secularism.
This section can be broadly divided into three groups. One is plain non-believers and according to them talking about religion in public discourse by itself is anti-secular exercise. Second group is anti-Hindu historians whose business is to distort Indian history and to lampoon Indian civilisational ethos, beliefs and culture. And the third group is those in the media who would like to compete with each other about their “secular” credentials.
Let’s take a few examples of these groups which are bent upon thwarting any negotiated settlement. They were appealing to the people, pre-verdict, that every one should respect the judicial verdict because they were hopeful that the judiciary cannot oblivious to the fact that a mosque did exist at the disputed site and hence the outcome of the judicial process could be in favour of the Muslims at least in parts. But when the Allahabad High Court felt that one should respect the faith and belief of the majority community on the issue of Janmasthan, they are unable to digest it.
That is the reason one could hear statements, immediately after the verdict was delivered and even before one could lay his hands on the full text of the three judgements, that the judiciary has exceeded its brief and has treaded on an area that belonged to faith. In a way, the secular lobby wanted the judgements in terms of their definition of secularism and faith. It was said that “secular” court tried its hands on “non-secular” areas. The very same section might not find anything wrong in shariah courts. Had the verdict been wholly in favour of the Wakf board, the “secular” lobby would have been in its orgasmic best.
A national television channel said that the verdict is an “assertion of Hindu majoritarianism”. The majority judgement said that the land should be divided into three parts and one part should go to the Muslims. On one hand the media was crying hoarse that there should be no attempt to wrongly interpret the verdict or make any statements that could be provocative, but on the other, what they were doing in practice was just the opposite.
Yet another “intellectual” who once edited the “most powerful daily in the world”, reacting to the statement of RSS sarsangchalak, said “how can we accept Ram as a symbol of national identity in a secular democracy?” According to him, it was quite “disturbing”. These are the people who vitiated the atmosphere two decades ago with their statements that “Lord Ram” was only a myth and there was no historical evidence for his existence. In fact, they should be taken around the countryside to know what exactly is the soul of India. Lord Ram is not just an idol worshipped in temples, but part and parcel of social, and spiritual life of the population even centuries before they were enslaved by invaders.
Strangely, people were also trying to find a difference between Gandhiji’s “Ram” and “Lord Ram” worshipped by others. A secular fanatic also suggested that there should be a multi-faith centre in the disputed area. Remember? In those days, there was a suggestion from the same lobby that we should construct a “urinal” in the Janmasthan. It is not the reluctance or absence of “generosity” on the part of Muslims alone that drove the majority to go to the extreme. What frustrated them was the public discourse of these secular fundamentalists questioning the existence of Ram.
And now there is action re-play. A political analyst says in a national daily that “force of faith has triumphed over law and reason in Ayodhya case”. He also suggests that “if left unamended by the Supreme Court, the legal, social and political repercussions of the judgement are likely to be extremely damaging”.
Historians of Aligarh Muslim University and Jawaharlal Nehru University - I don’t have to be explicit about their mindset - are rubbishing the Archeological Survey of India report on the existence of the temple prior to the mosque. They attributed motives to the ASI since the excavation was done during the NDA regime. For them, ASI report was not foolproof and inscriptions found in debris might have been planted.
Biased historians and secular fundamentalists can go on arguing whether Tulasidas talked about Ramjanmasthan or whether the central dome of the mosque was the exact place where Ram was born or whether faith can be the basis for judicial resolution of disputes. But civilisational issues cannot be settled by such inane discussions by those who have no respect for India’s civilisational values.
As Girilal Jain wrote some twenty years ago, “Civilisational revival is a gradual, complex and many sided affair...The heart of the matter is that if India’s vast spiritual energies, largely dormant for centuries, had to be tapped, Hindus had to be aroused, they could be aroused only by the use of a powerful symbol; and that symbol could only be Ram, as was evident when Mahathma moved millions by his talk of Ramrajya” To quote Jain again, “it is natural that Indiana culture should seek to recover its genuine self. Surely this is neither an anti-Islamic nor anti-Western activity”
Saturday, September 25, 2010
TALE OF TWO STATES
It was not something that was unexpected. I mean, the differences among the all party delegation that went to Jammu and Kashmir over the meeting with the avowed separatists and those who owe their allegiance to Pakistan and those who do not want to work within the framework of the Indian Constitution. Expectedly, the communists, for whom patriotism and nationalism are dirty words, took the lead to reach out to the separatists.
The condescending attitude of these interlocutors, as reflected in their body language while meeting the pro-Pakistanis, was too obvious. In fact, Ram Vilas Paswan made no bones of it when he said that he was feeling more comfortable with hawks like Syed Ali Shah Geelani than any other leader in his own country.
But what these self-styled optimists, without exception, said after the meeting with the hardliners was quite candid. The hawks are reported to have said something before the cameras for the consumption of the world at large, particularly their mentors and pay masters in Pakistan, and just the opposite in closed door meetings.
This double speak inspired this columnist to imagine a meeting between Geelani and our own Asaduddin Owaisi of Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen who had something in common with the pro-Pak hawks, though history and geography placed Owaisi on a different platform. Had there been an one-on-one meeting with Geelani and Owaisi,a la Ram Vilas Paswan, the conversation would have been like this.
Here is an imaginary chat:
Owaisi: Salaam ale ghum
Geelani: Wale ghum salaam
Owaisi: How I wish I could have lent my support openly to your pro-Pakistani stand on Kashmir had our Nizam succeeded either in securing Dominion Status for Hyderabad state or merged with Pakistan.
Geelani: But I believe even now people feel that you still have soft corner for the Land of Purity.
Owaisi: I can’t be so explicit, Jenab. But, you are so fortunate. Inspite of your strong pro-Pak sentiments and refusal to work within the framework of Indian Constitution, the Indian government is scared of touching you and political leaders knock at your door even though you show them the boot. And what is more, they pay obeisance to you in the full gaze of television cameras. However, that is not the case with me.
