Saswat Blog
All that's Left!
Hindus, Muslims and Secular Traditions: Vande Mataram (Part II)
By Saswat Pattanayak
Vande Mataram debate has almost engulfed India these days. I would not claim it to be entirely of no consequence. And those who say that people should be left to sing what they want to, in the tradition of liberal democracy, in my view again, are continuing to enjoy a Hindu privilege. If for a moment, they would imagine how it feels to be member of a minority group being subjected to a song that was targeted against them, most of us would clearly understand the inherent pain. Muslims in India have been told from the beginning that they are citizens of a secular country, and it is the responsibility of the Hindu majority to live upto that expectation. There must not be any confusion in this regard.
Furthermore, some of my beloved readers of this blog have vociferously attacked the communalism in Islam, and in fact to that extent shown solidarity with Bankim Chandra, the poet of Vande Mataram, who also happens to be the founding father of modern Bengali literature.
I am not surprised at the way both perceptions have been intertwined. However, I shall like to dispel some myths about the dismissal of Islam as a communal or fanatical religion, as many in the Hindutva brigade would like to portray it and influence some of us in that process in their abominable quest to establish a “Hindu Rashta”. Some even bring to question the credibility of Mohd. Iqbal who penned down “Sare Jahan se Achha” and compared it with “Vande Mataram”, which I think is a valid comparison, but a grossly non-issue, this time. I will attempt to make some clarifications within the limits of a weblog:
Vande Mataram vs Sare Jahan se Achha:
Let there be no doubt that the origins of the writings and the world-views of the authors are important in understanding the significance of any work. However, even while doing so, one should always keep in mind the socio-political context in which the works have been authored.
I have elaborated on Vande Mataram already in a previous post. The origin of the song was embedded in the work “Ananda Matha” which was just like every other written work of Bankim Chandra, a highly hindu supremacist literature. It clearly outlined Bankim’s aversion towards Muslim people and possibly could have sowed the seed among the Bengali community to later on engage in the religious animosities that eventually led to partition of India into two separate religious regions (East Bengal-Pakistan region and India).
Sensitizing the Bengali population to become reactionary elements in that age was the sole aim of Bankim Chatterjee, and he fairly succeeded in it (which is why the Hindu hymn became so popular to begin with). It can be said without a doubt Bankim was the founding father of reactionary Bengali literature and unfortunately as it is, quite a handful of works during that time thrived with feudal stories and patriarchal protagonists with entire omission of British misrule, (Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay’s stories included) thanks to the unmistakable popularity of this legendary writer.
Speaking of historical context, Bankim Chatterjee lived at a time that was not about “Islam invasion”, that his works were so apprehensive about. It was rather a time when British people had already invaded India. The primary enemies of Indian people were the British colonialists. And yet, Chatterjee was a loyal civil servant of the British administration, and worked as a deputy collector. And he was instrumental in sowing the seeds of two-nation theory through his works full of hatred for Muslims, who he used to describe as “Mlechhas”.
As regards Mohd. Iqbal, who is unfortunately brought to discussion in the context of Bande Mataram controversy, one can only say this. Mohd. Iqbal was a patriot of the highest order whose revolutionary songs were targeted against the British rule only. He had no expressed hatred against Hindus, although looking at growing popularity of Hindutva brigade within the Congress those days, he had sufficient reason to turn skeptical. Muslims, Buddhists and Dalits were among the most oppressed in India, and yet they were the least represented in the high echelons of Congress power. Congress was losing its secular focus with continued tension between Nehru and Patel. Despite Gandhiji’s reluctance, the Patel faction was growing in strength also due to the immense influence the Indian business houses had on sponsoring Gandhi’s visits and shelters at Ashrams. In disillusionment, Netaji Subhas also had to quit Congress. One needs to remember that the hindu fanatics had taken up so much of political space that Netaji Subhash was as unsure as Mohd. Iqbal about the eventual victory of Indians under leadership of mere religious reformers. Netaji was always known for his determined effort to persuade people to give up all their political differences and get united under the banner of Congress. He has emphatically stated that Congress was the only platform that needs support from people all across political spectrum, thus helping to enlist thousands of communists as well as receiving communist support to win the presidentship. However, Netaji was deeply influenced by the Soviet system of governance, its secularism and collective ownerships and he wanted to establish India in similar lines. Except for Nehru, who had himself visited Soviet Union and was a pronounced supporter of Marxist philosophy, Netaji could not gather support from any other major leader, finally leading to his quitting the party and forming an alternative Left organization.
It was during these times that Mohd. Iqbal also went through transformation as he was witnessing how the power structure of Congress was slipping into the hands of Hindu fundamentalists. He used to be a teacher in Philosophy after completing MA from Lahore University. During the college days, his radical poetry to destabilize the British rule with united efforts from Hindus and Muslims were inflammatory enough. At the same time, while on a short visit to London, Iqbal became conscious of the international Islamic revolutions against the European colonial powers, and his alignment towards Islamists became sharper. India was not merely struggling for independence from British during those days, one also needs to remember that some Hindu supremacists within the Congress were making clear their intent to get rid of Urdu as the lingua franca (which it was till that period), and to declare a Hindustan where Muslims would be tokenly represented as was the trend. Hindu leaders like Rajendra Prasad, Radhakrishnan, Sardar Patel were rabidly pursuing Hindu scholarships. And Gandhi himself was trying to adjust to Hinduism demands by “reforming” the religion, not condemning it. Clearly the country was about to be divided, just like Bankim Chatterjee had envisaged, the question was regarding when.
Bankim and Iqbal: Dichotomies
Again unlike Bankim Chatterjee who preached religious violence based on Militant Hinduism, Mohd Iqbal was deeply secular despite being a Muslim. And this is why there were attempts to caste aspersions on his popularity. Iqbal’s poetry were nationally sung and were widely popular (interestingly, it became popular even on the space when Rakesh Sharma made India proud by saying he saw “Sare Jahan Se Achha” from above when asked by Indira Gandhi about what India looked like to him while he was on the Soviet space expedition). Iqbal’s poetry was in Urdu, as opposed to Sanskrit, and that was a great dichotomy already. He was a Muslim revolutionary writing about the poor and the oppressed people of India grounded on realism of political economy. Chatterjee was a Hindu Brahmin reactionary who was writing about glorification of one-nation of Hindu India that was conditional upon annihilation of the Muslims. Whereas Chatterjee was preaching that deaths of Muslims were inevitable for India to be a proud nation, Iqbal was writing:
(roughly translated it means: We are where our hearts are, and even when we reside abroad, our hearts live in our land. Thus artificial borders cannot separate our patriotic feelings. What of the religions? Our religions do not teach us to create enemies among each other. We are the people from the land of the Hind and shall remain thus despite religions and artificial borders.)
This was the great radical poet Mohd. Iqbal who wrote this “Taraana-e-Watan” among other brilliant works where he always stressed on Hindu-Muslim unity that was needed to overthrow the British rulers.
Sadly, the country was so taken hostage by the Hindu supremacists that they did everything possible to highlight Bankim Chatterjee’s conservative anti-Islam works while they continued to demean Mohd Iqbal. Any serious reader of progressive literature would be able to fathom the length at which Iqbal was subsequently saddened by the way his hopes for a united India was being shattered through the aspirations of the growing Hindu militancy even within the rank and file of the mainstream Congress.
I am reproducing a rare poem of Mohd Iqbal written to his beloved son, where he is asking his child to treat poverty as an asset, and not a weakness. Living the life of the oppressed calls for revolution against the foreign invaders, he declares. He directs his son to recognize that Mother Nature (interesting because its not a similar portrayal like Goddess Durga) has gifted a heart to him that must be used to appreciate the diversity of flowers (his stress on ‘Gul’ is consistently present in most of his poems, including another poem by the name ‘Gul Hai to Gulistan ho’. Also interesting, considering that flowers have universal appeal unlike nation-state names). Iqbal asks his son to dedicate life towards serving the poor and the oppressed in a colonial India and not get disheartened by inherent limitations. “Do not be a sell-out; Make a name amidst poverty!”
I could go on quoting from the works of the great poet who did his best to promote religious harmony in the country that was facing threats from fanatic Hindus and insecure Muslims in terms of its future. And bowing down to the pressure of the Hindu revivalism that was to sketch a conditional secular country, Iqbal, like Malcolm X of African-American struggle, turned more towards recognizing the religious mainstream than secular alternatives. When he died in 1937, the entire country mourned the great loss whose expectations could not be lived upto by millions of people of the country who were engaged in falling into the traps of Hindu supremacists’ hatred towards Muslims as well British endorsement of the riots. What’s ironic is that Hindu atrocities those days were only usually tolerated with grief (as Gandhiji famously used to feel ‘sad’ about the conditions in a non-violent manner, which later allowed people like Patel to infiltrate Kashmir with terrorism), and it was continuation of a tradition. What’s often missed in the discourse is that most Muslims actually were converted from Hinduism because of the atrocities and caste-structures of Hinduism. Islam, despite its Shia/Sunni divisions never practiced “untouchability” which was a cornerstone of Hindu religion, and continues to exist even today in practice.
Finally, the categorical difference between Iqbal and Chatterjee was that whereas the former was a die-hard secular who wanted a “Hindustan” based on religious harmony, Chatterjee was a Hindu fanatic and British loyalist who wanted the country to be divided into two parts. Of course Chatterjee won by design since that’s also what the British wanted, and later on towards the late 30’s and early 40’s even the secular people of India had no other option than to accept the two-nation theory, simply because in the other case, there was a clear indication that India would have been ruled by Hindu Brahmins almost to the exclusion of Muslim leaders in power sharing. Even having more Muslim population in India than there is in Pakistan, today, India continues to oppress Muslims when it comes to relegating power.
Those who say that Congress is “appeasing” the minorities are entirely misguided. In fact, Congress, as much as the BJP, has been appeasing the majority in all respects, as a result of which the country’s power equation has fallen in the hands of Hindu Brahmin Supremacists.
Historical evidences, and why the right-wing never quite gets it right?
“Battle of Algiers” is considered to be a landmark in the history of cinema. And its Italian director Gillo Pontecorvo (who co-wrote it with the great Franco Solinas) shot Algeria while the Islamic revolution was defeating French colonialists in the 60’s. His extremely sympathetic treatment of cause of the revolutionaries won him great admiration from the progressive world, whereas the French were quick to ban the film in their country.
Encouraged by the response from the world over, he and his son went ahead to shoot Algeria once again, this time in the 90’s to get the pulse of the country under Islamic rule. Surprised as he was, his videos showed that people just could not tolerate his entry into the country, simply because he was a European filmmaker. However, after knowing that this was the man who had directed “Battle of Algiers”, he was immediately recognized by the new generation of people who greeted him, although with a little pinch of salt.
Seeing the commotion on the streets, a fellow European journalist asked him the reason behind Islam being such a violent religion. Such violent was it, that the Muslims even would not entertain a Marxist filmmaker like Pontecorvo, just because he was a European. Since throughout Pontecorvo was sad while shooting the second film in Algeria (and at some places children were spitting on his car), I was anxious to see how Pontecorvo responds to this stereotyped “European” question.
Pontecorvo, unfazed, replied that Islam was never a violent religion. Indeed its been violent from phase to phase since last 200 years only, and that marks the beginning of European colonization period. It was only in the manner that the European colonizers projected an image of the Muslim people as inherently backward that, they are now facing the wrath of a reaction (which is an ‘open wound’ still). He said he is convinced that the women in Algeria are not oppressed due to their religion, they are oppressed due to economic sanctions imposed by a group of elite colonialists who have made wealth by looting the Muslims during their illegal occupations. As regards the culture, Islamists were not ‘backward’ and the women were not ‘humiliated’. When asked why the women then covered themselves up in such primitive manner, Pontecorvo quoted a female Muslim doctor who said that burka is actually one of the most liberal outfit a woman can wear. It reveals the least and that’s why it makes the woman sexier. The point is to also see the perspectives of the other culture from different levels.
This is also a lesson one can get from the various radical postcolonial studies about how the Islam was never a regressive or oppressive religion in comparison to any other (every religion thrives on codes that are equally repressive). As in the case of India, MJ Akbar, the renowned journalist and author, gives the most comprehensive account about Muslim Rule in his book “Kashmir: Behind the Vale”.
He cites how Saiyyid Bilal Shah (called with love as Bulbul Shah) introduced Islam with love and compassion. That was a time when Kashmir was being ruled by Hindu King Sahadeva. Owing to Bulbul Shah’s immense popularity, there was great support for him, and consequently the King had befriended him in order to carry on the rule. In fact by the time Bulbul Shah passed away in 1327, the king, king’s brother and commander-in-chief of the army were all converted to Islam! The converted king had even constructed Bulbul Langar in Srinagar.
Two things can be noticed here. One, that the King was himself a convert, naturally a voluntary one. And there were many Hindus, predominantly lower castes, but also quite many Kashmiri Pundits themselves, who were horribly disenchanted by Hinduism’s orthodoxy and voluntarily converted themselves. In fact, works by Mulla Ahmed, the first Sheikh-ul-Islam, such as “Fatwa-i-Shihabi”, and “Shihab-i-Saqib” were immensely secular works that held more relevance to Hindus and Muslims than the epic superstitious mythologies of Hinduism.
Upon death of mongol expansionist Kublai Khan (1260-1294), there were huge tribal uprising that led to death of Beijing’s viceroy Lha-Chen-Dugos Grub. Tribes attacked the region Sonamarg valley, which was being ruled by Rama Chandra, who was the prime minister of King Sahadeva. But Sahadeva did not lend much support to Rama Chandra during the period of crisis when tribals attacked the area (in fact Sahadeva was supportive of the tribals). This betrayal led to Rama Chandra declaring himself as the King. As a rather feeble king, Rama Chandra was no match for Lha-Chen’s son Rinchin who attacked the king soon after. Rinchin had escaped the border and aspired to be a king, as much as his friend from Swat valley Shah Mir. Rinchin with support of Mir took over the palace. And Rinchin was declared the Lord of Kasmir on 6 October 1320. Interestingly, Rama Chandra’s daughter Kota who was in love with Rinchin much before the attack, quickly declared herself the queen.
Rinchin’s era is considered to be the golden age in the history of Kashmir, as Rinchin was a Buddhist and he wanted to spread peace throughout the region. He not only married Rama Chandra’s daughter, he also made Rama Chandra’s sons his prime ministers. But since Rinchin was a Buddhist, he could not rule over the state that did not have much Buddhist presence. Hence he decided to convert to Hinduism and called for the head priest. And as shocking as it may sound, the high priests of Hinduism declined to convert him, since they could not determine what caste in the hierarchy was King Rinchin!
Since the Brahmin pundits exercised this folly, Shah Mir found the opportunity to ask his friend to convert to Islam. Although Rinchin was skeptical, he soon saw the great Sufi divine Bulbul Shah at a prayer. Bulbul Shah provided Rinchin what the Brahmins could not: a casteless religion. Islam had no caste: it was built on the equality of humans and faith in the omnipotence of Allah and His last Messenger, the prophet Muhammad. To become a Muslim, Rinchin only had to utter the Qalimah: ‘La-e-laha illallah, Muhammad un-Rasul Allah’.
Rinchin thus became a Muslim, and Islam arrived not through violent coercion, but through peaceful understanding of a harmonious religion. Rinchin took the name Sultan Sadruddin, and built a mosque called Bodro Masjid. During his friend Shah Mir’s rule as Sultan Shamsuddin, a dynasty that lasted for 222 years, Islam had become the paramount religion of Kashmir, but because of its popular success and their identification with the Kashmiri people. Jonaraja described this rule:
“This believer in Allah, calm and active, became the savior of the people and protected the subjects.”
And throughout, despite the brahminical prejudices against the converted kings (Hindus and Budhhists who had turned into Muslims), the Muslim rulers were always sympathetic towards the high priests. It was the period when Nand Rishi or Lal Ded and other religious people flourished. In fact, Abul Fazl wrote in the Ain-i-Akbari:
Moghul rulers likewise, and especially Akbar, were aware of the large Hindu population and worked towards their harmonious living. Firstly, it was the most practical thing to do, since any alternative could have called for doom. Tribal populations were always up in arms against any empire, and it could become a matter of time before Hindus got disenchanted and joined the revolution. To that end, the emperors were forced to be considerate towards diversity of religions. Needless to point out, just as characteristic of any empire (just like it is true in today’s so-called democracies running large thought controls called mainstream media), there were state propaganda working those days to lull people to passivity and relaxation instead of agitated uprising. And just like today’s cheap slavery and draconic hours of call centers, people were forced those days to seek cheap labor in works they had no interests in. But as evidenced, the secularism during the Muslim and Moghul periods were quite practiced at several levels.
Upon deconstruction, what it merely suggests is that Moghul rule created more problems for the upper caste Hindu feudalists than the working peasants. The assimilation was seen more among Muslims and the working poor of India, than between Muslims and the upper caste people.
Now I will quote from Orissamatters, authored by SCP, who is an eminent journalist of Orissa:
Eminent historian Irfan Habib says that Moghul rulers had even appointed Brahmins as administrators owing to their upper caste/class/knowledge backgrounds. And even in such positions, the Brahmins under the Moghul rule, did not amend their behavior. As an example, we shall take the case of ‘Satnamis’, a sect founded in 1657 by a native of Narnaul, who proclaimed himself to be of the tradition of the great monotheist Kabir, the weaver. They were opposed tooth and nail by the banyas and Brahmin caste people, since Satnamis (worshipper of the True Name or God) comprised people from sections such as sweepers, carpenters and tanners. “It was obviously owing to this contamination from contact with the untouchables that the sect became particularly hateful in the eyes of the orthodox,” says Habib. (Essays in Indian History, Tulika, New Delhi, 1995).