Geelani: Well, you also turned history on its head when you opposed the celebration of “Telangana Liberation Day”. The Andhra Pradesh government and other mainstream political parties were shitting in their pants because of your numbers and they conveniently called it “Merger Day”. You could rewrite history and it is not a mean achievement.
Owaisi: I don’t consider it an achievement, Geelani sahib. I would have been happy if the Razaakar movement that Jenab Qasim Razvi led with the blessings of the Nizam VII, Osman Ali Khan had succeeded and the then trouble-makers were thrown out of the state to ensure the continuance of Nizam rule. Nizam had contributed so much for the Hyderabad state.
Geelani: Well, we did it with regard to the Pundits here. They have become refugees in their own land. Your Nizam also did his best. It was not an easy job to raise a private army of 200,000 militants to do his bidding, whereas we had to rely on Pakistan to capture Kashmir after the Hindu ruler here signed the accession treaty with India. Of course Pakistan could not complete the job. And, Insha Allah, we are trying to complete the unfinished agenda by creating Intifada like situation here in the Valley.
Owaisi: But we have lost that chance for ever thanks to Sardar Patel and that is why I was so angry when I said it was not correct to celebrate “Telangana Liberation Day”. Indian Army killed so many “Muslims of Qasim Razvi’s militia” in September 1948 in the name of “Police Action” code-named “Operation Polo”.
Geelani: I know. But it is said that on one day Razakars killed 22 persons in cold blood in some village near Warangal because they protested against the Nizam.
Owaisi: No Saab, it was just a “reaction” to the armed struggle by the Communists.
Geelani: But the very same Communists are coming to me uninvited with a deep bow and warm embrace and talk about peace.
Owaisi: Why Communists? Did not obsequious Ram Vilas Paswan come and wait at your doorsteps to be called in. Did you notice his body language? He was cringing. Do you know? He was the one who served as Union Minister in the “communal” BJP led NDA government! After the defeat of NDA, he went around with a look-alike of Osama bin Laden seeking Muslim votes for his one-man party.
Geelani: That apart, did you notice one major difference between the two situations. Here in Kashmir we are making a section of the people (atleast) to revolt against the establishment though the Indian state has granted a special status under Art 370 and pumping funds which no other state in India gets. Whereas people of Hyderabad state, despite Razakar’s action - the locals may brand it “genocide” - and Nizam’s despotic rule, did not revolt and create a difficult situation for the Nizam if you ignore that saffron-robed Sadhu (referring to Swami Ramanand Tirtha). But for “Police Action” you could have asserted your independence or merged with Pakistan. Despite lack of development, poverty, illiteracy, subjugation, the locals were docile (In a hushed tone) Do you know the reason? Kashmir was a Musliam-majority state with a Hindu ruler. It was easy for us to mobilise the extreme elements in the society to revolt and sustain our struggle for 60 years. Your state had Hindu majority under Muslim ruler. You know how Moghuls kept the Hindus subjugated for centuries. They could not rise in revolt and without local support you just can’t do anything. So, the Nizam caved in. That explains everything and especially the role of religion. By the way, do you still have the spirit of Razakars in your party?
Owaisi: Kya Saab! What MIM stands for? It is Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen. Do you know what Qasim Razvi”s militia known as? It was Ittehadul Muslimeen. We just added some prefixes like All India Majlis. In fact our detractors blame us that our forefathers inherited the legacy of Qasim Razvi when they formed MIM.
Geelani: Lot of these “byte” soldiers are waiting outside and they may even eavesdrop.Let’s stop here. Khuda fiz
Owaisi: Khuda fiz
The condescending attitude of these interlocutors, as reflected in their body language while meeting the pro-Pakistanis, was too obvious. In fact, Ram Vilas Paswan made no bones of it when he said that he was feeling more comfortable with hawks like Syed Ali Shah Geelani than any other leader in his own country.
But what these self-styled optimists, without exception, said after the meeting with the hardliners was quite candid. The hawks are reported to have said something before the cameras for the consumption of the world at large, particularly their mentors and pay masters in Pakistan, and just the opposite in closed door meetings.
This double speak inspired this columnist to imagine a meeting between Geelani and our own Asaduddin Owaisi of Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen who had something in common with the pro-Pak hawks, though history and geography placed Owaisi on a different platform. Had there been an one-on-one meeting with Geelani and Owaisi,a la Ram Vilas Paswan, the conversation would have been like this.
Here is an imaginary chat:
Owaisi: Salaam ale ghum
Geelani: Wale ghum salaam
Owaisi: How I wish I could have lent my support openly to your pro-Pakistani stand on Kashmir had our Nizam succeeded either in securing Dominion Status for Hyderabad state or merged with Pakistan.
Geelani: But I believe even now people feel that you still have soft corner for the Land of Purity.
Owaisi: I can’t be so explicit, Jenab. But, you are so fortunate. Inspite of your strong pro-Pak sentiments and refusal to work within the framework of Indian Constitution, the Indian government is scared of touching you and political leaders knock at your door even though you show them the boot. And what is more, they pay obeisance to you in the full gaze of television cameras. However, that is not the case with me.
Geelani: Well, you also turned history on its head when you opposed the celebration of “Telangana Liberation Day”. The Andhra Pradesh government and other mainstream political parties were shitting in their pants because of your numbers and they conveniently called it “Merger Day”. You could rewrite history and it is not a mean achievement.
Owaisi: I don’t consider it an achievement, Geelani sahib. I would have been happy if the Razaakar movement that Jenab Qasim Razvi led with the blessings of the Nizam VII, Osman Ali Khan had succeeded and the then trouble-makers were thrown out of the state to ensure the continuance of Nizam rule. Nizam had contributed so much for the Hyderabad state.
Geelani: Well, we did it with regard to the Pundits here. They have become refugees in their own land. Your Nizam also did his best. It was not an easy job to raise a private army of 200,000 militants to do his bidding, whereas we had to rely on Pakistan to capture Kashmir after the Hindu ruler here signed the accession treaty with India. Of course Pakistan could not complete the job. And, Insha Allah, we are trying to complete the unfinished agenda by creating Intifada like situation here in the Valley.
Owaisi: But we have lost that chance for ever thanks to Sardar Patel and that is why I was so angry when I said it was not correct to celebrate “Telangana Liberation Day”. Indian Army killed so many “Muslims of Qasim Razvi’s militia” in September 1948 in the name of “Police Action” code-named “Operation Polo”.
Geelani: I know. But it is said that on one day Razakars killed 22 persons in cold blood in some village near Warangal because they protested against the Nizam.
Owaisi: No Saab, it was just a “reaction” to the armed struggle by the Communists.
Geelani: But the very same Communists are coming to me uninvited with a deep bow and warm embrace and talk about peace.
Owaisi: Why Communists? Did not obsequious Ram Vilas Paswan come and wait at your doorsteps to be called in. Did you notice his body language? He was cringing. Do you know? He was the one who served as Union Minister in the “communal” BJP led NDA government! After the defeat of NDA, he went around with a look-alike of Osama bin Laden seeking Muslim votes for his one-man party.
Geelani: That apart, did you notice one major difference between the two situations. Here in Kashmir we are making a section of the people (atleast) to revolt against the establishment though the Indian state has granted a special status under Art 370 and pumping funds which no other state in India gets. Whereas people of Hyderabad state, despite Razakar’s action - the locals may brand it “genocide” - and Nizam’s despotic rule, did not revolt and create a difficult situation for the Nizam if you ignore that saffron-robed Sadhu (referring to Swami Ramanand Tirtha). But for “Police Action” you could have asserted your independence or merged with Pakistan. Despite lack of development, poverty, illiteracy, subjugation, the locals were docile (In a hushed tone) Do you know the reason? Kashmir was a Musliam-majority state with a Hindu ruler. It was easy for us to mobilise the extreme elements in the society to revolt and sustain our struggle for 60 years. Your state had Hindu majority under Muslim ruler. You know how Moghuls kept the Hindus subjugated for centuries. They could not rise in revolt and without local support you just can’t do anything. So, the Nizam caved in. That explains everything and especially the role of religion. By the way, do you still have the spirit of Razakars in your party?
Owaisi: Kya Saab! What MIM stands for? It is Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen. Do you know what Qasim Razvi”s militia known as? It was Ittehadul Muslimeen. We just added some prefixes like All India Majlis. In fact our detractors blame us that our forefathers inherited the legacy of Qasim Razvi when they formed MIM.
Geelani: Lot of these “byte” soldiers are waiting outside and they may even eavesdrop.Let’s stop here. Khuda fiz
Owaisi: Khuda fiz
Thursday, September 16, 2010
CAN THERE BE A GREATER POLITICAL PACKAGE FOR J&K THAN ART 370?
One does not know whether the PM-in-waiting Rahul Gandhi is a “migratory bird” or not, what is clear is that he is certainly an insensitive and immature bird trying to fly faster than its wings can support. Otherwise, he would not have rushed to the support of the beleaguered chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir Omar Abdullah when the entire nation is disappointed with his inept performance and even the government sources were making it known that there is governance deficit in the troubled state.
Well, it is a different matter that Farooq Abdullah may claim that his son was given a certificate of merit and commended by the Prime Minister for his best performance at the all-party meeting. In the absence of a denial from the PM, we have to believe Farooq. Whether it is “double-speak” or “cohesion”, it is for the PM to assert at yet another briefing for the select editors.
Anyway, the princeling wants to give Omar “time” since he is handling a “tough job”. He wants to give more time even as the state is on the boil for three months after having taken the lives of 89 people and injuring hundreds. What is the time limit that Rahul wants to give to his buddy? Does he want another hundred lives to be sacrificed for the sake of keeping the third generation leader of the Kashmir’s political family in power?
Yes, Omar is an elected leader of a duly constituted government reflecting the collective wisdom of the people of the state. He cannot be ousted on account of any political conspiracy or by any unfair and un-Constitutional means. If he fails to perform and spends his weekends in Delhi and exhibits extreme insensitivity to the grievances of his electors pushing the state into a state of turmoil, should the electorate suffer his incompetence? Interestingly, it is a case of like father like son. When the state was on the edge, father was watching T-20 matches in South Africa and even when Farooq was the chief minister of J&K, in the eighties, he was known to be playing Golf in London when his home state was encountering terror acts from across the border.
J&K is not like any other state in the country. Our neighbour, on the verge of collapse, has been instigating the people and stoking violence with the help of its stooges across the border who style themselves as “separatists” “azadis”, not to speak of LeT operatives who have been let loose on the soil of the Paradise on earth under the guidance of ISI. In a turbulent scenario like this which has been troubling the state for nearly six decades, can we afford to have a chief minister who does not care to reach out to his own people, but prefers to reach out to 10 Janpath for support? If he does not show political maturity to opt out, or sensitive enough to establish rapport with his own people, should there not be a demand for his ouster.
Well, there is a catch. If Omar throws in the towel, what is the alternative, especially when the Centre is clueless and has been pandering to the pro-Pakistani elements? After all, keeping aside his non-performance for a moment, he raised a bogey of the misuse of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to deflect the blame on the Indian Army and thus to the Centre for the mess he has created after squandering the massive mandate he got from the people just 18 months ago. While our heavily-accented Home Minister, after having made an ass of himself in dealing with Maoists, is trying to play a different game. The man who wanted the Indian Army to come to his rescue in crushing the Maoist violence, is lobbying for diluting the powers of the Army in a most sensitive region of the country just to placate the separatists. The Union cabinet is vertically divided on this issue and the Army, as is an open secret, is totally opposed to any tinkering with the AFSPA.
In a hapless situation like this, the Central government talks of “political package” “autonomy”, “meeting the aspirations of the youth” etc. Congress high priestess has posed a question to all us. “Why the youth of Kashmir are so angry”. Her party was part of the alliance government both with the PDP and the NC for the last six years and she should tell us why her party or the alliance government has failed to understand the reasons for the youth anger and their failure to assuage the anger in the valley? Moreover, she did not ask a single question when lakhs of Pundits were driven out of the Valley which, Madam must know, included Kashmiri youth? Was there a difference between the Kashmiri youth like Muslim youth and Pundit youth? Had the political parties cutting across ideologies intervened at that time, the state would not have come to this pass.