Isardas Mehta in “Futuhat-i ‘Alamgiri” quotes a loyal Hindu official of the Mughal government describing Satnamis as:
Thus, even during the Mughal period, the Hindu supremacists continued to hold sway, even in the face of definitive secular reigns by Akbar and Aurangzeb. Unfortunately, they continue to do so even to this date--to the extent that the stories of forced labor were exaggerated by the Hindu revisionists, without a mention of exploitation of workers to build temples. More than the Hindu kings, it was the Moghul rulers who played their part in promoting economic parity. Indeed Sir Walter Lawrence’s works show how in Moghul periods, women were given six annas a day for independent sustenance. And in projects involving large-scale labor, the main gates were written with inscriptions such as these:
“Na kardeh hech kas beggar anja
Tamame yaftand az makhzanash zar”.
(No one, it proclaims proudly, was shanghaied into beggar, or forced labor, for this imperial project; each worker was paid fully for his her labor.&rdquo
This blog cannot go on in the direction of glorifying the Moghul rulers. Indeed far from it, this stands to condemn any of the rules by the kings and emperors, since none of them established peoples’ democracy. Also because of the stages of development those days, such dreams were quite distant. But in view of the current attack on Islam and an ignorant dismissal of it as a religion inherently violent, oppressive or backward, I thought it would serve well to do a small analysis of the situation using a critical historiography.
In Conclusion:
The day of patriotic exhibition of India has passed us by. We can rejoice at its passage. To begin with 2006 is not the centenary of Vande Mataram. It was used this way solely for sensational purpose. In addition, even singing of National Anthem Jana Gana Mana is not compulsory and should not be. Hence Vande Mataram controversy was furthered solely for the political purpose. Lastly, Islam is unlike Hinduism. Just the way Hindu preachers know that Hinduism is an organically developed national religion that has always stayed inside India due to its exclusionary philosophy that forbids people from joining it (just like Puri Pandas are absolutely right in not allowing non-Hindus to enter Jagannath Temple since they know Hinduism quite well to be discriminatory), Muslims know it well that Islam is a global religion that is based upon spreading the word of the last Messenger of Allah, and hence it does not recognize a nation-state to be paramount. So certain religious people condemning certain other religious people because they think their base of religion is valid while other bases of other religions are not, amounts to mere assertion of misconception.
And the way the right wing brigade took advantage of death of Pramod Mahajan and statue of Bal Thackrey’s wife to cause unrest in the country, they are now trying to take advantage of a song-recital drama. News reports say that their Vande Mataram demonstrations are causing violence in muslim areas where the hindu fanatics are having a free hand in harassing the minorities in India. And this is simply intolerable and unacceptable, and every patriotic Indian must rise up against the narrow minded ignorant bigots of the rightist parties and stop them from further claiming that they represent us in any manner whatsoever. Its time for them to either gain newer knowledge and get rid of their professed idiocy, or prepare to face the wrath of the oppressed in coming times when the people of India will no more merely vote them out of power like a dying party of losers, but also wipe them off the public platforms where they stage hypocritical melodramas.
Vande Mataram debate has almost engulfed India these days. I would not claim it to be entirely of no consequence. And those who say that people should be left to sing what they want to, in the tradition of liberal democracy, in my view again, are continuing to enjoy a Hindu privilege. If for a moment, they would imagine how it feels to be member of a minority group being subjected to a song that was targeted against them, most of us would clearly understand the inherent pain. Muslims in India have been told from the beginning that they are citizens of a secular country, and it is the responsibility of the Hindu majority to live upto that expectation. There must not be any confusion in this regard.
Furthermore, some of my beloved readers of this blog have vociferously attacked the communalism in Islam, and in fact to that extent shown solidarity with Bankim Chandra, the poet of Vande Mataram, who also happens to be the founding father of modern Bengali literature.
I am not surprised at the way both perceptions have been intertwined. However, I shall like to dispel some myths about the dismissal of Islam as a communal or fanatical religion, as many in the Hindutva brigade would like to portray it and influence some of us in that process in their abominable quest to establish a “Hindu Rashta”. Some even bring to question the credibility of Mohd. Iqbal who penned down “Sare Jahan se Achha” and compared it with “Vande Mataram”, which I think is a valid comparison, but a grossly non-issue, this time. I will attempt to make some clarifications within the limits of a weblog:
Vande Mataram vs Sare Jahan se Achha:
Let there be no doubt that the origins of the writings and the world-views of the authors are important in understanding the significance of any work. However, even while doing so, one should always keep in mind the socio-political context in which the works have been authored.
I have elaborated on Vande Mataram already in a previous post. The origin of the song was embedded in the work “Ananda Matha” which was just like every other written work of Bankim Chandra, a highly hindu supremacist literature. It clearly outlined Bankim’s aversion towards Muslim people and possibly could have sowed the seed among the Bengali community to later on engage in the religious animosities that eventually led to partition of India into two separate religious regions (East Bengal-Pakistan region and India).
Sensitizing the Bengali population to become reactionary elements in that age was the sole aim of Bankim Chatterjee, and he fairly succeeded in it (which is why the Hindu hymn became so popular to begin with). It can be said without a doubt Bankim was the founding father of reactionary Bengali literature and unfortunately as it is, quite a handful of works during that time thrived with feudal stories and patriarchal protagonists with entire omission of British misrule, (Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay’s stories included) thanks to the unmistakable popularity of this legendary writer.
Speaking of historical context, Bankim Chatterjee lived at a time that was not about “Islam invasion”, that his works were so apprehensive about. It was rather a time when British people had already invaded India. The primary enemies of Indian people were the British colonialists. And yet, Chatterjee was a loyal civil servant of the British administration, and worked as a deputy collector. And he was instrumental in sowing the seeds of two-nation theory through his works full of hatred for Muslims, who he used to describe as “Mlechhas”.
As regards Mohd. Iqbal, who is unfortunately brought to discussion in the context of Bande Mataram controversy, one can only say this. Mohd. Iqbal was a patriot of the highest order whose revolutionary songs were targeted against the British rule only. He had no expressed hatred against Hindus, although looking at growing popularity of Hindutva brigade within the Congress those days, he had sufficient reason to turn skeptical. Muslims, Buddhists and Dalits were among the most oppressed in India, and yet they were the least represented in the high echelons of Congress power. Congress was losing its secular focus with continued tension between Nehru and Patel. Despite Gandhiji’s reluctance, the Patel faction was growing in strength also due to the immense influence the Indian business houses had on sponsoring Gandhi’s visits and shelters at Ashrams. In disillusionment, Netaji Subhas also had to quit Congress. One needs to remember that the hindu fanatics had taken up so much of political space that Netaji Subhash was as unsure as Mohd. Iqbal about the eventual victory of Indians under leadership of mere religious reformers. Netaji was always known for his determined effort to persuade people to give up all their political differences and get united under the banner of Congress. He has emphatically stated that Congress was the only platform that needs support from people all across political spectrum, thus helping to enlist thousands of communists as well as receiving communist support to win the presidentship. However, Netaji was deeply influenced by the Soviet system of governance, its secularism and collective ownerships and he wanted to establish India in similar lines. Except for Nehru, who had himself visited Soviet Union and was a pronounced supporter of Marxist philosophy, Netaji could not gather support from any other major leader, finally leading to his quitting the party and forming an alternative Left organization.
It was during these times that Mohd. Iqbal also went through transformation as he was witnessing how the power structure of Congress was slipping into the hands of Hindu fundamentalists. He used to be a teacher in Philosophy after completing MA from Lahore University. During the college days, his radical poetry to destabilize the British rule with united efforts from Hindus and Muslims were inflammatory enough. At the same time, while on a short visit to London, Iqbal became conscious of the international Islamic revolutions against the European colonial powers, and his alignment towards Islamists became sharper. India was not merely struggling for independence from British during those days, one also needs to remember that some Hindu supremacists within the Congress were making clear their intent to get rid of Urdu as the lingua franca (which it was till that period), and to declare a Hindustan where Muslims would be tokenly represented as was the trend. Hindu leaders like Rajendra Prasad, Radhakrishnan, Sardar Patel were rabidly pursuing Hindu scholarships. And Gandhi himself was trying to adjust to Hinduism demands by “reforming” the religion, not condemning it. Clearly the country was about to be divided, just like Bankim Chatterjee had envisaged, the question was regarding when.
Bankim and Iqbal: Dichotomies
Again unlike Bankim Chatterjee who preached religious violence based on Militant Hinduism, Mohd Iqbal was deeply secular despite being a Muslim. And this is why there were attempts to caste aspersions on his popularity. Iqbal’s poetry were nationally sung and were widely popular (interestingly, it became popular even on the space when Rakesh Sharma made India proud by saying he saw “Sare Jahan Se Achha” from above when asked by Indira Gandhi about what India looked like to him while he was on the Soviet space expedition). Iqbal’s poetry was in Urdu, as opposed to Sanskrit, and that was a great dichotomy already. He was a Muslim revolutionary writing about the poor and the oppressed people of India grounded on realism of political economy. Chatterjee was a Hindu Brahmin reactionary who was writing about glorification of one-nation of Hindu India that was conditional upon annihilation of the Muslims. Whereas Chatterjee was preaching that deaths of Muslims were inevitable for India to be a proud nation, Iqbal was writing:
“Gurbat mein ho agar hum, rehta hai dil watan mein
Samjho wohi humein bhi, dil mein jahna hamara
Majhab nahni sikhata, aapas mein bair rakhna
Hindi hain hum, watan hain Hindustan humara”
(roughly translated it means: We are where our hearts are, and even when we reside abroad, our hearts live in our land. Thus artificial borders cannot separate our patriotic feelings. What of the religions? Our religions do not teach us to create enemies among each other. We are the people from the land of the Hind and shall remain thus despite religions and artificial borders.)
This was the great radical poet Mohd. Iqbal who wrote this “Taraana-e-Watan” among other brilliant works where he always stressed on Hindu-Muslim unity that was needed to overthrow the British rulers.
Sadly, the country was so taken hostage by the Hindu supremacists that they did everything possible to highlight Bankim Chatterjee’s conservative anti-Islam works while they continued to demean Mohd Iqbal. Any serious reader of progressive literature would be able to fathom the length at which Iqbal was subsequently saddened by the way his hopes for a united India was being shattered through the aspirations of the growing Hindu militancy even within the rank and file of the mainstream Congress.
I am reproducing a rare poem of Mohd Iqbal written to his beloved son, where he is asking his child to treat poverty as an asset, and not a weakness. Living the life of the oppressed calls for revolution against the foreign invaders, he declares. He directs his son to recognize that Mother Nature (interesting because its not a similar portrayal like Goddess Durga) has gifted a heart to him that must be used to appreciate the diversity of flowers (his stress on ‘Gul’ is consistently present in most of his poems, including another poem by the name ‘Gul Hai to Gulistan ho’. Also interesting, considering that flowers have universal appeal unlike nation-state names). Iqbal asks his son to dedicate life towards serving the poor and the oppressed in a colonial India and not get disheartened by inherent limitations. “Do not be a sell-out; Make a name amidst poverty!”
“Garibi mein Naam Paida Kar”
Dayare-Ishq mein apna muqaam paida kar
Naya Zamaana naye subh-o-shaam paida kar
Khuda agar dil-e-fitrat-shanaas de tujhko
Sukute-laal-o-gul se kalaam paida kar
Utha na shisha-garane-Firang ke ehsaan
Sifale-hind se mina-o-jaam paida kar
Mein shakhe-taak hnu meri gazal hai mera samar
Mere samar se maya-e-lalafam paida kar
Meri tariq amiri nahni fakiri hain
Khud-i na bech, garibi mein naam paida kar
I could go on quoting from the works of the great poet who did his best to promote religious harmony in the country that was facing threats from fanatic Hindus and insecure Muslims in terms of its future. And bowing down to the pressure of the Hindu revivalism that was to sketch a conditional secular country, Iqbal, like Malcolm X of African-American struggle, turned more towards recognizing the religious mainstream than secular alternatives. When he died in 1937, the entire country mourned the great loss whose expectations could not be lived upto by millions of people of the country who were engaged in falling into the traps of Hindu supremacists’ hatred towards Muslims as well British endorsement of the riots. What’s ironic is that Hindu atrocities those days were only usually tolerated with grief (as Gandhiji famously used to feel ‘sad’ about the conditions in a non-violent manner, which later allowed people like Patel to infiltrate Kashmir with terrorism), and it was continuation of a tradition. What’s often missed in the discourse is that most Muslims actually were converted from Hinduism because of the atrocities and caste-structures of Hinduism. Islam, despite its Shia/Sunni divisions never practiced “untouchability” which was a cornerstone of Hindu religion, and continues to exist even today in practice.
Finally, the categorical difference between Iqbal and Chatterjee was that whereas the former was a die-hard secular who wanted a “Hindustan” based on religious harmony, Chatterjee was a Hindu fanatic and British loyalist who wanted the country to be divided into two parts. Of course Chatterjee won by design since that’s also what the British wanted, and later on towards the late 30’s and early 40’s even the secular people of India had no other option than to accept the two-nation theory, simply because in the other case, there was a clear indication that India would have been ruled by Hindu Brahmins almost to the exclusion of Muslim leaders in power sharing. Even having more Muslim population in India than there is in Pakistan, today, India continues to oppress Muslims when it comes to relegating power.
Those who say that Congress is “appeasing” the minorities are entirely misguided. In fact, Congress, as much as the BJP, has been appeasing the majority in all respects, as a result of which the country’s power equation has fallen in the hands of Hindu Brahmin Supremacists.
Historical evidences, and why the right-wing never quite gets it right?
“Battle of Algiers” is considered to be a landmark in the history of cinema. And its Italian director Gillo Pontecorvo (who co-wrote it with the great Franco Solinas) shot Algeria while the Islamic revolution was defeating French colonialists in the 60’s. His extremely sympathetic treatment of cause of the revolutionaries won him great admiration from the progressive world, whereas the French were quick to ban the film in their country.
Encouraged by the response from the world over, he and his son went ahead to shoot Algeria once again, this time in the 90’s to get the pulse of the country under Islamic rule. Surprised as he was, his videos showed that people just could not tolerate his entry into the country, simply because he was a European filmmaker. However, after knowing that this was the man who had directed “Battle of Algiers”, he was immediately recognized by the new generation of people who greeted him, although with a little pinch of salt.
Seeing the commotion on the streets, a fellow European journalist asked him the reason behind Islam being such a violent religion. Such violent was it, that the Muslims even would not entertain a Marxist filmmaker like Pontecorvo, just because he was a European. Since throughout Pontecorvo was sad while shooting the second film in Algeria (and at some places children were spitting on his car), I was anxious to see how Pontecorvo responds to this stereotyped “European” question.
Pontecorvo, unfazed, replied that Islam was never a violent religion. Indeed its been violent from phase to phase since last 200 years only, and that marks the beginning of European colonization period. It was only in the manner that the European colonizers projected an image of the Muslim people as inherently backward that, they are now facing the wrath of a reaction (which is an ‘open wound’ still). He said he is convinced that the women in Algeria are not oppressed due to their religion, they are oppressed due to economic sanctions imposed by a group of elite colonialists who have made wealth by looting the Muslims during their illegal occupations. As regards the culture, Islamists were not ‘backward’ and the women were not ‘humiliated’. When asked why the women then covered themselves up in such primitive manner, Pontecorvo quoted a female Muslim doctor who said that burka is actually one of the most liberal outfit a woman can wear. It reveals the least and that’s why it makes the woman sexier. The point is to also see the perspectives of the other culture from different levels.
This is also a lesson one can get from the various radical postcolonial studies about how the Islam was never a regressive or oppressive religion in comparison to any other (every religion thrives on codes that are equally repressive). As in the case of India, MJ Akbar, the renowned journalist and author, gives the most comprehensive account about Muslim Rule in his book “Kashmir: Behind the Vale”.
He cites how Saiyyid Bilal Shah (called with love as Bulbul Shah) introduced Islam with love and compassion. That was a time when Kashmir was being ruled by Hindu King Sahadeva. Owing to Bulbul Shah’s immense popularity, there was great support for him, and consequently the King had befriended him in order to carry on the rule. In fact by the time Bulbul Shah passed away in 1327, the king, king’s brother and commander-in-chief of the army were all converted to Islam! The converted king had even constructed Bulbul Langar in Srinagar.
Two things can be noticed here. One, that the King was himself a convert, naturally a voluntary one. And there were many Hindus, predominantly lower castes, but also quite many Kashmiri Pundits themselves, who were horribly disenchanted by Hinduism’s orthodoxy and voluntarily converted themselves. In fact, works by Mulla Ahmed, the first Sheikh-ul-Islam, such as “Fatwa-i-Shihabi”, and “Shihab-i-Saqib” were immensely secular works that held more relevance to Hindus and Muslims than the epic superstitious mythologies of Hinduism.
Upon death of mongol expansionist Kublai Khan (1260-1294), there were huge tribal uprising that led to death of Beijing’s viceroy Lha-Chen-Dugos Grub. Tribes attacked the region Sonamarg valley, which was being ruled by Rama Chandra, who was the prime minister of King Sahadeva. But Sahadeva did not lend much support to Rama Chandra during the period of crisis when tribals attacked the area (in fact Sahadeva was supportive of the tribals). This betrayal led to Rama Chandra declaring himself as the King. As a rather feeble king, Rama Chandra was no match for Lha-Chen’s son Rinchin who attacked the king soon after. Rinchin had escaped the border and aspired to be a king, as much as his friend from Swat valley Shah Mir. Rinchin with support of Mir took over the palace. And Rinchin was declared the Lord of Kasmir on 6 October 1320. Interestingly, Rama Chandra’s daughter Kota who was in love with Rinchin much before the attack, quickly declared herself the queen.