When we talk of “political package”, we have to pose a question to ourselves. Can there be a greater political package to the people of Kashmir than Art 370. If that has not addressed the issue, what else could? Economically, so far, the Centre has pumped in more than one lakh crore rupees on the state. Still, if the people appear to be dissatisfied, it could only be because of the Pak infiltrators and separatists who are doing their best to create a wedge between the people and the state by various means. It will be foolhardy on the part of the Centre to think that they can solve the problem by dialogue. With whom will you open the dialogue? With separatists? When the separatists’ agenda is known what will the govt achieve by opening a dialogue. There is no special problem for the youth of Kashmir, distinctly different from the rest of the country. Case in point is the agitation by Telangana youth for the cancellation of Gr-I exams and the violent demonstrations of advocates in the state. How are they different from Kashmiri youth? Because of the instigation from Pakistan, overt support by the separatists and the geography of the state makes it appear that the grievances of the Kashmiri youth are more genuine than the rest. Isolating the separatists and azadis from the rest of the people with an iron hand and relocating the youth in different parts of the country with suitable employment coupled with the rehabilitation of Pundits in the Valley would solve the problem to a great extent. The Army should have no fetters in protecting our borders and in preventing infiltration from Pakistan which has a vicious agenda. Rest of the noise generated by political parties like “autonomy” will only pave the way for greater anarchy and confusion serving the territorial ambitions of Pakistan.
Well, it is a different matter that Farooq Abdullah may claim that his son was given a certificate of merit and commended by the Prime Minister for his best performance at the all-party meeting. In the absence of a denial from the PM, we have to believe Farooq. Whether it is “double-speak” or “cohesion”, it is for the PM to assert at yet another briefing for the select editors.
Anyway, the princeling wants to give Omar “time” since he is handling a “tough job”. He wants to give more time even as the state is on the boil for three months after having taken the lives of 89 people and injuring hundreds. What is the time limit that Rahul wants to give to his buddy? Does he want another hundred lives to be sacrificed for the sake of keeping the third generation leader of the Kashmir’s political family in power?
Yes, Omar is an elected leader of a duly constituted government reflecting the collective wisdom of the people of the state. He cannot be ousted on account of any political conspiracy or by any unfair and un-Constitutional means. If he fails to perform and spends his weekends in Delhi and exhibits extreme insensitivity to the grievances of his electors pushing the state into a state of turmoil, should the electorate suffer his incompetence? Interestingly, it is a case of like father like son. When the state was on the edge, father was watching T-20 matches in South Africa and even when Farooq was the chief minister of J&K, in the eighties, he was known to be playing Golf in London when his home state was encountering terror acts from across the border.
J&K is not like any other state in the country. Our neighbour, on the verge of collapse, has been instigating the people and stoking violence with the help of its stooges across the border who style themselves as “separatists” “azadis”, not to speak of LeT operatives who have been let loose on the soil of the Paradise on earth under the guidance of ISI. In a turbulent scenario like this which has been troubling the state for nearly six decades, can we afford to have a chief minister who does not care to reach out to his own people, but prefers to reach out to 10 Janpath for support? If he does not show political maturity to opt out, or sensitive enough to establish rapport with his own people, should there not be a demand for his ouster.
Well, there is a catch. If Omar throws in the towel, what is the alternative, especially when the Centre is clueless and has been pandering to the pro-Pakistani elements? After all, keeping aside his non-performance for a moment, he raised a bogey of the misuse of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to deflect the blame on the Indian Army and thus to the Centre for the mess he has created after squandering the massive mandate he got from the people just 18 months ago. While our heavily-accented Home Minister, after having made an ass of himself in dealing with Maoists, is trying to play a different game. The man who wanted the Indian Army to come to his rescue in crushing the Maoist violence, is lobbying for diluting the powers of the Army in a most sensitive region of the country just to placate the separatists. The Union cabinet is vertically divided on this issue and the Army, as is an open secret, is totally opposed to any tinkering with the AFSPA.
In a hapless situation like this, the Central government talks of “political package” “autonomy”, “meeting the aspirations of the youth” etc. Congress high priestess has posed a question to all us. “Why the youth of Kashmir are so angry”. Her party was part of the alliance government both with the PDP and the NC for the last six years and she should tell us why her party or the alliance government has failed to understand the reasons for the youth anger and their failure to assuage the anger in the valley? Moreover, she did not ask a single question when lakhs of Pundits were driven out of the Valley which, Madam must know, included Kashmiri youth? Was there a difference between the Kashmiri youth like Muslim youth and Pundit youth? Had the political parties cutting across ideologies intervened at that time, the state would not have come to this pass.
When we talk of “political package”, we have to pose a question to ourselves. Can there be a greater political package to the people of Kashmir than Art 370. If that has not addressed the issue, what else could? Economically, so far, the Centre has pumped in more than one lakh crore rupees on the state. Still, if the people appear to be dissatisfied, it could only be because of the Pak infiltrators and separatists who are doing their best to create a wedge between the people and the state by various means. It will be foolhardy on the part of the Centre to think that they can solve the problem by dialogue. With whom will you open the dialogue? With separatists? When the separatists’ agenda is known what will the govt achieve by opening a dialogue. There is no special problem for the youth of Kashmir, distinctly different from the rest of the country. Case in point is the agitation by Telangana youth for the cancellation of Gr-I exams and the violent demonstrations of advocates in the state. How are they different from Kashmiri youth? Because of the instigation from Pakistan, overt support by the separatists and the geography of the state makes it appear that the grievances of the Kashmiri youth are more genuine than the rest. Isolating the separatists and azadis from the rest of the people with an iron hand and relocating the youth in different parts of the country with suitable employment coupled with the rehabilitation of Pundits in the Valley would solve the problem to a great extent. The Army should have no fetters in protecting our borders and in preventing infiltration from Pakistan which has a vicious agenda. Rest of the noise generated by political parties like “autonomy” will only pave the way for greater anarchy and confusion serving the territorial ambitions of Pakistan.
Monday, September 13, 2010
VANA PRASTHA ASHRAM
BHARADWAJAR VANA PRASTHA ASHRAMAM AT VELAMUR
Velamur, a little known hamlet to the rest of the world, has a hallowed place in the history of Sri Vaishnavism. Velamur is the birth place of Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan, whose importance to Sri Vaishnavites is next only to Yethirajar and Sri Vedanta Desikar. Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan is also revered as the second Ramanuja. His commentaries on ten important Upanishads are hailed as his greatest contribution to Hindu philosophy in general and Sri Vaishnavism in particular. He has therefore come to be known as “DASOPANISHAD BASHYAKARAR”
After the collapse of Vijayanagar empire, whose kings were esteemed patrons of Vaishnavism, there was a great threat to Vaishnavism and it is the undaunted efforts of saints like Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan that helped Vaishnavism to flourish again with great aplomb.
There is a grand temple dedicated to Sundara Varadar and Lakshmi Narayanan in Velamur with a separate shrine for Dasopanishad Bashyakarar, the second one after Sri Rangam.
With the grace and blessings of the present Andavan Swami His Holiness Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan, works for the Raja Gopuram and Vasantha Mandapam in Velamur are in progress.
To keep up with the spiritual tempo generated in the village by HH Andavan, descendents of Rishi Bharadwajar and people of Velamur origin have formed a Trust in the name of the presiding deity of Velamur temple known as SUNDARAVARADHAR CHARITABLE TRUST (Regd No.50/2007).
One of the main objectives of the Trust is to run a Vana Prastha Ashramam in honour of Rishi Bharadwajar. It is NOT yet another Home for the aged to be run on commercial lines nor an orphanage. It is designed to be a centre for those devout individuals who would like to pursue spiritual life after they had fulfilled all their family/parental responsibilities and ripe enough to enter the third Ashram (Vana Prastham) as ordained by our scriptures.
Velamur village with its spiritual history and the presence of a grand temple nearby provide the right ambience who long for solitude and serene atmosphere away from the hustle and bustle of highly polluted Metros.
The Ashram has a capacity for 14 sadhaks at present and there are plans for expansion. It has only a dormitory –type accommodation and a spacious kitchen with the necessary modern kitchenware. The inmates have to have respect and belief in the concept of “self-help” and they will be encouraged to keep themselves busy with some activity like watering flower plants, preparing garlands for the temple, singing bhajans, dhyanams, yoga etc.
Accommodation and food will be free to the inmates. However, inmates are expected to offer a nominal sum for the hygienic upkeep of the Ashram and to organise events every month like Sudarshana homam, Laksha Deepam, Laksharchana, Go Rakshana, Grama Seva etc, so that the village reverberates with spiritual fervour.
We appeal to all the Sri Vaishnavites to help us find the right people for the Ashram by spreading this message.
Issued by:
TRUSTEES OF SUNDARA VARADHAR CHARITABLE TRUST
Contact: Ranga Ramanujan
Tel: 09848023289
Email: srramanujan@gmail.com
S_ramanujan9@yahoo.co.in
Velamur, a little known hamlet to the rest of the world, has a hallowed place in the history of Sri Vaishnavism. Velamur is the birth place of Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan, whose importance to Sri Vaishnavites is next only to Yethirajar and Sri Vedanta Desikar. Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan is also revered as the second Ramanuja. His commentaries on ten important Upanishads are hailed as his greatest contribution to Hindu philosophy in general and Sri Vaishnavism in particular. He has therefore come to be known as “DASOPANISHAD BASHYAKARAR”
After the collapse of Vijayanagar empire, whose kings were esteemed patrons of Vaishnavism, there was a great threat to Vaishnavism and it is the undaunted efforts of saints like Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan that helped Vaishnavism to flourish again with great aplomb.
There is a grand temple dedicated to Sundara Varadar and Lakshmi Narayanan in Velamur with a separate shrine for Dasopanishad Bashyakarar, the second one after Sri Rangam.
With the grace and blessings of the present Andavan Swami His Holiness Sri Ranga Ramanuja Maha Desikan, works for the Raja Gopuram and Vasantha Mandapam in Velamur are in progress.
To keep up with the spiritual tempo generated in the village by HH Andavan, descendents of Rishi Bharadwajar and people of Velamur origin have formed a Trust in the name of the presiding deity of Velamur temple known as SUNDARAVARADHAR CHARITABLE TRUST (Regd No.50/2007).
One of the main objectives of the Trust is to run a Vana Prastha Ashramam in honour of Rishi Bharadwajar. It is NOT yet another Home for the aged to be run on commercial lines nor an orphanage. It is designed to be a centre for those devout individuals who would like to pursue spiritual life after they had fulfilled all their family/parental responsibilities and ripe enough to enter the third Ashram (Vana Prastham) as ordained by our scriptures.
Velamur village with its spiritual history and the presence of a grand temple nearby provide the right ambience who long for solitude and serene atmosphere away from the hustle and bustle of highly polluted Metros.
The Ashram has a capacity for 14 sadhaks at present and there are plans for expansion. It has only a dormitory –type accommodation and a spacious kitchen with the necessary modern kitchenware. The inmates have to have respect and belief in the concept of “self-help” and they will be encouraged to keep themselves busy with some activity like watering flower plants, preparing garlands for the temple, singing bhajans, dhyanams, yoga etc.
Accommodation and food will be free to the inmates. However, inmates are expected to offer a nominal sum for the hygienic upkeep of the Ashram and to organise events every month like Sudarshana homam, Laksha Deepam, Laksharchana, Go Rakshana, Grama Seva etc, so that the village reverberates with spiritual fervour.
We appeal to all the Sri Vaishnavites to help us find the right people for the Ashram by spreading this message.
Issued by:
TRUSTEES OF SUNDARA VARADHAR CHARITABLE TRUST
Contact: Ranga Ramanujan
Tel: 09848023289
Email: srramanujan@gmail.com
S_ramanujan9@yahoo.co.in
Thursday, September 9, 2010
WAS EVR ANY DIFFERENT FROM TERRY JONES?