Rinchin’s era is considered to be the golden age in the history of Kashmir, as Rinchin was a Buddhist and he wanted to spread peace throughout the region. He not only married Rama Chandra’s daughter, he also made Rama Chandra’s sons his prime ministers. But since Rinchin was a Buddhist, he could not rule over the state that did not have much Buddhist presence. Hence he decided to convert to Hinduism and called for the head priest. And as shocking as it may sound, the high priests of Hinduism declined to convert him, since they could not determine what caste in the hierarchy was King Rinchin!
Since the Brahmin pundits exercised this folly, Shah Mir found the opportunity to ask his friend to convert to Islam. Although Rinchin was skeptical, he soon saw the great Sufi divine Bulbul Shah at a prayer. Bulbul Shah provided Rinchin what the Brahmins could not: a casteless religion. Islam had no caste: it was built on the equality of humans and faith in the omnipotence of Allah and His last Messenger, the prophet Muhammad. To become a Muslim, Rinchin only had to utter the Qalimah: ‘La-e-laha illallah, Muhammad un-Rasul Allah’.
Rinchin thus became a Muslim, and Islam arrived not through violent coercion, but through peaceful understanding of a harmonious religion. Rinchin took the name Sultan Sadruddin, and built a mosque called Bodro Masjid. During his friend Shah Mir’s rule as Sultan Shamsuddin, a dynasty that lasted for 222 years, Islam had become the paramount religion of Kashmir, but because of its popular success and their identification with the Kashmiri people. Jonaraja described this rule:
“This believer in Allah, calm and active, became the savior of the people and protected the subjects.”
And throughout, despite the brahminical prejudices against the converted kings (Hindus and Budhhists who had turned into Muslims), the Muslim rulers were always sympathetic towards the high priests. It was the period when Nand Rishi or Lal Ded and other religious people flourished. In fact, Abul Fazl wrote in the Ain-i-Akbari:
“The most respected people are the Rishis who, although they do not suffer themselves to be fettered by traditions, are doubtless the true worshippers of God. They do not revile any other sect, nor ask anything of anyone. They plant the roads with fruit trees to provide the traveler with refreshments. They abstain from meat and have no intercourse with the other sex. There are 2000 of these Rishis in Kashmir.”
Moghul rulers likewise, and especially Akbar, were aware of the large Hindu population and worked towards their harmonious living. Firstly, it was the most practical thing to do, since any alternative could have called for doom. Tribal populations were always up in arms against any empire, and it could become a matter of time before Hindus got disenchanted and joined the revolution. To that end, the emperors were forced to be considerate towards diversity of religions. Needless to point out, just as characteristic of any empire (just like it is true in today’s so-called democracies running large thought controls called mainstream media), there were state propaganda working those days to lull people to passivity and relaxation instead of agitated uprising. And just like today’s cheap slavery and draconic hours of call centers, people were forced those days to seek cheap labor in works they had no interests in. But as evidenced, the secularism during the Muslim and Moghul periods were quite practiced at several levels.
“The fusion of Islamic culture with existing Indian culture achieved the most positive expression in the activities of the artisan classes of the towns and amongst the cultivators, as is evident from the socio-religious ideas of the time, and also in primarily artisan activities such as building monuments, the fusion being evident in the architecture of the period. The pattern of living in both these classes came to be interrelated to a far greater degree than amongst the nobility. Domestic ceremonies and rituals such as those connected with birth, marriage, and death became mingled. The converted Muslims were also heirs to long-standing rituals practiced by the Hindus. New ceremonies which had come with Islam, and which were regarded as auspicious, crept into Hindu ritual.”
(page 300, A History of India, Volume One. Romila Thapar.)
Upon deconstruction, what it merely suggests is that Moghul rule created more problems for the upper caste Hindu feudalists than the working peasants. The assimilation was seen more among Muslims and the working poor of India, than between Muslims and the upper caste people.
Now I will quote from Orissamatters, authored by SCP, who is an eminent journalist of Orissa:
“Kalhan’s classic work ‘Rajtarangini’ describes how the Brahmins conspired against Queen Dida as she was not patronizing to Brahminism and after her death, beheaded from behind Sri Tunga, the most powerful protector of the liberal policies of the Late Queen.
So ruthlessly the Brahmins known as Kashmir Pundits imposed their caste supremacy that the people exploited under caste apartheid jumped into Islam which was not vitiated by caste system. They not only became Muslims en masse, but also they became so with so much revengeful resolution that they drove away the Pundits from the soil.
The entire land mass that has now become Pakistan and Bangladesh was the dwelling place of Indians where our ancient people had established their own civilization. It is the Brahmins’ supremacist mentality that has helped Islam to spread in India.
So whosoever has embraced the Muslim religion in this Sub-Continent is an Indian who has revolted against Brahminism, against Brahminic caste apartheid.”
Eminent historian Irfan Habib says that Moghul rulers had even appointed Brahmins as administrators owing to their upper caste/class/knowledge backgrounds. And even in such positions, the Brahmins under the Moghul rule, did not amend their behavior. As an example, we shall take the case of ‘Satnamis’, a sect founded in 1657 by a native of Narnaul, who proclaimed himself to be of the tradition of the great monotheist Kabir, the weaver. They were opposed tooth and nail by the banyas and Brahmin caste people, since Satnamis (worshipper of the True Name or God) comprised people from sections such as sweepers, carpenters and tanners. “It was obviously owing to this contamination from contact with the untouchables that the sect became particularly hateful in the eyes of the orthodox,” says Habib. (Essays in Indian History, Tulika, New Delhi, 1995).
Isardas Mehta in “Futuhat-i ‘Alamgiri” quotes a loyal Hindu official of the Mughal government describing Satnamis as:
“That community, because of its extreme dirtiness, is rendered foul, filthy and impure. Thus in their religion they do not differentiate between Hindus and Muslims. They eat porks and other disgusting things. If a dog has eaten from their bowl, they do not abstain from eating from it or show any revulsion.”
Thus, even during the Mughal period, the Hindu supremacists continued to hold sway, even in the face of definitive secular reigns by Akbar and Aurangzeb. Unfortunately, they continue to do so even to this date--to the extent that the stories of forced labor were exaggerated by the Hindu revisionists, without a mention of exploitation of workers to build temples. More than the Hindu kings, it was the Moghul rulers who played their part in promoting economic parity. Indeed Sir Walter Lawrence’s works show how in Moghul periods, women were given six annas a day for independent sustenance. And in projects involving large-scale labor, the main gates were written with inscriptions such as these:
“Na kardeh hech kas beggar anja
Tamame yaftand az makhzanash zar”.
(No one, it proclaims proudly, was shanghaied into beggar, or forced labor, for this imperial project; each worker was paid fully for his her labor.&rdquo
This blog cannot go on in the direction of glorifying the Moghul rulers. Indeed far from it, this stands to condemn any of the rules by the kings and emperors, since none of them established peoples’ democracy. Also because of the stages of development those days, such dreams were quite distant. But in view of the current attack on Islam and an ignorant dismissal of it as a religion inherently violent, oppressive or backward, I thought it would serve well to do a small analysis of the situation using a critical historiography.
In Conclusion:
The day of patriotic exhibition of India has passed us by. We can rejoice at its passage. To begin with 2006 is not the centenary of Vande Mataram. It was used this way solely for sensational purpose. In addition, even singing of National Anthem Jana Gana Mana is not compulsory and should not be. Hence Vande Mataram controversy was furthered solely for the political purpose. Lastly, Islam is unlike Hinduism. Just the way Hindu preachers know that Hinduism is an organically developed national religion that has always stayed inside India due to its exclusionary philosophy that forbids people from joining it (just like Puri Pandas are absolutely right in not allowing non-Hindus to enter Jagannath Temple since they know Hinduism quite well to be discriminatory), Muslims know it well that Islam is a global religion that is based upon spreading the word of the last Messenger of Allah, and hence it does not recognize a nation-state to be paramount. So certain religious people condemning certain other religious people because they think their base of religion is valid while other bases of other religions are not, amounts to mere assertion of misconception.
And the way the right wing brigade took advantage of death of Pramod Mahajan and statue of Bal Thackrey’s wife to cause unrest in the country, they are now trying to take advantage of a song-recital drama. News reports say that their Vande Mataram demonstrations are causing violence in muslim areas where the hindu fanatics are having a free hand in harassing the minorities in India. And this is simply intolerable and unacceptable, and every patriotic Indian must rise up against the narrow minded ignorant bigots of the rightist parties and stop them from further claiming that they represent us in any manner whatsoever. Its time for them to either gain newer knowledge and get rid of their professed idiocy, or prepare to face the wrath of the oppressed in coming times when the people of India will no more merely vote them out of power like a dying party of losers, but also wipe them off the public platforms where they stage hypocritical melodramas.
|
Vande Mataram as a Hindu Hymn
By Saswat Pattanayak
There is no reason why Vande Mataram, the Indian national song, should be in controversy any longer. This song should be now scrapped and deleted from its current status.
Ever since India’s ‘independence’, this song has created controversies, and for obvious reasons. However, just as the ‘secular’ leadership of India had tried to suppress the skeletons in its cupboard, the opportunistic media had also vociferously supported the need for the song to go on in its truncated form.
And India, mostly kept ignorant about the damaging consequences of having such a song was lulled into believing that everything was well so long as we could come to a consensus. For the consensus, however the four power estates of Indian democracy utilized a) the voices of Hindu seculars approving the song’s first two paragraphs, b) the voices of Muslim seculars approving the same paragraphs, c) the voices of Hindu fanatics demanding the whole song to be made compulsory, and d) the confusion of the vast majority of Indians who had no clue whatsoever of any possibility of controversy over a ‘patriotic’ song. But the structure deliberately left out a segment of public which had from the beginning staged protest against the song.
Since the mainstream premise of such a song begins with unquestioned patriotism, anyone who opposes an element within that realm is at once accused of being anti-national. Hence, the remaining group of people, the fifth group which fervently opposed the song everytime, unfortunately most of the time comprised radical Muslims, were denounced to the extent of being silenced by the media.
Bankim Chandra as a Patriot: The lies my teacher told me
In matters of social concerns, half-truths are synonymous with blatant lies. This is so, because half-truths promote biases, prejudices and stereotypes. The text books that most of us studied during our school days were full of the half-truths. This is nothing surprising or exceptional, though. Every government under a popular democracy has to resort to lies in order to sustain its power base. Hence the dominant Congress with its pseudo-Gandhian philosophy also worked towards integrating its lies by to projecting a reconciled difference and reaching a “consensus”.
There is nothing wrong in reaching a consensus, but in this attempt, the critical voices should not be silenced systematically either. And in this case, Vande Mataram should not have been allowed to triumph in a land that should have had it banned subsequent to pursuance of its ideals of secularism. Rajendra Prasad whose fanaticism with Hindutva is well known, of course wanted the song to be given equal status with national anthem. This was unfortunate, although not entirely unexpected of him, considering that the rabid religious elements still wanted to declare India as a Hindu Rashtra. But the condescending statesmen of the time also acquiesced to the demand, albeit in the truncated form.
The future generations of India were not to be told of the lies and deception that went behind projecting Vande Mataram as a national song. As a result, today most people do not even think twice before patronizing the song. Even the ardent Hindu fanatics forgave a Muslim composer making tunes and money off the obsession.
The colonial crisis?
The demands by the rightist brigade to make the song compulsory in educational institution has raised eyebrows. In this case, again, the criticism has mostly come from religious minorities, even at the expense of being categorized as anti-national. We all know it too well how the Hindu fanatics are running to any extent to blame the Muslims of India as instigators of terrorism instead of looking within for managing a society based on complete anarchy and making living off the institutional ignorance. And now, the Hindu supremacists, whose ideological forefathers were infamously hands in gloves with the imperialists (and which is why they were banned from contesting polls in secular India) have picked up sensitive threads of patriotism.
In the classic case of ignorance, the mainstream media propaganda, clearly overlooks certain facts that people of India have right to know and act upon. Here they are in a nutshell:
1. Anti-Muslim: Bankim Chattarjee, the man who wrote this song Vande Mataram was a rabid Hindu fundamentalist whose goal was not emancipation of India from the clutches of the colonialists, rather to establish a Hindu Rashtra by any means. His stress on Islam corruption of India is not only devoid of the highly secular past of India during the Moghul rule, but also smacks of religious chauvinism targeted against Muslim freedom fighters of the colonial period.
Historian R.C. Majumdar writes, “Bankimchandra converted patriotism into religion and religion into patriotism”. In fact Anand Math, the work from which Vande Mataram is derived, is a text of Hindu nationalism, and not Indian nationalism. The work is selectively targeted against Muslims all over the texts. Anand Math is a Hindu temple where there are scenes of Jivananda calling Muslims names: “We have often thought to break up this bird's nest of Muslim rule, to pull down the city of the renegades and throw it into the river - to turn this pig-sty to ashes and make Mother earth free from evil again. Friends, that day has come.”
A G Noorani (Frontline, January 2-15, 1999) quotes M.R.A. Baig’s analysis of the novel in which the song finds exclusive place:
2. Pro-British: If there ever was a piece of Indian literature that was most pronouncedly pro-colonialists, then it was Anand Math. Interestingly, and naturally enough, the right wing political parties have picked up their ideal role model in Chatterjee since their ideologues were themselves allies of the British rulers in India. Anand Math is replete with anti-Muslim slogans, no doubt. But it also celebrates the British rule in India. It in fact goes to the extent of saying that British were friends of India, and it was only the Muslim people against whom the Hindus should fight against.
In the last chapter of the work, the author speaks through the supreme character: “Your task is accomplished. The Muslim power is destroyed. There is nothing else for you to do.
Your vow is fulfilled. You have brought fortune to your Mother. You have set up a British government. Give up your fighting. Let the people take to their ploughs. Let the earth be rich with harvest and the people rich with wealth.
There are no foes now. The English are our friends as well as rulers.”
This is the context of the song that goes on to celebrate Hindu religious deities entirely and exclusively.
Baahute tumi maa shakti
hR^idaye tumi maa bhakti
tomaara i pratimaa gaDi
mandire mandire
TvaM hi Durgaa dashapraharaNadhaariNii
kamalaa kamaladala vihaariNii
vaaNii vidyaadaayinii namaami tvaaM
Its target is the Muslim people of India and their tradition which has been blatantly misrepresented in the work. And its ally in the vicious hatred campaign is the British rule in India. The mothers in Bande Mataram are the Hindu goddesses and there is no reason why people of other religions should be forced to sing their praises. Just because certain Bengal revolutionaries used this slogan and popularized it, and some more Bengali intellectuals upheld Bankim Chatterjee as an iconic litterateur, it does not mean the great peoples of India will forget the rich multi-cultural tradition that has been in existence in the country since centuries now and in the name of Hindu chauvinism, people should not be misled any further to denounce Moghul rule and celebrate British Raj.
Knowingly or unknowingly, people have believed in the mainstream history of India from almost a harmless angle. They believe that Gandhi was the ‘father of the nation’, that Congress was the party that gave freedom to India, they believe that Hindus contribute the most to the country’s cultural landscape, and they celebrate Saraswati and Sivaji. People are apparently content with the reservation policies working against the Dalits, with nominal celebrations of Islam culture, with not paying reparation to the tribal peoples for having snatched their dear lands.
Even as these acceptances come as mediocre consensus of some form to carry on with a liberal democracy, these have been still in a Gandhian tradition of positive compromises. Our objections should not be towards the social fiber of Indian constitution which is secular, democratic and socialist in its spirit. But if anyone tries to enforce their religious ideals down the future generations of the country, one and all of us must stand in solidarity to oppose the vicious steps. Once and for all, it must be declared that India is not a Hindu country and no Hindu glorifications can take place at an official level, not even if some right wing fanatics come to power once in a while.
We have had many a dramatic stands of consensus in the past. Indeed, this has been the policy of Indian ‘nation’ since its very birth. Although the country is composed of different nation-states, we declared a consensus that we were almost one nation. Although India had distinctly different language groups we declared Hindi as the adopted core. Despite numerous tribal and distinctly exclusive peoples historically inhabiting the country, we agreed that it was a country of the Aryas.
Need to oppose the reactionaries:
But what’s missing from the discourse is not the sense of agreement, but the sense of disagreement. We never studied anything where the genuine disagreements were brought forth for healthy dialogues. We agreed India was the most ancient civilization, that Paravati and Laxmi were goddesses, that Hindus needed more festivities than any other religious groups, that New Delhi needed to be the capital city and Vande Mataram was the national song.
The problem is not in the ultimate acceptance of something as official policy. This is needed for sound governance. The issue at stake is the manner in which the officiating agencies of India never propose the need for the measures that would seriously dwell upon critical issues at stake. Everywhere, regional and national chauvinistic forces are at work in India. The conservatives are creating vandalisms all over with their openly racist and primitively backward views, starting from setting up Saraswati Vidya Mandirs which goes unchallenged even though separation of education from religion should be the spirit of secularism, to install statues in parochial terms. They go on to disrupt Valentines Days, link Muslim cricketers and filmstars with underworld, even as they have formed the most pernicious underworld themselves, only operating wide open in the corridors of political power. They go on to revise history to celebrate Shivaji and claim a Gujarat civilization named after a Hindu goddess. And as their wont, they go on to celebrate their fellow hindu fanatic, one Nathuram Gadse, the killer of Gandhi by revising text books to omit the assassination incident.