There is universal condemnation, and rightly so, of the call given by the Pastor of Florida church, Terry Jones to burn copies of the Koran on the anniversary of September 11 attacks at the World Trade Centre. Jones has been variously decried as “lunatic fringe”, “insane” and the Secretary of State Ms Hillary Clinton lost no time in condemning Jones outburst as “disgraceful” and “disrespectful”, citing George Washington to say that the US would not give any sanction to bigotry. But the pastor of a small time church in Gainesville seems to be defiant. He finds a rationale for his threat: “we should address radical Islam and send a very clear warning that they are not to retaliate in any form”.
This may be pastor’s wishful thinking. If his threat is executed, it would only pave the way for more radical Islam than the world is witnessing today. It will be a God-sent opportunity for the masterminds of Jihadi or Wahabi movement to recruit more and more “soldiers of God” for the “holy war”. Already, Afghan militants have said that they would kill every American citizen they come across and they have a track record in executing their threats.
The condemnation for the pastor’s threat is not only from the US Christians and the Arab world, needless to say from India for it considers itself more secular than any other country in this planet, but also from Europe and the Vatican. The Vatican official daily talks of protests around the world against the burning of Koran as it is “contrary to the respect owed to all religions and against our doctrine and faith”.
The buzz word today is Islamophobi a. Europe is worried that “Islam would sooner rather than later conquer Europe”. Ban on veil in France, Belgium and ban on minarets in Sweden and Switzerland reflect this fear. A Vatican official exhorts Christians in Europe to produce more children to counter the huge growth in Muslim immigrants to most of the European countries.
Therefore, the protest against the Florida Pastor is not mainly out of concern for increasing bigotry, but out of fear of Islamists and their intolerance. Take for example Pakistan. The country has banned cartoon networks which telecast Hindu mythology. Can this not be termed as “religious bigotry”. Like good Talibans and bad Talibans, bigotry also seems to be of two kinds. If the bigotry is of non-Muslim variety, it is bad, but not Islamic bigotry.
Be that as it may, one cannot resist drawing a parallel to what happened in our own country a few decades ago. Florida pastor is a small fry and he does not represent all the Christians except for 50 or so group in a small church. His threat to burn Koran could have been dismissed as the misguided act of an immature person. But it received world wide attention and condemnation.
Well, public memory is very short. What happened when the so-called “social revolutionary” EV Ramaswamy Naickar, the face of Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu, led a procession of Hindu gods and goddesses garlanded with chappals, while his cronies were pouring excreta on the idols and beating them up with chappals on the main arterial road of the then Madras city. Forget the Hindu society which lost its verve and nerve after 1000 years of slavery, how did the nation react or the non Hindus. Was there a whimper from Christians and Muslims? Contrast this with the sound and fury against Jones from every religious group or for that matter against the Danish cartoonist.
On the contrary, EV Ramaswamy Naickar, who is no more than an uncivilized man of venom and hatred towards the Hindus, is hailed by his blind followers as great “social reformer”. All his acts to offend Hindu sentiments were eulogised as “social reform” intended to put an end to the superstitious beliefs of the Hindu masses.
The present government in Tamil Nadu has put up statues of this phoney reformer in every nook and corner of the state. To add insult to the injury one such statue was put up just infront of the famous Sri Rangam temple which is the most sacred place for the Vaishnava sect of Hindus. It is like putting up a statue of Godse in front of Gandhi Samadhi or near the Sabarmati Ashram or the statue of Veer Savarkar in front of Jama Masjid in Delhi.
Did any of those who make noise against Jones raise a little finger against Karunanidhi when he defended the statue of EVR in front of Sri Rangam temple? Will he put up the statue of bogus reformer in Velankanni or Nagore facing Christian and Muslim religious shrines. It is not the suggestion of this writer that he should. But why this discrimination. What superstition has EVR removed from Hindu society? You must ask this question to the family of Karunanidhi.
Look at the superstition when it comes to Karunanidhi himself. Did EVR ask him to sport a yellow shawl as against the black shawl, the dress code of Dravidian movement? Can Karuna’s followers or partymen call him by his name. He can be called only by his titles and not by name, so he will be referred to as “Muththamiz Arignar, Tamilaga Mudalvar, Doctor, Kalaignar” and his name “Karunanidhi” will be omitted. What sort of self-respect movement he has inherited from his mentor – EVR? Though EVR said there was no God and God is the creation barbarians and led a movement on that premise, what we witness today in the state is oozing religious fervour with no let up on superstitious rituals
This may be pastor’s wishful thinking. If his threat is executed, it would only pave the way for more radical Islam than the world is witnessing today. It will be a God-sent opportunity for the masterminds of Jihadi or Wahabi movement to recruit more and more “soldiers of God” for the “holy war”. Already, Afghan militants have said that they would kill every American citizen they come across and they have a track record in executing their threats.
The condemnation for the pastor’s threat is not only from the US Christians and the Arab world, needless to say from India for it considers itself more secular than any other country in this planet, but also from Europe and the Vatican. The Vatican official daily talks of protests around the world against the burning of Koran as it is “contrary to the respect owed to all religions and against our doctrine and faith”.
The buzz word today is Islamophobi a. Europe is worried that “Islam would sooner rather than later conquer Europe”. Ban on veil in France, Belgium and ban on minarets in Sweden and Switzerland reflect this fear. A Vatican official exhorts Christians in Europe to produce more children to counter the huge growth in Muslim immigrants to most of the European countries.
Therefore, the protest against the Florida Pastor is not mainly out of concern for increasing bigotry, but out of fear of Islamists and their intolerance. Take for example Pakistan. The country has banned cartoon networks which telecast Hindu mythology. Can this not be termed as “religious bigotry”. Like good Talibans and bad Talibans, bigotry also seems to be of two kinds. If the bigotry is of non-Muslim variety, it is bad, but not Islamic bigotry.