We have been taking all these lying down even as the rightist brigade, safely harbored by the domestic business houses of India continues to celebrate the absurd. And now they want the rest of the country to celebrate these sectarian crimes as well, and hence there is a need for the rest of us to resist and desist the temptation to fall into the opium trap. The trap works variously. At times, the enlightened people just assume that its alright if things are this way or that way. Thats the Hindu privilege some people enjoy since their feelings do not get hurt, as long as the hymn remains as the national song.
And if the secular Hindus and religious Muslims of India have not denounced the song in such a serious manner to seek its withdrawal as India’s national song, it speaks of their great tradition of tolerance to Hindu bigotry. This should not be misconstrued as an organic weakness and allowed to be taken advantage of any further.
There is no reason why Vande Mataram, the Indian national song, should be in controversy any longer. This song should be now scrapped and deleted from its current status.
Ever since India’s ‘independence’, this song has created controversies, and for obvious reasons. However, just as the ‘secular’ leadership of India had tried to suppress the skeletons in its cupboard, the opportunistic media had also vociferously supported the need for the song to go on in its truncated form.
And India, mostly kept ignorant about the damaging consequences of having such a song was lulled into believing that everything was well so long as we could come to a consensus. For the consensus, however the four power estates of Indian democracy utilized a) the voices of Hindu seculars approving the song’s first two paragraphs, b) the voices of Muslim seculars approving the same paragraphs, c) the voices of Hindu fanatics demanding the whole song to be made compulsory, and d) the confusion of the vast majority of Indians who had no clue whatsoever of any possibility of controversy over a ‘patriotic’ song. But the structure deliberately left out a segment of public which had from the beginning staged protest against the song.
Since the mainstream premise of such a song begins with unquestioned patriotism, anyone who opposes an element within that realm is at once accused of being anti-national. Hence, the remaining group of people, the fifth group which fervently opposed the song everytime, unfortunately most of the time comprised radical Muslims, were denounced to the extent of being silenced by the media.
Bankim Chandra as a Patriot: The lies my teacher told me
In matters of social concerns, half-truths are synonymous with blatant lies. This is so, because half-truths promote biases, prejudices and stereotypes. The text books that most of us studied during our school days were full of the half-truths. This is nothing surprising or exceptional, though. Every government under a popular democracy has to resort to lies in order to sustain its power base. Hence the dominant Congress with its pseudo-Gandhian philosophy also worked towards integrating its lies by to projecting a reconciled difference and reaching a “consensus”.
There is nothing wrong in reaching a consensus, but in this attempt, the critical voices should not be silenced systematically either. And in this case, Vande Mataram should not have been allowed to triumph in a land that should have had it banned subsequent to pursuance of its ideals of secularism. Rajendra Prasad whose fanaticism with Hindutva is well known, of course wanted the song to be given equal status with national anthem. This was unfortunate, although not entirely unexpected of him, considering that the rabid religious elements still wanted to declare India as a Hindu Rashtra. But the condescending statesmen of the time also acquiesced to the demand, albeit in the truncated form.
The future generations of India were not to be told of the lies and deception that went behind projecting Vande Mataram as a national song. As a result, today most people do not even think twice before patronizing the song. Even the ardent Hindu fanatics forgave a Muslim composer making tunes and money off the obsession.
The colonial crisis?
The demands by the rightist brigade to make the song compulsory in educational institution has raised eyebrows. In this case, again, the criticism has mostly come from religious minorities, even at the expense of being categorized as anti-national. We all know it too well how the Hindu fanatics are running to any extent to blame the Muslims of India as instigators of terrorism instead of looking within for managing a society based on complete anarchy and making living off the institutional ignorance. And now, the Hindu supremacists, whose ideological forefathers were infamously hands in gloves with the imperialists (and which is why they were banned from contesting polls in secular India) have picked up sensitive threads of patriotism.
In the classic case of ignorance, the mainstream media propaganda, clearly overlooks certain facts that people of India have right to know and act upon. Here they are in a nutshell:
1. Anti-Muslim: Bankim Chattarjee, the man who wrote this song Vande Mataram was a rabid Hindu fundamentalist whose goal was not emancipation of India from the clutches of the colonialists, rather to establish a Hindu Rashtra by any means. His stress on Islam corruption of India is not only devoid of the highly secular past of India during the Moghul rule, but also smacks of religious chauvinism targeted against Muslim freedom fighters of the colonial period.
Historian R.C. Majumdar writes, “Bankimchandra converted patriotism into religion and religion into patriotism”. In fact Anand Math, the work from which Vande Mataram is derived, is a text of Hindu nationalism, and not Indian nationalism. The work is selectively targeted against Muslims all over the texts. Anand Math is a Hindu temple where there are scenes of Jivananda calling Muslims names: “We have often thought to break up this bird's nest of Muslim rule, to pull down the city of the renegades and throw it into the river - to turn this pig-sty to ashes and make Mother earth free from evil again. Friends, that day has come.”
A G Noorani (Frontline, January 2-15, 1999) quotes M.R.A. Baig’s analysis of the novel in which the song finds exclusive place:
“Written as a story set in the period of the dissolution of the Moghul Empire, the hero of the novel, Bhavananda, is planning an armed rising against the Muslims of Bengal. While busy recruiting, he meets Mahendra and sings the song 'Bande Mataram' or 'Hail Mother'. The latter asks him the meaning of the words and Bhavananda, making a spirited answer, concludes with: 'Our religion is gone, our caste is gone, our honour is gone. Can the Hindus preserve their Hinduism unless these drunken Nereys (a term of contempt for Muslims) are driven away?'... Mahendra, however, not convinced, expresses reluctance to join the rebellion. He is, therefore, taken to the temple of Ananda Math and shown a huge image of four-armed Vishnu, with two decapitated and bloody heads in front, "Do you know who she is?" asks the priest in charge, pointing to an image on the lap of Vishnu, "She is the Mother. We are her children Say 'Bande Mataram'" He is taken to the image of Kali and then to that of Durga. On each occasion he is asked to recite 'Bande Mataram'. In another scene in the novel some people shouted 'kill, kill the Nereys'. Others shouted 'Bande Mataram' 'Will the day come when we shall break mosques and build temples on their sites?””
2. Pro-British: If there ever was a piece of Indian literature that was most pronouncedly pro-colonialists, then it was Anand Math. Interestingly, and naturally enough, the right wing political parties have picked up their ideal role model in Chatterjee since their ideologues were themselves allies of the British rulers in India. Anand Math is replete with anti-Muslim slogans, no doubt. But it also celebrates the British rule in India. It in fact goes to the extent of saying that British were friends of India, and it was only the Muslim people against whom the Hindus should fight against.
In the last chapter of the work, the author speaks through the supreme character: “Your task is accomplished. The Muslim power is destroyed. There is nothing else for you to do.
Your vow is fulfilled. You have brought fortune to your Mother. You have set up a British government. Give up your fighting. Let the people take to their ploughs. Let the earth be rich with harvest and the people rich with wealth.
There are no foes now. The English are our friends as well as rulers.”
This is the context of the song that goes on to celebrate Hindu religious deities entirely and exclusively.
Baahute tumi maa shakti
hR^idaye tumi maa bhakti
tomaara i pratimaa gaDi
mandire mandire
TvaM hi Durgaa dashapraharaNadhaariNii
kamalaa kamaladala vihaariNii
vaaNii vidyaadaayinii namaami tvaaM
Its target is the Muslim people of India and their tradition which has been blatantly misrepresented in the work. And its ally in the vicious hatred campaign is the British rule in India. The mothers in Bande Mataram are the Hindu goddesses and there is no reason why people of other religions should be forced to sing their praises. Just because certain Bengal revolutionaries used this slogan and popularized it, and some more Bengali intellectuals upheld Bankim Chatterjee as an iconic litterateur, it does not mean the great peoples of India will forget the rich multi-cultural tradition that has been in existence in the country since centuries now and in the name of Hindu chauvinism, people should not be misled any further to denounce Moghul rule and celebrate British Raj.
Knowingly or unknowingly, people have believed in the mainstream history of India from almost a harmless angle. They believe that Gandhi was the ‘father of the nation’, that Congress was the party that gave freedom to India, they believe that Hindus contribute the most to the country’s cultural landscape, and they celebrate Saraswati and Sivaji. People are apparently content with the reservation policies working against the Dalits, with nominal celebrations of Islam culture, with not paying reparation to the tribal peoples for having snatched their dear lands.
Even as these acceptances come as mediocre consensus of some form to carry on with a liberal democracy, these have been still in a Gandhian tradition of positive compromises. Our objections should not be towards the social fiber of Indian constitution which is secular, democratic and socialist in its spirit. But if anyone tries to enforce their religious ideals down the future generations of the country, one and all of us must stand in solidarity to oppose the vicious steps. Once and for all, it must be declared that India is not a Hindu country and no Hindu glorifications can take place at an official level, not even if some right wing fanatics come to power once in a while.
We have had many a dramatic stands of consensus in the past. Indeed, this has been the policy of Indian ‘nation’ since its very birth. Although the country is composed of different nation-states, we declared a consensus that we were almost one nation. Although India had distinctly different language groups we declared Hindi as the adopted core. Despite numerous tribal and distinctly exclusive peoples historically inhabiting the country, we agreed that it was a country of the Aryas.
Need to oppose the reactionaries:
But what’s missing from the discourse is not the sense of agreement, but the sense of disagreement. We never studied anything where the genuine disagreements were brought forth for healthy dialogues. We agreed India was the most ancient civilization, that Paravati and Laxmi were goddesses, that Hindus needed more festivities than any other religious groups, that New Delhi needed to be the capital city and Vande Mataram was the national song.
The problem is not in the ultimate acceptance of something as official policy. This is needed for sound governance. The issue at stake is the manner in which the officiating agencies of India never propose the need for the measures that would seriously dwell upon critical issues at stake. Everywhere, regional and national chauvinistic forces are at work in India. The conservatives are creating vandalisms all over with their openly racist and primitively backward views, starting from setting up Saraswati Vidya Mandirs which goes unchallenged even though separation of education from religion should be the spirit of secularism, to install statues in parochial terms. They go on to disrupt Valentines Days, link Muslim cricketers and filmstars with underworld, even as they have formed the most pernicious underworld themselves, only operating wide open in the corridors of political power. They go on to revise history to celebrate Shivaji and claim a Gujarat civilization named after a Hindu goddess. And as their wont, they go on to celebrate their fellow hindu fanatic, one Nathuram Gadse, the killer of Gandhi by revising text books to omit the assassination incident.
We have been taking all these lying down even as the rightist brigade, safely harbored by the domestic business houses of India continues to celebrate the absurd. And now they want the rest of the country to celebrate these sectarian crimes as well, and hence there is a need for the rest of us to resist and desist the temptation to fall into the opium trap. The trap works variously. At times, the enlightened people just assume that its alright if things are this way or that way. Thats the Hindu privilege some people enjoy since their feelings do not get hurt, as long as the hymn remains as the national song.
And if the secular Hindus and religious Muslims of India have not denounced the song in such a serious manner to seek its withdrawal as India’s national song, it speaks of their great tradition of tolerance to Hindu bigotry. This should not be misconstrued as an organic weakness and allowed to be taken advantage of any further.
Happy Victory Day!
By Saswat Pattanayak
My father calls this, not the Independence day, but the Victory Day.
For, on August 14-15, 1947, peoples of the brave revolutionary land of India finally won the long war against British Imperialism. The war, spanning more than 200 years was fought with occasional non-violent demonstrations of millions of people, and more importantly, was fought with organized revolutionary peasants and workers movements which finally forced the Empire to concede defeat. It was perhaps the largest victory of the landless peoples over the landlords and invaders in the history of world. In doing so, peoples from the Indian subcontinent regions demonstrated that they would not concede a wee bit either to accommodate the foreign imperialists nor allow any rule by the homegrown royal families. The “purna swaraj” declaration by the radical left freedom fighters, although facing strong opposition from religious chauvinists who were in cohort with British colonialists, finally forced the expulsion of the rulers and silenced the communal politicians.
However, religions as addictively dangerous they are by nature, spread the poison of hatred incited by the British in their centuries old misrules. The ‘divide-and-rule’ tactics of old guard imperialists continued to show colors in the divided land of India. Not only were they successful in dividing the country into India and Pakistan, two regions who shared the same history of struggles, they also left behind a legacy that continued to help their former informers—the right wing Hindu fanatics who were backed by the British authorities to disrupt the harmonious ways of living, that were characteristic of the people of the land.
Today, sixty years hence, we still feel the uprising of the right wing colonial assistors. These are the same religious elements who stop at nothing in order to create environment of suspicion and foster an insecure climate for the religious and atheistic minorities. These are still hands-in-gloves with the oppressor classes worldwide who comfortably rule in various names, but propagate hatred, war, and feelings of hostilities which help them in targeting countries that practice different religions. In the name of religion alone, they have fought all the wars of the world so far. And they believe they will continue to kill people without even facing opposition, since they have already created the notions of God, cultures of religion, and politics of intolerance.
Today they are targeting Lebanon. Yesterday they targeted Mumbai. Day before that, they targeted working people of London. All in the name of a philosophy they created to sustain their ruling class status. The philosophy is called Religion.
Sixty years have passed since the day became sacred to Pakistan and India, for their peoples’ revolutionary overthrow of the imperialists. Yet it seems the enemy grows stronger. The religious fanatics in the name of their various Gods have been ruining the peace we deserve to have in this planet.
So I thought it will be worthwhile to reflect and tell to each of us and to each of our children, that enough has been lost. Now is the time for social justice. Now is the time to regain our lost causes. Not another life in the name of religion. Not another child to be declared religious. Not another war in name of religions, nationalities and moral standards. No more Christians and Sikhs. No more Muslims and Hindus. Just human beings who respect the roots of our shared history as peaceful, cooperative peoples. Just radical human beings.
I have translated Sahir Ludhianvi’s poem “Tu Hindu Banega Na Mussalman Banega” for this occasion. The poem was addressed to a child who did not know of his parents. Naturally enough, the child had no surname yet, no religion yet and no nationality yet! And such a joy was this child to the poet!
Full of hope and twinkles of determination. Sahir was not just the voice of the landless and oppressed, orphans and women, he was also the voice of the future, of a future that belongs to all of us, without private properties, mindless competition, needless nationalities and fanatic religions. Here it is:
Happy Victory Day!
Neither you will be a Hindu nor a Muslim will you be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
A bundle of joy you are, sans a given name
Disconnected from religions, that’s your gain
Religious texts have only divided humanity
My child! So far they couldn’t attack your sanity
Hence the clarion call for the revolution, will you be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
Mother Nature warmly nurtured us as human beings
Alas! we forced our children into Hindus and Muslims
One small world was all that we were bestowed
Bigots among us created India and Iran instead
Destroyer of barriers, of this unjust world order, will you be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
Religions preach hate--they are not designed for you
And they practice hostilities--not even an option for you
No good is this Quran since it excludes the Hindu temples
You disown the Geeta that mentions not the Islam shrines
Symbol of world peace, fighter for social justice you will be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
In garb of patriotism, these nationalists are daylight killers
Even they trade coffins meant for their warring soldiers
These rich capitalists adorned in power and fame
They barter the peoples’ peace for communal shame
Shudder them with deaths, a revolutionary you will be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
(Trans. By Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet)
The original poem by Sahir:
Tu Hindu banega na Mussalman banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Accha hai abhi tak tera kuchh naam nahni hai
Tujh ko kisi mazhab se koi kaam nahni hai
Jis ilm ne insaan ko taqseem kiya hai
Is ilm ka tujh par koi ilzam nahni hai
Tu badle huye waqt ki pehchaan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Malik ne har insaan ko insaan banaya
Humne use Hindoo ya Mussalman banaya
Kudrat ne to bakshi thi hamein ek hi dharti
Hum ne kahni Bharat kahni Iran banaya
Jo tod de har bandh woh toofan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Nafrat jo sikhaye woh dharm tera nahni hai
Insaan ko jo rounde woh kadm tera nahni hai
Quran na ho jis mein woh Mandir nahni tera
Geeta na ho jis mein woh Haram tera nahni hai
Tu amn aur sulha ka armaan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Yeh din ke taajir, yeh watan bechne wale
Insaanoen ki laashoen ke kafn bechne wale
Yeh mehloen mein baithe huye qaatil ye lootere
Kantoen ke awaj roohe-chaman bechne wale
Tu inke liye maut ka elaan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
My father calls this, not the Independence day, but the Victory Day.
For, on August 14-15, 1947, peoples of the brave revolutionary land of India finally won the long war against British Imperialism. The war, spanning more than 200 years was fought with occasional non-violent demonstrations of millions of people, and more importantly, was fought with organized revolutionary peasants and workers movements which finally forced the Empire to concede defeat. It was perhaps the largest victory of the landless peoples over the landlords and invaders in the history of world. In doing so, peoples from the Indian subcontinent regions demonstrated that they would not concede a wee bit either to accommodate the foreign imperialists nor allow any rule by the homegrown royal families. The “purna swaraj” declaration by the radical left freedom fighters, although facing strong opposition from religious chauvinists who were in cohort with British colonialists, finally forced the expulsion of the rulers and silenced the communal politicians.
However, religions as addictively dangerous they are by nature, spread the poison of hatred incited by the British in their centuries old misrules. The ‘divide-and-rule’ tactics of old guard imperialists continued to show colors in the divided land of India. Not only were they successful in dividing the country into India and Pakistan, two regions who shared the same history of struggles, they also left behind a legacy that continued to help their former informers—the right wing Hindu fanatics who were backed by the British authorities to disrupt the harmonious ways of living, that were characteristic of the people of the land.
Today, sixty years hence, we still feel the uprising of the right wing colonial assistors. These are the same religious elements who stop at nothing in order to create environment of suspicion and foster an insecure climate for the religious and atheistic minorities. These are still hands-in-gloves with the oppressor classes worldwide who comfortably rule in various names, but propagate hatred, war, and feelings of hostilities which help them in targeting countries that practice different religions. In the name of religion alone, they have fought all the wars of the world so far. And they believe they will continue to kill people without even facing opposition, since they have already created the notions of God, cultures of religion, and politics of intolerance.
Today they are targeting Lebanon. Yesterday they targeted Mumbai. Day before that, they targeted working people of London. All in the name of a philosophy they created to sustain their ruling class status. The philosophy is called Religion.
Sixty years have passed since the day became sacred to Pakistan and India, for their peoples’ revolutionary overthrow of the imperialists. Yet it seems the enemy grows stronger. The religious fanatics in the name of their various Gods have been ruining the peace we deserve to have in this planet.
So I thought it will be worthwhile to reflect and tell to each of us and to each of our children, that enough has been lost. Now is the time for social justice. Now is the time to regain our lost causes. Not another life in the name of religion. Not another child to be declared religious. Not another war in name of religions, nationalities and moral standards. No more Christians and Sikhs. No more Muslims and Hindus. Just human beings who respect the roots of our shared history as peaceful, cooperative peoples. Just radical human beings.
I have translated Sahir Ludhianvi’s poem “Tu Hindu Banega Na Mussalman Banega” for this occasion. The poem was addressed to a child who did not know of his parents. Naturally enough, the child had no surname yet, no religion yet and no nationality yet! And such a joy was this child to the poet!
Full of hope and twinkles of determination. Sahir was not just the voice of the landless and oppressed, orphans and women, he was also the voice of the future, of a future that belongs to all of us, without private properties, mindless competition, needless nationalities and fanatic religions. Here it is:
Happy Victory Day!
My Child, A Radical Human Being
Neither you will be a Hindu nor a Muslim will you be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
A bundle of joy you are, sans a given name
Disconnected from religions, that’s your gain
Religious texts have only divided humanity
My child! So far they couldn’t attack your sanity
Hence the clarion call for the revolution, will you be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
Mother Nature warmly nurtured us as human beings
Alas! we forced our children into Hindus and Muslims
One small world was all that we were bestowed
Bigots among us created India and Iran instead
Destroyer of barriers, of this unjust world order, will you be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
Religions preach hate--they are not designed for you
And they practice hostilities--not even an option for you
No good is this Quran since it excludes the Hindu temples
You disown the Geeta that mentions not the Islam shrines
Symbol of world peace, fighter for social justice you will be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
In garb of patriotism, these nationalists are daylight killers
Even they trade coffins meant for their warring soldiers
These rich capitalists adorned in power and fame
They barter the peoples’ peace for communal shame
Shudder them with deaths, a revolutionary you will be
A gift of this new era, a radical human being you will be
(Trans. By Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet)
The original poem by Sahir:
Tu Hindu banega na Mussalman banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Accha hai abhi tak tera kuchh naam nahni hai
Tujh ko kisi mazhab se koi kaam nahni hai
Jis ilm ne insaan ko taqseem kiya hai
Is ilm ka tujh par koi ilzam nahni hai
Tu badle huye waqt ki pehchaan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Malik ne har insaan ko insaan banaya
Humne use Hindoo ya Mussalman banaya
Kudrat ne to bakshi thi hamein ek hi dharti
Hum ne kahni Bharat kahni Iran banaya
Jo tod de har bandh woh toofan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Nafrat jo sikhaye woh dharm tera nahni hai
Insaan ko jo rounde woh kadm tera nahni hai
Quran na ho jis mein woh Mandir nahni tera
Geeta na ho jis mein woh Haram tera nahni hai
Tu amn aur sulha ka armaan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
Yeh din ke taajir, yeh watan bechne wale
Insaanoen ki laashoen ke kafn bechne wale
Yeh mehloen mein baithe huye qaatil ye lootere
Kantoen ke awaj roohe-chaman bechne wale
Tu inke liye maut ka elaan banega
Insaan ki aulad hai insaan banega
End Global Terrorism. Save Mumbai from Hindu Fanatics.
By Saswat Pattanayak
Giving into pressure from his promoters, the so-called opposition parties in India, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has, as usual, condemned Pakistan for Mumbai blasts, and threatened disruptions to any peace talk with Pakistan. The right-wingers of India are jubilant at this prospect of forthcoming war with Pakistan, in which they hope to wipe out Islam from the world.
The irreparable damage that could not have resulted from the right wing political rhetoric alone, has now been done through their orchestration of Mumbai tensions. Following the blasts, most of even otherwise liberal people of India are now readily supporting the cause of Hindu fanatics in declaring war against Indian Muslims and Pakistan. This is grossly pathetic display of patriotism by any standard, and a sense of ingratitude towards a great, exemplary minority religious community of India that has actively helped save whatever is left of India’s grace.
Hindus who constitute an overwhelming majority in India have an obligation to display a great sense of responsibility at this time of national crisis. Let it be mentioned that Mumbai blasts is an international tragedy caused by global terrorists (we will soon go to who are the people that are the terrorists and who fund them, and for what cause etc). It is definitely not an occasion to play communal political opportunism. ALL words and actions and thoughts and indications, discriminations and prejudices against Muslim population MUST STOP in India. And blame games against Pakistan and Indian Muslims must end and the peace process must resume as scheduled. This is the least we can do to ensure that India has not yet turned a mad militarist (Although the reality is it is. Although since it’s not North Korea and since it is an ally of USA, India was not declared a terrorist country of the world even after its missile tests last week).
Muslim influence in making of modern India is one for great celebration. Indeed, if the British colonialists would not have forced their way to further gaps between the two communities and would not have manipulated their power structure to divide the country into two or three halves, we would have a different history today.
India’s History of Freedom Struggle against Hindu Fanatics:
The history would have been surely different, if Mahatma Gandhi or Netajee Subhas or Bhagat Singh (all three had radically different ways of approach towards freedom struggle, but convincingly similar goals in mind) would have had their ways. All three of them fought tooth and nail against Hindu fanatics and did not tolerate the ideology that was preached in name of Hinduism. Three of them were secular to the core and they believed that the country’s foundation must be built on Hindu-Muslim unity (not separation).
Whereas Bhagat Singh was assassinated by British imperialists, Subhas Bose’s ideals were massacred by homegrown reactionaries like Sardar Patel and Mahatma Gandhi was shot to death by well organized Hindu fanatics of India.
Whereas the freedom fighters wanted secularism at all costs, the reactionaries wanted communal tensions at all costs. Hence, India’s so-called glorious history has been nothing short of a shameful, casteist, communal history of religious hatred, incited, engaged in, and managed by Hindu supremacists.
This is true that Muslim League, despite having some great patriots of the era, was also religious in nature. But its impact waned after formation of Pakistan. But Hindu Mahasabha, despite having no freedom fighter worth a mention, went on ransacking the emotional wealth of the country even after independence from illegal British rulers.
The history of Hindu ransacking in a Hindu India has gone on unabated in India since British were forced to leave. Although the reality is that these fanatics never got any support from mainstream Indian population, (85% of whom are Hindus) despite their claims to be representing the Hindus!
In the early periods of India’s independent history, which can be truly claimed to be the only glorious period in India’s recent times, the country under Nehru emerged as highly respectable nation in the world, with an internationalist outlook, where India played global role in promoting peace, cooperation and non-violence. India was at its secular best, in curbing the forces of Hindu chauvinism and indeed acted heavily against Hindu fanatics to the extent that they had to go underground. Whereas forming the Non-Aligned Movement in order to refrain from entering a nuclear club (which a shamelessly communalist like Vajpayee or the agent of domestic businessmen like Singh marred by their show of inferiorities---declaration of India as a militarist country…sic!), Nehru stood in solidarity with socialist causes worldwide. India supported the Soviet policies of planning, programming and social welfare. Cooperation, not competition, cooperatives, not private companies, small scale industries, not multinational companies, advancement of scientific rational progressive thoughts, not superstitious religious and fanatic camps…India was the most enviable country as the great role model in the world then.
But just as supremacist Hindus (although a tiny minority, they are so well organized with half pants and lathis and reactionary mechanisms in place) assured the end of Gandhi, they ensured the end of Nehru by fielding Patel against him several times. Both of them had rivalry since few decades before freedom, and even before Nehru could act undemocratically (which was actually the need of the hour, as Netajee had suggested, to educate people about political empowerment), Patel had let the Indian Army loose on Kashmir.
Of course Nehru cannot be forgiven for having tolerated entry of Hindu fanatics in the group already. For example, people like Ambedkar or Aruna Ali were not given the power. Neither Dalits nor Muslims had any primary say in the state of the nation. It was reinstallation of a north Indian Brahmin supremacy in India, that went on playing a different ideology than what Nehru had envisaged (as found in his own writings about the need to curb communal elements in India).
Indian private businesses started to grow after the demise of Nehru and despite valiant efforts by the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, India had inadvertently fallen into the cold war game. As can be seen from Nixon and Kissinger talks about Indira Gandhi, America started having great interest in India (strategically that’s the best bet to defeat China and USSR at the same time). To that end, as was the creation of Taliban or the Iraqi fascists, foreign aids came to Indian insurgents to organize acts of terror.
Who are the terrorists?
In the pre-independence era, when the British condemned Bhagat Singh as a terrorist, he was very clear on his response. He said he was a revolutionary, and not a terrorist.
We need to dwell on the coinage and definition of who is a terrorist. First off, this is a word founded and coined by the ruling class to portray the resisters negatively, which is why it becomes more logical to believe in their description of who fits the phrase.
For many of the resisters however, they would rather be called Revolutionaries. That’s because revolutionaries fight against the system. And terrorists are integral to the system. Hence, the police forces, military forces and the profiteering governments become the terrorists when they cause circumstances where innocent people are massacred.
This is going on right now in India. The Hindu supremacists of India –the biggest blot in India’s secular image—are the ones who spread the venoms in early last decade by demolishing a national treasure called Babri Masjid. The terrorists who stoned the walls of the mosques and destroyed it with active collaboration of police forces (since they are all integral to the terrorizing network) that December 6, went on to incite the Mumbai bomb blasts—the biggest in India’s history. The riots went on unabated with an entirely unapologetic Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackerey calling the shots and giving hateful speeches against the Muslims of India. Shiv Sainiks who were aided by BJP in demolishing the mosque are the neo-nazi elements of India who should have been declared as state terrorists long back.
These were the people who came to power by killing extremely popular labor union leader of Maharashtra Krishna Desai, who was a communist leader of amazing popularity, already a MLA and was poised to rule the state. Desai’s murder was the first act of political murder in independent India. Shiva Sena hacked him to death, whereas the police and administration watched haplessly. The rise of political mafia in India has now surfaced to become the voice of the Hindu nationalists, and there cannot be any sadder development than this in India.
Journalist Praveen Swami of Frontline writes:
“Through the 1970s, Sena gangs repeatedly attacked leading Communist trade union leaders, and in 1973 were responsible for the murder of popular Parel MLA Krishna Desai. It was only in 1984, with the Sena discredited as a criminal mafia and in electoral decline, that Thackeray sought alliances with the Hindu Right, first forming the Hindu Mahasangh, and then allying with the BJP.
Violent riots, starting with the anti-Muslim pogroms in Bhiwandi, Kalyan and Thane, and through similar butchery at Panvel, Nashik, Nanded and Amravati, marked this new direction taken by the Sena.”
Activist Praful Bidwai writes:
“The Sena consciously fomented religious hatred and communalised Maharashtra politics. It manufactured chauvinist prejudice against non-Maharashtrians and instigated or committed hate-crimes. The Sena, with its disgusting demagoguery, represents pure, unadulterated evil, a political force that concentrates much that’s negative and deplorable in Indian society, including hierarchical authoritarianism, repression and addiction to the use of force and bullying.”
Ashok Dhawale writes:
“Many other communal decisions were taken by the SS-BJP regime. These were the abolition of the State Minorities Commission, the Urdu Academy and the Haj Committee; the bringing of a bill banning all forms of cow slaughter, including buffaloes, but which was defeated in the Council; a shrill campaign for the imposition of a uniform civil code; an attempt to drive out so-called Bangladeshi infiltrators, most of whom were bonafide citizens of India hailing from West Bengal but who happened to be Muslim; and so on. The claim that was made by the regime that there were no communal riots under its tenure was also false. Communal riots did take place at Pen in Raigad district, Junnar in Pune district, Khirwad in Jalgaon district, in Aurangabad city and other places. The decrease in intensity was simply because the rioters were themselves in state power!”
The riot-ridden India:
By focusing only on the here and now, we shall be basically imitating television reality shows. What is needed is to introspect with historical clarity about how things have shaped up with people.
The great journalist MJ Akbar writes in his book “Riot after Riot” (Roli 2003) that Ayodhya was developed as a case in communal “dispute” back in 1885. The history of it is interesting to be noted here:
“The Englishman who reported this incident more than 100 years ago, that left 75 Muslims dead over the Babri Masjid said that the police were present but merely looked on, being “under strict orders not to interfere”. However a secular judge Pandit Hari Kishan (echoing the voice of millions of Indians) did not award the rights to Hindu fanatics to construct a temple. “Awarding permission to construct the temple at this juncture is to lay the foundation of riot and murder”. A.F. Millett, the British officiating settlement officer even mentioned, “It is said that upto that time (the riot of 1885) the Hindus and Mohammedans alike used to worship in the mosque/temple. Since British rule a railing has been put up to prevent disputes, within which, in the mosque, the Mohammedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they can make their offerings.”
Akbar says, then in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the first propagators of modern communalism, the builders of a nation in the name of religion, first came into prominence. These ideologues sent out their missionaries—priests, politicians, novelists, historians---to color the mind of an emerging nation with blood rather than peace. The growing synthesis among the upper and middle classes and the creation of a common culture among the poor was the target. “Purification” became the key of separation, as the leaders indulged in dreams of Muslim and Hindu states…..
The Global Terrorists. Who are they?
The point is the purifiers are still present in one way or the other. Some times, at the helm of power, and at other times, in collaboration. And at all times, they are inciting violence on common people in name of religion. And these days, the local terrorism by dominant religions has been almost replaced by collaborated terrorism across the globe, which we call today as Global Terrorism.
Unfortunately, the global terrorists are this time enjoying power in big powerful countries. On closer look, one can notice the strategies adopted by Indian right-wingers as very akin to the tactics used by Israeli forces. In name of protecting the defense forces (ha!), in name of maintaining national boundaries, in name of safeguarding national interests, the militarist countries like India and Israel (you may please add United States and France and Germany as well&hellip stop nowhere in their quest to
dominate the marginalized resisters.
But as is their wont, the ruling class uses every means possible to alienate people from the resisting forces. And when people themselves become resistors, they invent an opposition from the air, in order to project their indispensability. This has happened in every ages. In the most devastating period of economic instability that America has faced since the 1930’s, we are told that Saddam Hussein or Bin Laden are terrorists. Whereas this could be true, the reality is that both of them were creations of the American interventions. Taliban indeed is a logical consequence of American policy in Afghanistan in its attempt to enforce religious fundamentalism in that land.
Likewise, Indian leadership, pathetically criminal in their words and deeds (stealing poor peoples’ thatched roofs to hand them over to industries is one of the recent examples), are detested for rising prices of essential commodities and escalating housing and healthcare costs. In face of real crisis, the country has only its structural governance to blame (BJP or Congress, in the so-called political democracy being run by private businesses, everything is the same after the polls end&hellip. And to avoid these, the creation
of external elements as the disrupters is a
natural political gameplan. From Hitler to Bush
to Singh, everyone has applied this tactic of
state control in implicit fashion.
Alright, but who are the terrorists then?
Terrorists are people who cause terror. From our experience, we know that terrors can be imaginary (as in dreams or in political speech) or real (as in price-rise, homelessness, death due to cold wave). So the answer is not very complicated. The real terrorists are the military-industrial complex of politicians who rule through the produces: militia to enforce and money to allure.
But if we need further critical appraisal, here it is: The terrorists make plans. They define territories. They decide on allegiance. They talk of countries and boundaries. They think of their own nationalities, and regionalism. They do not think of world’s working class, they are concerned about domestic business class. They enforce different privileges for citizens and immigrants and aliens. They terrorize people through enforcement of draconian legislations like POTA, TADA or Patriot Act. They use police force and military to perpetrate crime on women and children by declaring war. They use tanks and guns to suppress people who use stones and slogans. They get international support from all terrorists, thus making terrorism not a sectarian act any longer, but a global business.
These terrorists terrorize people by talking sweet and killing their aspirations, or by planting bombs and blaming imaginations. Scolding each other (look how Manmohan Singh scolded Pakistan today for Mumbai blasts!) while failing to apologize and resign because of inability to maintain law and order. In fact they are so involved in creating riots that they make a profession out of it and enjoy allegiance of people.
Today’s India is a result of the Communal Politicians like Bal Thackerey whose party went on rampage merely because of his wife’s statue getting defaced and who has threatened several times to eliminate Pakistan from world map. It is the Communal Politicians like Manmohan Singh who instead of acting on the right wing fanatics are blaming Pakistan for every single law and order disaster in India. New York Times reports Singh saying “I have explained it to the government of Pakistan at the highest level that if the acts of terrorism are not controlled, it is exceedingly difficult for any government to carry forward what may be called a normalization and peace process.”