Be that as it may, one cannot resist drawing a parallel to what happened in our own country a few decades ago. Florida pastor is a small fry and he does not represent all the Christians except for 50 or so group in a small church. His threat to burn Koran could have been dismissed as the misguided act of an immature person. But it received world wide attention and condemnation.
Well, public memory is very short. What happened when the so-called “social revolutionary” EV Ramaswamy Naickar, the face of Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu, led a procession of Hindu gods and goddesses garlanded with chappals, while his cronies were pouring excreta on the idols and beating them up with chappals on the main arterial road of the then Madras city. Forget the Hindu society which lost its verve and nerve after 1000 years of slavery, how did the nation react or the non Hindus. Was there a whimper from Christians and Muslims? Contrast this with the sound and fury against Jones from every religious group or for that matter against the Danish cartoonist.
On the contrary, EV Ramaswamy Naickar, who is no more than an uncivilized man of venom and hatred towards the Hindus, is hailed by his blind followers as great “social reformer”. All his acts to offend Hindu sentiments were eulogised as “social reform” intended to put an end to the superstitious beliefs of the Hindu masses.
The present government in Tamil Nadu has put up statues of this phoney reformer in every nook and corner of the state. To add insult to the injury one such statue was put up just infront of the famous Sri Rangam temple which is the most sacred place for the Vaishnava sect of Hindus. It is like putting up a statue of Godse in front of Gandhi Samadhi or near the Sabarmati Ashram or the statue of Veer Savarkar in front of Jama Masjid in Delhi.
Did any of those who make noise against Jones raise a little finger against Karunanidhi when he defended the statue of EVR in front of Sri Rangam temple? Will he put up the statue of bogus reformer in Velankanni or Nagore facing Christian and Muslim religious shrines. It is not the suggestion of this writer that he should. But why this discrimination. What superstition has EVR removed from Hindu society? You must ask this question to the family of Karunanidhi.
Look at the superstition when it comes to Karunanidhi himself. Did EVR ask him to sport a yellow shawl as against the black shawl, the dress code of Dravidian movement? Can Karuna’s followers or partymen call him by his name. He can be called only by his titles and not by name, so he will be referred to as “Muththamiz Arignar, Tamilaga Mudalvar, Doctor, Kalaignar” and his name “Karunanidhi” will be omitted. What sort of self-respect movement he has inherited from his mentor – EVR? Though EVR said there was no God and God is the creation barbarians and led a movement on that premise, what we witness today in the state is oozing religious fervour with no let up on superstitious rituals
Thursday, September 2, 2010
TERROR HAS NO RELIGION, BUT COLOUR!!
If there is a synonym for “double standards”, it is this much abused expression “secularism”. All these days our secular pretenders have been dinning into the heads of Indian masses that terror has no religion. That is, so long as terrorists and terrorism were identified with people professing faith to Islam. They drew inspiration, right or wrong, from their holy book. The names these terror groups coined for their militant outfits were in one way or the other related to the army of their God. They sincerely believed that their God ordained them to kill those “kafirs” or non-believers and the name that was given to such an adventure or agenda was “jihad” (holy war) and the jihadis had their berths reserved in heaven.
The jihad was not confined to India and thanks to the financial and manpower support provided by some of the Islamic nations, and Al Queda, they spread far and wide wreaking havoc in Europe, Chehenya, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan and as a climax to their acts of terror in New York city on the fateful day of 9/11. There were many recruitment and training centres to brainwash the young minds to assume the role of soldiers of God and there was no dearth of petro funds for the sponsors of terrorism. The masterminds of this pogram could not have succeeded but for the silent support of the non-violent Muslims. Though many apologists tried to find a rationale for terrorism stating that poverty, illiteracy and alienation led to perversion of young minds, developments subsequent to 9/11 proved that such an alibi is nothing but a myth because highly educated and rich youth from the community were attracted to the concept of Jihad.
Therefore, this brand of terrorism had come to be known as “Islamic terrorism” and interestingly, the perpetrators of this terrorism had no objection to the phrase. But the objection came from the secular pretenders of India who felt that terror has no religion. For the political class and the media, this came as a politically correct stand. In fact, I recall a leading journalist, and author lamenting over the fact that why LTTE terror was not branded as “Hindu terror” or for that matter the ULFA. A highly knowledgeable man that he is, how come he missed the point that LTTE or ULFA had not drawn inspiration from any Hindu holy book or scriptures. It is a different matter that LTTE’s architect Velupillai Pirabhakaran was a Christian and not a Hindu. Moreover, it was a territorial war and not a holy war as the jihadis claim theirs to be.
But those secular pretenders who objected to the phrase “Islamic terrorism” though the entire world accepted it as such, they did not have a second thought when they coined the phrase “Hindu terror”, just a few groups were SUSPECTED to be involved in the blasts in the recent past. That is what our great Home Minister who has been pilloried by his own party for the use of phrase “Saffron terror” says in defence: “The message is right wing fundamentalist groups are SUSPECTED to be behind some bomb blasts and that message should not be lost in the furore over the phrase”. Can a responsible minister make a statement and condemn particular group of people based on ‘SUSPICION’? The cases of blasts that he refers to have not even come up for trial and in some cases there was not even a charge sheet. Even those fringe groups did not draw inspiration from Vedic texts or atleast they did not say so. Possibly, yes, possibly, some could have acted as a retaliatory measure and to generalise it on behalf of its religion or its chosen colour, is nothing but extreme form of perversion.
The National Socialist Council of Nagaland is a Christian terror group operating in Nagaland. Its proclaimed objective is to establish a separate nation under the slogan “Nagaland for Christ”. In the neighbouring Tripura, there is another group, banned though, operating under the name “National Liberation Front of Tripura and it wants “Kingdom of God and Christ” for Tripura. No one in his senses would coin a phrase “Christian terror” citing such misguided movements.