The same article quotes Tasnim Aslam, the Foreign Office spokeswoman for Pakistan as saying, “In the past two days, India has not given us anything in writing or talked of any evidence.” Sumit Ganguly, a professor of politics at Indiana University in Bloomington says to NYT: It (Mumbai blasts) cannot but help India’s cause in Kashmir.”
Indeed, the goal is to help India’s cause in Kashmir. India’s cause in Kashmir has been one of repression, oppression and violent acquisition of the state’s population. Anyone who resists the Indian Army could be termed as someone backed by Pakistan. Or perhaps some of us might even say backed by America. Things will not change by the proclaimed associations or phrases such as “terrorists”. The power which has been ruling over Kashmir for six decades now need to recognize its need to let the people take back the state. Let there be referendums in Kashmir. Indeed, let there be referendum in India.
Different questions beg different answers. Just like during Mumbai blasts, in recent (as always) Israel attack on Palestine, different questions are being asked too. Some are engaged in finding out who is behind the attacks. I am trying to figure out who benefits in the long run from these attacks.
The people who ask questions like “who will then rule Kashmir” or “who is behind Mumbai blasts” might be asking possibly candid and urgent questions. But my question is altogether different. Mine is “whose interest do these serve”. Occupation of Kashmir or Mumbai blasts serve the political elites of India and Pakistan who are aided in their so-called peace-process (a conversation that takes place entirely without considering the resisting people, who are conveniently always dismissed as “terrorists&rdquo by the US of A. My question then
does not seek any answers. Definitely not on
this blog. It facilitates further questions.
For example, I am still wondering why the attacks were carried out, why the police without investigations said it was Pakistani backed terrorist groups, why the prime minister before investigations were over, said it was just a few terrorists, why did the Shiv Sainiks go on rampage two days before blasts with its president threatening major repercussions (more violent than the cartoon controversy), why was it that despite its hand in the biggest blast in Mumbai (1993 march) in inciting mass scale murders, and despite right wing roles in genocide in Gujarat---interestingly the media do not touch these communal violence at all as antecedents--no investigations are being done against the parties which have been involved. Even judicial commissions that find Shiv Sena guilty are dismissed (Srikrishna Commission for example). My question also is why has law and order completely failed to take up responsibilities and although we cannot expect the Army (or Indian military) to come help people in crisis, why is it not at least contemplating over the past so many decades of massacres that have been leading to such escalating tensions.
Someone needs to take responsibility. Surely none of the current crop of leaders can take stands like Lal Bahadur Shastri, but its time media stopped quoting a failed and feeble and ashamed agent of global capitalism called Manmohan Singh, and indeed demanded his resignation for failing to act upon the communal elements.
In conclusion:
Every act of terrorism must be condemned. The more pressing need is to understand who are the terrorists. Only a few months back, when the Naveen PatnaiK Government of Orissa in its zealous bid to sell the land to some profiteers ordered mass murder of tribal people without any provocation or need, that was an act of terrorism, which went unnoticed. The Kalinga Nagar incident escaped attention of world media, because it did not involve Muslims. Or when the American firm United Carbide plant killed more than 20,000 people of Bhopal, it was not considered terrorism because it was not a reaction from Muslims. Or when Gujarat Genocide took place under right wingers of India, it was not global terrorism, because Muslims became the worst sufferers.
Without getting lost in the web of words, one must act on the root causes of today’s mishaps. When one does that, it can be unquestionably found that the far-right wing factions of world religions are the perpetrators. And so far at least, in India or America, the Hindus and Christians in their fundamentalist form have been holding power mechanism to their favor to declare war on Islam (American administration has not atoned for its post 9/11 crimes of religious discrimination nature nor is Indian government likely to for its post 7/11 outbursts against Pakistan and Indian Muslims).
The people in Mumbai did not die because they were innocent. They did not die because they were protesting Islam religion. They did not die because they were Hindus. They did not die because they were Mumbaiites.
They were massacred in systematic, organized fashion because the Indian administration failed to arrest the perpetrators even after they had sent clear warnings. And because even after the blasts, the Indian administration failed to carry out investigations into the cause of the blasts. People who planted the bombs could be unemployed, misguided missiles, either Hindus or Muslims. But the ones who used them to further their goals are still in power and they are fighting one religion against another. It is these communal politicians who need to be declared as terrorists. We should not use terrorist word only because the present American president (who has been declared by people as the real International Terrorist on the streets of New York) thinks the war is against Islam.
The war on global terror is actually a war on global poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, a war against war mongers and militarists.
However, terror is not an illusion. The real terrorists are very much present before us. They are the politicians and bureaucrats and blood sucking industrialists who own every means of mental production so much that they make us believe in the unreal terrorism. They do so by generating conditions of violence and then declaring the violence itself as terror, whereas they thrive on the conditions.
We need to ask different questions. Presently, we must force the communal politicians to introspect, if not be forced out by the same people it claims to be “terrorists”. People resisting against the communal politicians actually fight for their own human rights, and I am quoting a great singer from Goa, Remo Fernandes in his album “Politicians Don’t know to Rock ‘n’ Roll”, who represented a profoundly secular majority, thanks due to which the world still is surviving. The minority ruling classes of the world will soon be forced to withdraw from their communal tactics. The world without religions is the one dream…of Lennon to Sahir, and hopefully, to some readers of this blog.
Here’s Remo:
Giving into pressure from his promoters, the so-called opposition parties in India, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has, as usual, condemned Pakistan for Mumbai blasts, and threatened disruptions to any peace talk with Pakistan. The right-wingers of India are jubilant at this prospect of forthcoming war with Pakistan, in which they hope to wipe out Islam from the world.
The irreparable damage that could not have resulted from the right wing political rhetoric alone, has now been done through their orchestration of Mumbai tensions. Following the blasts, most of even otherwise liberal people of India are now readily supporting the cause of Hindu fanatics in declaring war against Indian Muslims and Pakistan. This is grossly pathetic display of patriotism by any standard, and a sense of ingratitude towards a great, exemplary minority religious community of India that has actively helped save whatever is left of India’s grace.
Hindus who constitute an overwhelming majority in India have an obligation to display a great sense of responsibility at this time of national crisis. Let it be mentioned that Mumbai blasts is an international tragedy caused by global terrorists (we will soon go to who are the people that are the terrorists and who fund them, and for what cause etc). It is definitely not an occasion to play communal political opportunism. ALL words and actions and thoughts and indications, discriminations and prejudices against Muslim population MUST STOP in India. And blame games against Pakistan and Indian Muslims must end and the peace process must resume as scheduled. This is the least we can do to ensure that India has not yet turned a mad militarist (Although the reality is it is. Although since it’s not North Korea and since it is an ally of USA, India was not declared a terrorist country of the world even after its missile tests last week).
Muslim influence in making of modern India is one for great celebration. Indeed, if the British colonialists would not have forced their way to further gaps between the two communities and would not have manipulated their power structure to divide the country into two or three halves, we would have a different history today.
India’s History of Freedom Struggle against Hindu Fanatics:
The history would have been surely different, if Mahatma Gandhi or Netajee Subhas or Bhagat Singh (all three had radically different ways of approach towards freedom struggle, but convincingly similar goals in mind) would have had their ways. All three of them fought tooth and nail against Hindu fanatics and did not tolerate the ideology that was preached in name of Hinduism. Three of them were secular to the core and they believed that the country’s foundation must be built on Hindu-Muslim unity (not separation).
Whereas Bhagat Singh was assassinated by British imperialists, Subhas Bose’s ideals were massacred by homegrown reactionaries like Sardar Patel and Mahatma Gandhi was shot to death by well organized Hindu fanatics of India.
Whereas the freedom fighters wanted secularism at all costs, the reactionaries wanted communal tensions at all costs. Hence, India’s so-called glorious history has been nothing short of a shameful, casteist, communal history of religious hatred, incited, engaged in, and managed by Hindu supremacists.
This is true that Muslim League, despite having some great patriots of the era, was also religious in nature. But its impact waned after formation of Pakistan. But Hindu Mahasabha, despite having no freedom fighter worth a mention, went on ransacking the emotional wealth of the country even after independence from illegal British rulers.
The history of Hindu ransacking in a Hindu India has gone on unabated in India since British were forced to leave. Although the reality is that these fanatics never got any support from mainstream Indian population, (85% of whom are Hindus) despite their claims to be representing the Hindus!
In the early periods of India’s independent history, which can be truly claimed to be the only glorious period in India’s recent times, the country under Nehru emerged as highly respectable nation in the world, with an internationalist outlook, where India played global role in promoting peace, cooperation and non-violence. India was at its secular best, in curbing the forces of Hindu chauvinism and indeed acted heavily against Hindu fanatics to the extent that they had to go underground. Whereas forming the Non-Aligned Movement in order to refrain from entering a nuclear club (which a shamelessly communalist like Vajpayee or the agent of domestic businessmen like Singh marred by their show of inferiorities---declaration of India as a militarist country…sic!), Nehru stood in solidarity with socialist causes worldwide. India supported the Soviet policies of planning, programming and social welfare. Cooperation, not competition, cooperatives, not private companies, small scale industries, not multinational companies, advancement of scientific rational progressive thoughts, not superstitious religious and fanatic camps…India was the most enviable country as the great role model in the world then.
But just as supremacist Hindus (although a tiny minority, they are so well organized with half pants and lathis and reactionary mechanisms in place) assured the end of Gandhi, they ensured the end of Nehru by fielding Patel against him several times. Both of them had rivalry since few decades before freedom, and even before Nehru could act undemocratically (which was actually the need of the hour, as Netajee had suggested, to educate people about political empowerment), Patel had let the Indian Army loose on Kashmir.
Of course Nehru cannot be forgiven for having tolerated entry of Hindu fanatics in the group already. For example, people like Ambedkar or Aruna Ali were not given the power. Neither Dalits nor Muslims had any primary say in the state of the nation. It was reinstallation of a north Indian Brahmin supremacy in India, that went on playing a different ideology than what Nehru had envisaged (as found in his own writings about the need to curb communal elements in India).
Indian private businesses started to grow after the demise of Nehru and despite valiant efforts by the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, India had inadvertently fallen into the cold war game. As can be seen from Nixon and Kissinger talks about Indira Gandhi, America started having great interest in India (strategically that’s the best bet to defeat China and USSR at the same time). To that end, as was the creation of Taliban or the Iraqi fascists, foreign aids came to Indian insurgents to organize acts of terror.
Who are the terrorists?
In the pre-independence era, when the British condemned Bhagat Singh as a terrorist, he was very clear on his response. He said he was a revolutionary, and not a terrorist.
We need to dwell on the coinage and definition of who is a terrorist. First off, this is a word founded and coined by the ruling class to portray the resisters negatively, which is why it becomes more logical to believe in their description of who fits the phrase.
For many of the resisters however, they would rather be called Revolutionaries. That’s because revolutionaries fight against the system. And terrorists are integral to the system. Hence, the police forces, military forces and the profiteering governments become the terrorists when they cause circumstances where innocent people are massacred.
This is going on right now in India. The Hindu supremacists of India –the biggest blot in India’s secular image—are the ones who spread the venoms in early last decade by demolishing a national treasure called Babri Masjid. The terrorists who stoned the walls of the mosques and destroyed it with active collaboration of police forces (since they are all integral to the terrorizing network) that December 6, went on to incite the Mumbai bomb blasts—the biggest in India’s history. The riots went on unabated with an entirely unapologetic Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackerey calling the shots and giving hateful speeches against the Muslims of India. Shiv Sainiks who were aided by BJP in demolishing the mosque are the neo-nazi elements of India who should have been declared as state terrorists long back.
These were the people who came to power by killing extremely popular labor union leader of Maharashtra Krishna Desai, who was a communist leader of amazing popularity, already a MLA and was poised to rule the state. Desai’s murder was the first act of political murder in independent India. Shiva Sena hacked him to death, whereas the police and administration watched haplessly. The rise of political mafia in India has now surfaced to become the voice of the Hindu nationalists, and there cannot be any sadder development than this in India.
Journalist Praveen Swami of Frontline writes:
“Through the 1970s, Sena gangs repeatedly attacked leading Communist trade union leaders, and in 1973 were responsible for the murder of popular Parel MLA Krishna Desai. It was only in 1984, with the Sena discredited as a criminal mafia and in electoral decline, that Thackeray sought alliances with the Hindu Right, first forming the Hindu Mahasangh, and then allying with the BJP.
Violent riots, starting with the anti-Muslim pogroms in Bhiwandi, Kalyan and Thane, and through similar butchery at Panvel, Nashik, Nanded and Amravati, marked this new direction taken by the Sena.”
Activist Praful Bidwai writes:
“The Sena consciously fomented religious hatred and communalised Maharashtra politics. It manufactured chauvinist prejudice against non-Maharashtrians and instigated or committed hate-crimes. The Sena, with its disgusting demagoguery, represents pure, unadulterated evil, a political force that concentrates much that’s negative and deplorable in Indian society, including hierarchical authoritarianism, repression and addiction to the use of force and bullying.”
Ashok Dhawale writes:
“Many other communal decisions were taken by the SS-BJP regime. These were the abolition of the State Minorities Commission, the Urdu Academy and the Haj Committee; the bringing of a bill banning all forms of cow slaughter, including buffaloes, but which was defeated in the Council; a shrill campaign for the imposition of a uniform civil code; an attempt to drive out so-called Bangladeshi infiltrators, most of whom were bonafide citizens of India hailing from West Bengal but who happened to be Muslim; and so on. The claim that was made by the regime that there were no communal riots under its tenure was also false. Communal riots did take place at Pen in Raigad district, Junnar in Pune district, Khirwad in Jalgaon district, in Aurangabad city and other places. The decrease in intensity was simply because the rioters were themselves in state power!”
The riot-ridden India:
By focusing only on the here and now, we shall be basically imitating television reality shows. What is needed is to introspect with historical clarity about how things have shaped up with people.
The great journalist MJ Akbar writes in his book “Riot after Riot” (Roli 2003) that Ayodhya was developed as a case in communal “dispute” back in 1885. The history of it is interesting to be noted here:
“The Englishman who reported this incident more than 100 years ago, that left 75 Muslims dead over the Babri Masjid said that the police were present but merely looked on, being “under strict orders not to interfere”. However a secular judge Pandit Hari Kishan (echoing the voice of millions of Indians) did not award the rights to Hindu fanatics to construct a temple. “Awarding permission to construct the temple at this juncture is to lay the foundation of riot and murder”. A.F. Millett, the British officiating settlement officer even mentioned, “It is said that upto that time (the riot of 1885) the Hindus and Mohammedans alike used to worship in the mosque/temple. Since British rule a railing has been put up to prevent disputes, within which, in the mosque, the Mohammedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they can make their offerings.”
Akbar says, then in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the first propagators of modern communalism, the builders of a nation in the name of religion, first came into prominence. These ideologues sent out their missionaries—priests, politicians, novelists, historians---to color the mind of an emerging nation with blood rather than peace. The growing synthesis among the upper and middle classes and the creation of a common culture among the poor was the target. “Purification” became the key of separation, as the leaders indulged in dreams of Muslim and Hindu states…..
The Global Terrorists. Who are they?
The point is the purifiers are still present in one way or the other. Some times, at the helm of power, and at other times, in collaboration. And at all times, they are inciting violence on common people in name of religion. And these days, the local terrorism by dominant religions has been almost replaced by collaborated terrorism across the globe, which we call today as Global Terrorism.
Unfortunately, the global terrorists are this time enjoying power in big powerful countries. On closer look, one can notice the strategies adopted by Indian right-wingers as very akin to the tactics used by Israeli forces. In name of protecting the defense forces (ha!), in name of maintaining national boundaries, in name of safeguarding national interests, the militarist countries like India and Israel (you may please add United States and France and Germany as well&hellip
stop nowhere in their quest to
dominate the marginalized resisters.
But as is their wont, the ruling class uses every means possible to alienate people from the resisting forces. And when people themselves become resistors, they invent an opposition from the air, in order to project their indispensability. This has happened in every ages. In the most devastating period of economic instability that America has faced since the 1930’s, we are told that Saddam Hussein or Bin Laden are terrorists. Whereas this could be true, the reality is that both of them were creations of the American interventions. Taliban indeed is a logical consequence of American policy in Afghanistan in its attempt to enforce religious fundamentalism in that land.
Likewise, Indian leadership, pathetically criminal in their words and deeds (stealing poor peoples’ thatched roofs to hand them over to industries is one of the recent examples), are detested for rising prices of essential commodities and escalating housing and healthcare costs. In face of real crisis, the country has only its structural governance to blame (BJP or Congress, in the so-called political democracy being run by private businesses, everything is the same after the polls end&hellip
. And to avoid these, the creation
of external elements as the disrupters is a
natural political gameplan. From Hitler to Bush
to Singh, everyone has applied this tactic of
state control in implicit fashion.
Alright, but who are the terrorists then?
Terrorists are people who cause terror. From our experience, we know that terrors can be imaginary (as in dreams or in political speech) or real (as in price-rise, homelessness, death due to cold wave). So the answer is not very complicated. The real terrorists are the military-industrial complex of politicians who rule through the produces: militia to enforce and money to allure.
But if we need further critical appraisal, here it is: The terrorists make plans. They define territories. They decide on allegiance. They talk of countries and boundaries. They think of their own nationalities, and regionalism. They do not think of world’s working class, they are concerned about domestic business class. They enforce different privileges for citizens and immigrants and aliens. They terrorize people through enforcement of draconian legislations like POTA, TADA or Patriot Act. They use police force and military to perpetrate crime on women and children by declaring war. They use tanks and guns to suppress people who use stones and slogans. They get international support from all terrorists, thus making terrorism not a sectarian act any longer, but a global business.
These terrorists terrorize people by talking sweet and killing their aspirations, or by planting bombs and blaming imaginations. Scolding each other (look how Manmohan Singh scolded Pakistan today for Mumbai blasts!) while failing to apologize and resign because of inability to maintain law and order. In fact they are so involved in creating riots that they make a profession out of it and enjoy allegiance of people.
Today’s India is a result of the Communal Politicians like Bal Thackerey whose party went on rampage merely because of his wife’s statue getting defaced and who has threatened several times to eliminate Pakistan from world map. It is the Communal Politicians like Manmohan Singh who instead of acting on the right wing fanatics are blaming Pakistan for every single law and order disaster in India. New York Times reports Singh saying “I have explained it to the government of Pakistan at the highest level that if the acts of terrorism are not controlled, it is exceedingly difficult for any government to carry forward what may be called a normalization and peace process.”
The same article quotes Tasnim Aslam, the Foreign Office spokeswoman for Pakistan as saying, “In the past two days, India has not given us anything in writing or talked of any evidence.” Sumit Ganguly, a professor of politics at Indiana University in Bloomington says to NYT: It (Mumbai blasts) cannot but help India’s cause in Kashmir.”
Indeed, the goal is to help India’s cause in Kashmir. India’s cause in Kashmir has been one of repression, oppression and violent acquisition of the state’s population. Anyone who resists the Indian Army could be termed as someone backed by Pakistan. Or perhaps some of us might even say backed by America. Things will not change by the proclaimed associations or phrases such as “terrorists”. The power which has been ruling over Kashmir for six decades now need to recognize its need to let the people take back the state. Let there be referendums in Kashmir. Indeed, let there be referendum in India.
Different questions beg different answers. Just like during Mumbai blasts, in recent (as always) Israel attack on Palestine, different questions are being asked too. Some are engaged in finding out who is behind the attacks. I am trying to figure out who benefits in the long run from these attacks.
The people who ask questions like “who will then rule Kashmir” or “who is behind Mumbai blasts” might be asking possibly candid and urgent questions. But my question is altogether different. Mine is “whose interest do these serve”. Occupation of Kashmir or Mumbai blasts serve the political elites of India and Pakistan who are aided in their so-called peace-process (a conversation that takes place entirely without considering the resisting people, who are conveniently always dismissed as “terrorists&rdquo
by the US of A. My question then
does not seek any answers. Definitely not on
this blog. It facilitates further questions.
For example, I am still wondering why the attacks were carried out, why the police without investigations said it was Pakistani backed terrorist groups, why the prime minister before investigations were over, said it was just a few terrorists, why did the Shiv Sainiks go on rampage two days before blasts with its president threatening major repercussions (more violent than the cartoon controversy), why was it that despite its hand in the biggest blast in Mumbai (1993 march) in inciting mass scale murders, and despite right wing roles in genocide in Gujarat---interestingly the media do not touch these communal violence at all as antecedents--no investigations are being done against the parties which have been involved. Even judicial commissions that find Shiv Sena guilty are dismissed (Srikrishna Commission for example). My question also is why has law and order completely failed to take up responsibilities and although we cannot expect the Army (or Indian military) to come help people in crisis, why is it not at least contemplating over the past so many decades of massacres that have been leading to such escalating tensions.
Someone needs to take responsibility. Surely none of the current crop of leaders can take stands like Lal Bahadur Shastri, but its time media stopped quoting a failed and feeble and ashamed agent of global capitalism called Manmohan Singh, and indeed demanded his resignation for failing to act upon the communal elements.
In conclusion:
Every act of terrorism must be condemned. The more pressing need is to understand who are the terrorists. Only a few months back, when the Naveen PatnaiK Government of Orissa in its zealous bid to sell the land to some profiteers ordered mass murder of tribal people without any provocation or need, that was an act of terrorism, which went unnoticed. The Kalinga Nagar incident escaped attention of world media, because it did not involve Muslims. Or when the American firm United Carbide plant killed more than 20,000 people of Bhopal, it was not considered terrorism because it was not a reaction from Muslims. Or when Gujarat Genocide took place under right wingers of India, it was not global terrorism, because Muslims became the worst sufferers.
Without getting lost in the web of words, one must act on the root causes of today’s mishaps. When one does that, it can be unquestionably found that the far-right wing factions of world religions are the perpetrators. And so far at least, in India or America, the Hindus and Christians in their fundamentalist form have been holding power mechanism to their favor to declare war on Islam (American administration has not atoned for its post 9/11 crimes of religious discrimination nature nor is Indian government likely to for its post 7/11 outbursts against Pakistan and Indian Muslims).
The people in Mumbai did not die because they were innocent. They did not die because they were protesting Islam religion. They did not die because they were Hindus. They did not die because they were Mumbaiites.
They were massacred in systematic, organized fashion because the Indian administration failed to arrest the perpetrators even after they had sent clear warnings. And because even after the blasts, the Indian administration failed to carry out investigations into the cause of the blasts. People who planted the bombs could be unemployed, misguided missiles, either Hindus or Muslims. But the ones who used them to further their goals are still in power and they are fighting one religion against another. It is these communal politicians who need to be declared as terrorists. We should not use terrorist word only because the present American president (who has been declared by people as the real International Terrorist on the streets of New York) thinks the war is against Islam.
The war on global terror is actually a war on global poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, a war against war mongers and militarists.
However, terror is not an illusion. The real terrorists are very much present before us. They are the politicians and bureaucrats and blood sucking industrialists who own every means of mental production so much that they make us believe in the unreal terrorism. They do so by generating conditions of violence and then declaring the violence itself as terror, whereas they thrive on the conditions.
We need to ask different questions. Presently, we must force the communal politicians to introspect, if not be forced out by the same people it claims to be “terrorists”. People resisting against the communal politicians actually fight for their own human rights, and I am quoting a great singer from Goa, Remo Fernandes in his album “Politicians Don’t know to Rock ‘n’ Roll”, who represented a profoundly secular majority, thanks due to which the world still is surviving. The minority ruling classes of the world will soon be forced to withdraw from their communal tactics. The world without religions is the one dream…of Lennon to Sahir, and hopefully, to some readers of this blog.
Here’s Remo:
How do you feel?
This song is dedicated
To a species most hated
The curse of the Indian nation
The Communal Politician.
How do you feel? How do you feel?
You who have taught us to kill?
How do you feel? How do you feel?
Are you happy that blood has been spilled?
Do you have sweet dreams at night
Or do the sounds of fright
Come gurgling from your victims
As they feel the knife?
Do you have wet dreams in bed
About the throne you wish you had
Or do you hear the rattling skeletons in your head?
How do you sleep? How do you sleep?
With a dead body lying beside you
How do you sleep? How do you sleep?
Can you smell the rotting heart inside you?
Are you happy inside, or do you try to hide
From the graves you’ve been filling far and wide?
If you can’t have your cake
You’d rather poison the world!
How do you feel? How do you feel?
Mumbai Blasts, Hindu Assumptions and What Needs to be Done?
By Saswat Pattanayak
In a large-scale human tragedy today, a series of bomb blasts in Mumbai has taken lives of more than 150 people. However, these blasts are no aberrations for the financial capital of India. Mumbai—a city governed by Hindu right-wing fanatics of India—has faced such calamities several times in the recent past.
What’s unique about the blasts in the western India –Gujarat and Maharashtra—is their etiology. Invariably all the blasts have been religious in nature, targeted to create heightened communal tension in the region. And today was no different.
So, if communal violences have such a pattern of occurrence and regularity in frequency, how is it that the administrations turn conveniently indifferent towards their recurrence? Who are benefited in the process?
The usual suspects:
“Terrorists” is one-word explanation given as being the perpetrators for every systematic violence these days. Of course, this word has gained coinage and credibility through the usage by the ruling class. What is important to note here is that the more one uses this word, the more one tends to align with the interests of the ruling class.
A violation to the law and order necessarily is handiwork of the people who desire instability. Without going into the logistics regarding needs of instability (which could be desirable for various reasons too), one can assume that the ruling power draws sympathy wave from people by projecting an ‘external’ element to be cause of innocent peoples’ deaths. Interestingly, the structural instability actually happens only with killing of the politicians, whereas their structural “stability” takes place when innocent lives are lost!
Of course, it usually happens during the days when the ruling powers are apparently most unstable themselves. By every account, any war in the world is also caused at times of uncertainty for the ruling powers. Think of any cold war interventions by the US (spread of communism was the factor), or later on Clinton in Yugoslovia (Monica Lewinsky) or Bush in Iraq (September 11 orchestration). Or take for account, India’s own trysts with regional instability resulting in massive operations in Assam, Punjab, and Kashmir.
More often than not, these take shape of communal violence (just as every war has been fought by religious fanatics). In India, bomb blasts in Maharashtra or genocide in Gujarat are cases of Hindu fanatics attacking Muslim minorities in the name of their own misplaced insecurities.
Misplaced Insecurities:
In the past, the allegations by Hindu Mafia of India against the Muslims were based on myths such as: “Muslim population is increasing in rapid pace to overtake Hindu majority”, “Muslims of India are Pakistani loyalists, and since Pakistan is an enemy state, Muslims must be declared so too” etc. Practicing neo-nazi tactics of training Hindu youths to take up violent means to eliminate Muslims from India, the Hindu militant groups have traditionally enjoyed quite a presence. From propagandizing religions in school education (Saraswati Vidya Mandir) to promote Hindu businesses (Swadeshi Jagran Manch), the right-wingers of India have stopped at nothing in overcoming their insecurities.
Clearly all these insecurities of Hindus fundamentalists have led to loss in lives and property of Muslims (Gujarati Muslims are usually attacked more, because of their prosperous business) and fellow Hindus (who clearly in majority reject these fanatics except for once when they elected BJP to a considerable tenure). But of course, these tactics are carried out most surreptitiously, and at times with blatant disregard to actual circumstances.
Why Mumbai? Why now?
In continuance with this power ploy, the recent tragedies in Mumbai started since last three days.
First, someone defaced the statue of one woman in Mumbai. But this woman was not BR Ambedkar or for that matter, Mahatma Gandhi. Because in Mumbai, and elsewhere in India, on a regular basis, statues of these two giants of Indian freedom struggle are subjected to desecration.
Ironically, this woman was way more powerful. As the late wife of the Hindu supremacist Bal Thackeray, the figure in statue commanded respect. Hence all political parties instead of looking into maintaining law and order of the state so that no publicly installed statues are defaced, and the ‘actual’ culprits are caught, they came forward to apologize for the shameful incident.
The sainiks, allegedly representing the majority religion of India, decided to react in their traditional manner: in a purely Hindu supremacist way. So none less that the executive president of the party (whose mother’s statue this was) decided to take law into his own hands. He declared proudly: “If derogatory cartoons appearing in a newspaper in far-off Denmark can have repercussions in India, this incident is bound to provoke reactions from Shiv Sainiks.”
What a shame!
First off, no one knows who defaced the statue. In all possibility, it might have been a handiwork by the right wing plotters themselves. The desecration took place in wee hours of early morning. The police in Mumbai say the incident took place when there was no activity on the street. In other words, it was not an organized effort by motivated party. To further incite tensions, an empty tourist bus from Gujarat was burnt down in front of the Hindu bosses’ office. It was also found out that this could have been a result of short-circuit, and not done by any motivated party.
Mumbai Joint Commissioner (Police) Arup Patnaik said, “Video footage suggests that the flames started inside, so we are also probing whether it could have been caused by a short circuit. Our priority is to quell the disturbances and maintain order.” The police said they had no leads on the incident that sparked off the day’s disturbances.
So basically, there was no reason to suspect that any Muslim groups or “terrorists” or Pakistan might have been behind such incidents. On the contrary, going by the way, the statue was chosen (to rouse sentiments), the bus came from Gujarat (Hindu violent prone state) and the location (Shiv Sena office), one could investigate the hands of the Sainiks in these events.
But, even as the state police clearly said they had absolutely “no lead”, the leader of the fanatic party declared a war. Throughout the state, widespread violence was let loose. Thackeray, after visiting the spot, told reporters that there was likely to be “ramifications”.
The dark humor
When the majority religions take stock of the situation, the communal racism just takes over. Because of the sheer majority of people that lead the war, they confidently go on attacking like mad dogs. Such rampage has been going in India since decades now.
Just three days back when on July 9, Thackeray warned the country that severe reactions from Shiv Sainks was inevitable, one was apprehending the attacks. Unfortunately it turned out to be even more serious. Closely on the heels of the attacks in Kashmir, where American interests lie, the attack in Mumbai has been planned in premeditated fashion so as to draw international condemnation: against Islam.
To appease American obsession with anti-Islam movements throughout the world, the Indian group of loyal foot soldiers have indeed given fuel to the fire. There was no international coverage of the violence let loose by Shiv Sainiks which had paralyzed the city of Mumbai since last three days. And to draw further attention, innocent lives had to be sacrificed.
This is an old political trick that has always helped Indian communal leaders. When the government at center has been doing absolutely nothing to agitate Pakistan into a war, the war mongering Hindu fundamentalists had no better excuse than looking towards Kashmir and Mumbai.
What needs to be done?
First and foremost, none of the persons on that local train deserved to die this way. Enemies could be well within the same people who are staging a drama of violent protests. There must be through investigations to that effect. Not biased investigations. The Indian intelligence sources need to be smarter than they are now.
Corporate leaflets pretending to be newspapers, like Times of India have already created headlines regarding the perpetrators even before the investigations have begun! One report already says, “LeT, SIMI hand in Mumbai blasts”. Highest form of irresponsible journalism can only result in such news stories. The report without naming any sources, says in the first paragraph itself that the “terror attack on Mumbai trains was carried out by Lashkar-e-Toiba and local Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) activists and was designed to trigger communal conflagration in the country’s financial capital.”
And in the body, it says, “While still waiting for clues to emerge, top intelligence sources in New Delhi seem pretty sure the blasts on the trains were plotted by Lashkar modules which are increasingly collaborating with activists of SIMI, which boasts of strong pockets of influence across Maharashtra.”
For such serious violence that causes hundreds of valuable lives, the press, the government and the so-called intelligence sources are highly irresponsible, and criminal in their misconducts. Times of India owes a public apology for displaying such highest form of carelessness. It’s entirely lost on me as to how someone can be “pretty sure” of the blasts while “waiting for clues to emerge”! As in the past, this time also, the official propaganda machine of India might prove successful and they may even go and nab some people with Muslim surnames (a recent popular Bollywood cinema "Khakee" (2004) dealt with this tragic issue).
History revisited?
In the past, everytime there have been communal violences in India, the administrations have found easy scapegoats in a) Pakistan, b) Pakistani-funded terrorists. Alas, they have never provided any evidence to support these claims. (while on the contrary, independent findings by filmmakers and judicial bodies have always found the homegrown communal parties to be the root causes). These blame-games are perfectly orchestrated tricks by the Government of India to maintain its supremacy in the subcontinent. And in the process the communal politicians have never cared to think of the lives lost.
At times, facts of life are too obvious to be missed. One of them tells me about the complete absence of deaths of lives of the politicians who are ‘protesting’ the most. It’s always usually the innocent commoners who lay down their lives. The people who are responsible for maintaining law and order (the politicians themselves) fail to own up to their responsibilities (barring perhaps Lal Bahadur Shastri in case of a rail accident). They never seem to resign from their powerful positions for not having been able to provide their people any sense of security. On the contrary, while adamantly glued to their seats of power (or of opposition power in the parliaments), they keep blaming some or the other external factors, so that in times like this, they can scare enough people to get united for their own sake.
This time, it should be enough.
Well, this time….
No more reasons to call mayhem
Not one more life in your name
Not another death to uphold your religion
No more such violent catch 22 situation
Not to secure your mother’s dormant statues
Nor to pay back for your father’s power abuse
No more thought controls by government bureaucrats
Not once more will we believe in your tactics of attacks
No time to agitate, its time to step down from power
No press conferences, no indomitable statues or tower
In such times, politicians of the world must unite
You have everything to lose, including your might
For once, walk with the people, feel their agonies
Set examples of selves, write accords for peace
Stop the blame-games with Pakistan and Muslims
Or against one’s poor, the backward, and their miseries
Now is the time to act, to promise just one thing:
Stop playing communal, ‘tis just one life for rejoicing.
(Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet, 2006)
In a large-scale human tragedy today, a series of bomb blasts in Mumbai has taken lives of more than 150 people. However, these blasts are no aberrations for the financial capital of India. Mumbai—a city governed by Hindu right-wing fanatics of India—has faced such calamities several times in the recent past.
What’s unique about the blasts in the western India –Gujarat and Maharashtra—is their etiology. Invariably all the blasts have been religious in nature, targeted to create heightened communal tension in the region. And today was no different.
So, if communal violences have such a pattern of occurrence and regularity in frequency, how is it that the administrations turn conveniently indifferent towards their recurrence? Who are benefited in the process?
The usual suspects:
“Terrorists” is one-word explanation given as being the perpetrators for every systematic violence these days. Of course, this word has gained coinage and credibility through the usage by the ruling class. What is important to note here is that the more one uses this word, the more one tends to align with the interests of the ruling class.
A violation to the law and order necessarily is handiwork of the people who desire instability. Without going into the logistics regarding needs of instability (which could be desirable for various reasons too), one can assume that the ruling power draws sympathy wave from people by projecting an ‘external’ element to be cause of innocent peoples’ deaths. Interestingly, the structural instability actually happens only with killing of the politicians, whereas their structural “stability” takes place when innocent lives are lost!