But you can always take liberties with Hindus because they don’t constitute a tactical vote bank as they are divided into hundreds of castes and sub-castes. The Muslims in the country have been on the defensive because of Jihadi terrorism and the fact that many Muslim youth had training in Bangladesh, Pakistan and other Arab countries for terror mechanism. If you have to make them feel comfortable and pleased with the establishment what else would be effective other than parity. So invent Hindu terror and lock up some Hindu activists behind bars on “suspicion”. It comes very handy when the right wing forces accuse the Congress of going soft on Jihadi terrorism in order to placate a particular community.
Do you notice yet another double standard here? When it comes to serial blasts in Mumbai local trains, or Godhra violence or attack on Swami Narain temple, it was a reaction to Ayodhya and therefore have to be understood as such. When hundreds of Indians were killed and lakhs maimed as a result of Islamic terrorism, there should not be reaction or retaliation from right wing groups assuming that Chidambaram’s suspicion had some basis. Even before credible evidence surfaces and produced before the trial courts, the Home Minister is in a hurry to use the phrase “Saffron terror” demonstrating his ignorance and insensitivity to the word “saffron” in the Indian culture, tradition and civilization. Indian tradition is such that even an octogenarian will fall at the feet of one who wears saffron attire even if the latter is in his twenties or thirties. That is the respect saffron colour enjoys, as a symbol of sacrifice, in Indian tradition. Style and accent are not enough Mr Chidambaram, you must have respect for the tradition of this ancient nation. If you really want to be effective and go in history as a capable home minister, instead of passing the buck to the state chief ministers when confronted with the Left wing extremism such as the one in Bihar hostage crisis, take the bull by its horn. Don’t try to divert the attention by imagining something on suspicion which does not exist. I mean your pet phrase “Saffron terror”. Hope you know other colours as well – like green, white and red!
The jihad was not confined to India and thanks to the financial and manpower support provided by some of the Islamic nations, and Al Queda, they spread far and wide wreaking havoc in Europe, Chehenya, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan and as a climax to their acts of terror in New York city on the fateful day of 9/11. There were many recruitment and training centres to brainwash the young minds to assume the role of soldiers of God and there was no dearth of petro funds for the sponsors of terrorism. The masterminds of this pogram could not have succeeded but for the silent support of the non-violent Muslims. Though many apologists tried to find a rationale for terrorism stating that poverty, illiteracy and alienation led to perversion of young minds, developments subsequent to 9/11 proved that such an alibi is nothing but a myth because highly educated and rich youth from the community were attracted to the concept of Jihad.
Therefore, this brand of terrorism had come to be known as “Islamic terrorism” and interestingly, the perpetrators of this terrorism had no objection to the phrase. But the objection came from the secular pretenders of India who felt that terror has no religion. For the political class and the media, this came as a politically correct stand. In fact, I recall a leading journalist, and author lamenting over the fact that why LTTE terror was not branded as “Hindu terror” or for that matter the ULFA. A highly knowledgeable man that he is, how come he missed the point that LTTE or ULFA had not drawn inspiration from any Hindu holy book or scriptures. It is a different matter that LTTE’s architect Velupillai Pirabhakaran was a Christian and not a Hindu. Moreover, it was a territorial war and not a holy war as the jihadis claim theirs to be.
But those secular pretenders who objected to the phrase “Islamic terrorism” though the entire world accepted it as such, they did not have a second thought when they coined the phrase “Hindu terror”, just a few groups were SUSPECTED to be involved in the blasts in the recent past. That is what our great Home Minister who has been pilloried by his own party for the use of phrase “Saffron terror” says in defence: “The message is right wing fundamentalist groups are SUSPECTED to be behind some bomb blasts and that message should not be lost in the furore over the phrase”. Can a responsible minister make a statement and condemn particular group of people based on ‘SUSPICION’? The cases of blasts that he refers to have not even come up for trial and in some cases there was not even a charge sheet. Even those fringe groups did not draw inspiration from Vedic texts or atleast they did not say so. Possibly, yes, possibly, some could have acted as a retaliatory measure and to generalise it on behalf of its religion or its chosen colour, is nothing but extreme form of perversion.
The National Socialist Council of Nagaland is a Christian terror group operating in Nagaland. Its proclaimed objective is to establish a separate nation under the slogan “Nagaland for Christ”. In the neighbouring Tripura, there is another group, banned though, operating under the name “National Liberation Front of Tripura and it wants “Kingdom of God and Christ” for Tripura. No one in his senses would coin a phrase “Christian terror” citing such misguided movements.
But you can always take liberties with Hindus because they don’t constitute a tactical vote bank as they are divided into hundreds of castes and sub-castes. The Muslims in the country have been on the defensive because of Jihadi terrorism and the fact that many Muslim youth had training in Bangladesh, Pakistan and other Arab countries for terror mechanism. If you have to make them feel comfortable and pleased with the establishment what else would be effective other than parity. So invent Hindu terror and lock up some Hindu activists behind bars on “suspicion”. It comes very handy when the right wing forces accuse the Congress of going soft on Jihadi terrorism in order to placate a particular community.
Do you notice yet another double standard here? When it comes to serial blasts in Mumbai local trains, or Godhra violence or attack on Swami Narain temple, it was a reaction to Ayodhya and therefore have to be understood as such. When hundreds of Indians were killed and lakhs maimed as a result of Islamic terrorism, there should not be reaction or retaliation from right wing groups assuming that Chidambaram’s suspicion had some basis. Even before credible evidence surfaces and produced before the trial courts, the Home Minister is in a hurry to use the phrase “Saffron terror” demonstrating his ignorance and insensitivity to the word “saffron” in the Indian culture, tradition and civilization. Indian tradition is such that even an octogenarian will fall at the feet of one who wears saffron attire even if the latter is in his twenties or thirties. That is the respect saffron colour enjoys, as a symbol of sacrifice, in Indian tradition. Style and accent are not enough Mr Chidambaram, you must have respect for the tradition of this ancient nation. If you really want to be effective and go in history as a capable home minister, instead of passing the buck to the state chief ministers when confronted with the Left wing extremism such as the one in Bihar hostage crisis, take the bull by its horn. Don’t try to divert the attention by imagining something on suspicion which does not exist. I mean your pet phrase “Saffron terror”. Hope you know other colours as well – like green, white and red!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)