Of course, it usually happens during the days when the ruling powers are apparently most unstable themselves. By every account, any war in the world is also caused at times of uncertainty for the ruling powers. Think of any cold war interventions by the US (spread of communism was the factor), or later on Clinton in Yugoslovia (Monica Lewinsky) or Bush in Iraq (September 11 orchestration). Or take for account, India’s own trysts with regional instability resulting in massive operations in Assam, Punjab, and Kashmir.
More often than not, these take shape of communal violence (just as every war has been fought by religious fanatics). In India, bomb blasts in Maharashtra or genocide in Gujarat are cases of Hindu fanatics attacking Muslim minorities in the name of their own misplaced insecurities.
Misplaced Insecurities:
In the past, the allegations by Hindu Mafia of India against the Muslims were based on myths such as: “Muslim population is increasing in rapid pace to overtake Hindu majority”, “Muslims of India are Pakistani loyalists, and since Pakistan is an enemy state, Muslims must be declared so too” etc. Practicing neo-nazi tactics of training Hindu youths to take up violent means to eliminate Muslims from India, the Hindu militant groups have traditionally enjoyed quite a presence. From propagandizing religions in school education (Saraswati Vidya Mandir) to promote Hindu businesses (Swadeshi Jagran Manch), the right-wingers of India have stopped at nothing in overcoming their insecurities.
Clearly all these insecurities of Hindus fundamentalists have led to loss in lives and property of Muslims (Gujarati Muslims are usually attacked more, because of their prosperous business) and fellow Hindus (who clearly in majority reject these fanatics except for once when they elected BJP to a considerable tenure). But of course, these tactics are carried out most surreptitiously, and at times with blatant disregard to actual circumstances.
Why Mumbai? Why now?
In continuance with this power ploy, the recent tragedies in Mumbai started since last three days.
First, someone defaced the statue of one woman in Mumbai. But this woman was not BR Ambedkar or for that matter, Mahatma Gandhi. Because in Mumbai, and elsewhere in India, on a regular basis, statues of these two giants of Indian freedom struggle are subjected to desecration.
Ironically, this woman was way more powerful. As the late wife of the Hindu supremacist Bal Thackeray, the figure in statue commanded respect. Hence all political parties instead of looking into maintaining law and order of the state so that no publicly installed statues are defaced, and the ‘actual’ culprits are caught, they came forward to apologize for the shameful incident.
The sainiks, allegedly representing the majority religion of India, decided to react in their traditional manner: in a purely Hindu supremacist way. So none less that the executive president of the party (whose mother’s statue this was) decided to take law into his own hands. He declared proudly: “If derogatory cartoons appearing in a newspaper in far-off Denmark can have repercussions in India, this incident is bound to provoke reactions from Shiv Sainiks.”
What a shame!
First off, no one knows who defaced the statue. In all possibility, it might have been a handiwork by the right wing plotters themselves. The desecration took place in wee hours of early morning. The police in Mumbai say the incident took place when there was no activity on the street. In other words, it was not an organized effort by motivated party. To further incite tensions, an empty tourist bus from Gujarat was burnt down in front of the Hindu bosses’ office. It was also found out that this could have been a result of short-circuit, and not done by any motivated party.
Mumbai Joint Commissioner (Police) Arup Patnaik said, “Video footage suggests that the flames started inside, so we are also probing whether it could have been caused by a short circuit. Our priority is to quell the disturbances and maintain order.” The police said they had no leads on the incident that sparked off the day’s disturbances.
So basically, there was no reason to suspect that any Muslim groups or “terrorists” or Pakistan might have been behind such incidents. On the contrary, going by the way, the statue was chosen (to rouse sentiments), the bus came from Gujarat (Hindu violent prone state) and the location (Shiv Sena office), one could investigate the hands of the Sainiks in these events.
But, even as the state police clearly said they had absolutely “no lead”, the leader of the fanatic party declared a war. Throughout the state, widespread violence was let loose. Thackeray, after visiting the spot, told reporters that there was likely to be “ramifications”.
The dark humor
When the majority religions take stock of the situation, the communal racism just takes over. Because of the sheer majority of people that lead the war, they confidently go on attacking like mad dogs. Such rampage has been going in India since decades now.
Just three days back when on July 9, Thackeray warned the country that severe reactions from Shiv Sainks was inevitable, one was apprehending the attacks. Unfortunately it turned out to be even more serious. Closely on the heels of the attacks in Kashmir, where American interests lie, the attack in Mumbai has been planned in premeditated fashion so as to draw international condemnation: against Islam.
To appease American obsession with anti-Islam movements throughout the world, the Indian group of loyal foot soldiers have indeed given fuel to the fire. There was no international coverage of the violence let loose by Shiv Sainiks which had paralyzed the city of Mumbai since last three days. And to draw further attention, innocent lives had to be sacrificed.
This is an old political trick that has always helped Indian communal leaders. When the government at center has been doing absolutely nothing to agitate Pakistan into a war, the war mongering Hindu fundamentalists had no better excuse than looking towards Kashmir and Mumbai.
What needs to be done?
First and foremost, none of the persons on that local train deserved to die this way. Enemies could be well within the same people who are staging a drama of violent protests. There must be through investigations to that effect. Not biased investigations. The Indian intelligence sources need to be smarter than they are now.
Corporate leaflets pretending to be newspapers, like Times of India have already created headlines regarding the perpetrators even before the investigations have begun! One report already says, “LeT, SIMI hand in Mumbai blasts”. Highest form of irresponsible journalism can only result in such news stories. The report without naming any sources, says in the first paragraph itself that the “terror attack on Mumbai trains was carried out by Lashkar-e-Toiba and local Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) activists and was designed to trigger communal conflagration in the country’s financial capital.”
And in the body, it says, “While still waiting for clues to emerge, top intelligence sources in New Delhi seem pretty sure the blasts on the trains were plotted by Lashkar modules which are increasingly collaborating with activists of SIMI, which boasts of strong pockets of influence across Maharashtra.”
For such serious violence that causes hundreds of valuable lives, the press, the government and the so-called intelligence sources are highly irresponsible, and criminal in their misconducts. Times of India owes a public apology for displaying such highest form of carelessness. It’s entirely lost on me as to how someone can be “pretty sure” of the blasts while “waiting for clues to emerge”! As in the past, this time also, the official propaganda machine of India might prove successful and they may even go and nab some people with Muslim surnames (a recent popular Bollywood cinema "Khakee" (2004) dealt with this tragic issue).
History revisited?
In the past, everytime there have been communal violences in India, the administrations have found easy scapegoats in a) Pakistan, b) Pakistani-funded terrorists. Alas, they have never provided any evidence to support these claims. (while on the contrary, independent findings by filmmakers and judicial bodies have always found the homegrown communal parties to be the root causes). These blame-games are perfectly orchestrated tricks by the Government of India to maintain its supremacy in the subcontinent. And in the process the communal politicians have never cared to think of the lives lost.
At times, facts of life are too obvious to be missed. One of them tells me about the complete absence of deaths of lives of the politicians who are ‘protesting’ the most. It’s always usually the innocent commoners who lay down their lives. The people who are responsible for maintaining law and order (the politicians themselves) fail to own up to their responsibilities (barring perhaps Lal Bahadur Shastri in case of a rail accident). They never seem to resign from their powerful positions for not having been able to provide their people any sense of security. On the contrary, while adamantly glued to their seats of power (or of opposition power in the parliaments), they keep blaming some or the other external factors, so that in times like this, they can scare enough people to get united for their own sake.
This time, it should be enough.
Well, this time….
No more reasons to call mayhem
Not one more life in your name
Not another death to uphold your religion
No more such violent catch 22 situation
Not to secure your mother’s dormant statues
Nor to pay back for your father’s power abuse
No more thought controls by government bureaucrats
Not once more will we believe in your tactics of attacks
No time to agitate, its time to step down from power
No press conferences, no indomitable statues or tower
In such times, politicians of the world must unite
You have everything to lose, including your might
For once, walk with the people, feel their agonies
Set examples of selves, write accords for peace
Stop the blame-games with Pakistan and Muslims
Or against one’s poor, the backward, and their miseries
Now is the time to act, to promise just one thing:
Stop playing communal, ‘tis just one life for rejoicing.
(Saswat Pattanayak, Peoples’ Poet, 2006)
Attack on Delhi: Stop Blaming Pakistan
By Saswat Pattanayak
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf that he expected Pakistan to honor its promise to end cross-border terrorism.
And this comes at a time when both countries are decidedly allowing not just the line of control to be deregulated, but also the manufactured cultural division across borders be illegitimated. Any impediments to that will only result in suspension of the planned facilitation. There is no good reason why such a movement needs to be postponed at this point.
Crucial to remember here is that such intense acts at promoting mutual friendships have come not out of some vacuum, rather with concerted efforts by people across borders to challenge the status quo. People of Pakistan have clearly seen through the empty barrels of Benazir Bhuttos and Nawaj Sharrifs. Indian population has also collectively rejected the right wingers like Vajpayee and Advani. Empty rhetoric aimed at insulating people of shared cultural past (and political heritage too in their drives against colonial powers) have finally been attacked widely. Artistes have exchanged places despite threats from fanatics like Shiv Senas’. Editors have expressed solidarities despite barriers on such freedoms of speech. Leaders on both fronts have realized the growing public pressure to end the invented differences. And recent peace talks are culminations of such a hopeful past.
Suddenly New Delhi has been attacked. Of course it is strategically symbolic in that the cowards chose Sarojini Nagar, among all the places because of the density of working/middle class population there. But the bigger question is who might have been involved. Only that section of people who have a stake in the gains. And who would gain from the process?
The only theory doing the rounds in the Indian press is that Pakistan is involved. A certain journalist from BBC, Sanjoy Majumder who regularly opines carelessly, says India feels groups based in Pakistan or linked to them may have been involved.
There is a danger in such theorizing. Unlike in the past, the attack this time was not targeted at people in power or governmental institutions (Parliament etc.). Unlike in the past, neither Lashkar-e-Toiba nor the Jaish-e-Mohammad has claimed the attack. Instead a rather unknown group Inqilabi has claimed anything of worth. Moreover, even Kashmiri analysts are unaware of existence of this group.
In that case, where does the needle of suspicion point to? For once, just for once, if we absolve the ghost of Pakistan masterminding, then can we look within and see patterns of similar attacks on civilians? In India by Indians?
What about recent riots in Mumbai? In Gujarat? These led to deaths of thousands of people and we still cannot blame any group in Pakistan for perpetuating either. Delhi has been the domain of political groups who have been known to have incited hatred among people since decades now, for their own political gains. Why first look across the border for clues? How about looking at home front for possible explanations? Only after we have exhausted all possible logic for attacking civilians to disturb the initiated peace process that might have germinated from a certain section of Indian public, should we look beyond.
Let India not choose a pathetic model that American way of theorizing terror has created. Oklahoma bombing did not teach us a lesson. Recently as an empty threat in New York Subways came about, theory was already afloat that fundamentalists (of course from ‘their’ religion, not ours) were after us.
The riddle is not a Gordian knot. We must find out a good motive. There is a bloody good one. And it’s not Diwali. Please! Media is doing a disservice by giving coverage to irresponsible comments by leaders (a la Rice) who feel bad that it was days before Diwali. The attacks have nothing to do with Diwali. For the religious lot, no God teaches to annihilate people of other faiths. And for the irreligious lot, who have done the act, let’s say hypothetically in the name of religion, they would care less about Diwali as a point of reference. The only thing that has changed since last attack on Indian Parliament and this attack on Sarojini Nagar is not a new festival called Diwali. It’s the initiation of a peace process that would have made line of control a point of friendship.
After the serious examination of this motive, intelligence agencies must look into the genealogy of people who would otherwise be harmed if India were to aid Pakistan at such a time of grave danger for the latter with more than 80,000 of its people dead due to earthquakes. And at a time when Pakistan is in need much in excess of what is being offered worldwide. At such a time, India has come forward with immense goodwill gesture and just the way the British had tarnished every hope of a united India and Pakistan during their times of crisis, at this time, there is every hope of a unity to resurface. At this point, who would be most persistent at refusing such a thing from happening?
Nay, I just don’t believe it is Pakistan. The people out there, in our neighborhood are suffering at the moment. 80,000 dead in an economically impoverished nation. That’s burden upon cataclysm. They can’t be it. Come on now, Mr Indian Prime Minister. We have had enough of these hocus-pocus oratory every time any attack takes place. The easiest way to fool India’s masses has been to direct their frustration at a neighboring country. Instead of lecturing Pakistan about your expectations, start introspecting on the levels of expectations that you meet when peoples across the borders want no more of Indian army, no more of Pakistani unrest. All that folks want is a united South Asia. And the further you delay in understanding this, the merrier would be the forces of disharmony.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf that he expected Pakistan to honor its promise to end cross-border terrorism.
And this comes at a time when both countries are decidedly allowing not just the line of control to be deregulated, but also the manufactured cultural division across borders be illegitimated. Any impediments to that will only result in suspension of the planned facilitation. There is no good reason why such a movement needs to be postponed at this point.
Crucial to remember here is that such intense acts at promoting mutual friendships have come not out of some vacuum, rather with concerted efforts by people across borders to challenge the status quo. People of Pakistan have clearly seen through the empty barrels of Benazir Bhuttos and Nawaj Sharrifs. Indian population has also collectively rejected the right wingers like Vajpayee and Advani. Empty rhetoric aimed at insulating people of shared cultural past (and political heritage too in their drives against colonial powers) have finally been attacked widely. Artistes have exchanged places despite threats from fanatics like Shiv Senas’. Editors have expressed solidarities despite barriers on such freedoms of speech. Leaders on both fronts have realized the growing public pressure to end the invented differences. And recent peace talks are culminations of such a hopeful past.
Suddenly New Delhi has been attacked. Of course it is strategically symbolic in that the cowards chose Sarojini Nagar, among all the places because of the density of working/middle class population there. But the bigger question is who might have been involved. Only that section of people who have a stake in the gains. And who would gain from the process?
The only theory doing the rounds in the Indian press is that Pakistan is involved. A certain journalist from BBC, Sanjoy Majumder who regularly opines carelessly, says India feels groups based in Pakistan or linked to them may have been involved.
There is a danger in such theorizing. Unlike in the past, the attack this time was not targeted at people in power or governmental institutions (Parliament etc.). Unlike in the past, neither Lashkar-e-Toiba nor the Jaish-e-Mohammad has claimed the attack. Instead a rather unknown group Inqilabi has claimed anything of worth. Moreover, even Kashmiri analysts are unaware of existence of this group.
In that case, where does the needle of suspicion point to? For once, just for once, if we absolve the ghost of Pakistan masterminding, then can we look within and see patterns of similar attacks on civilians? In India by Indians?
What about recent riots in Mumbai? In Gujarat? These led to deaths of thousands of people and we still cannot blame any group in Pakistan for perpetuating either. Delhi has been the domain of political groups who have been known to have incited hatred among people since decades now, for their own political gains. Why first look across the border for clues? How about looking at home front for possible explanations? Only after we have exhausted all possible logic for attacking civilians to disturb the initiated peace process that might have germinated from a certain section of Indian public, should we look beyond.
Let India not choose a pathetic model that American way of theorizing terror has created. Oklahoma bombing did not teach us a lesson. Recently as an empty threat in New York Subways came about, theory was already afloat that fundamentalists (of course from ‘their’ religion, not ours) were after us.
The riddle is not a Gordian knot. We must find out a good motive. There is a bloody good one. And it’s not Diwali. Please! Media is doing a disservice by giving coverage to irresponsible comments by leaders (a la Rice) who feel bad that it was days before Diwali. The attacks have nothing to do with Diwali. For the religious lot, no God teaches to annihilate people of other faiths. And for the irreligious lot, who have done the act, let’s say hypothetically in the name of religion, they would care less about Diwali as a point of reference. The only thing that has changed since last attack on Indian Parliament and this attack on Sarojini Nagar is not a new festival called Diwali. It’s the initiation of a peace process that would have made line of control a point of friendship.
After the serious examination of this motive, intelligence agencies must look into the genealogy of people who would otherwise be harmed if India were to aid Pakistan at such a time of grave danger for the latter with more than 80,000 of its people dead due to earthquakes. And at a time when Pakistan is in need much in excess of what is being offered worldwide. At such a time, India has come forward with immense goodwill gesture and just the way the British had tarnished every hope of a united India and Pakistan during their times of crisis, at this time, there is every hope of a unity to resurface. At this point, who would be most persistent at refusing such a thing from happening?
Nay, I just don’t believe it is Pakistan. The people out there, in our neighborhood are suffering at the moment. 80,000 dead in an economically impoverished nation. That’s burden upon cataclysm. They can’t be it. Come on now, Mr Indian Prime Minister. We have had enough of these hocus-pocus oratory every time any attack takes place. The easiest way to fool India’s masses has been to direct their frustration at a neighboring country. Instead of lecturing Pakistan about your expectations, start introspecting on the levels of expectations that you meet when peoples across the borders want no more of Indian army, no more of Pakistani unrest. All that folks want is a united South Asia. And the further you delay in understanding this, the merrier would be the forces of disharmony.
Why Salman, Why now?
By Saswat Pattanayak
There is no news in the items being circulated by the media about Bollywood actor Salman Khan’s connection with the Underworld. Instead the news that should be worth a credential follow-up now is: Why is Salman in the news now?
First, the conversations that are making news now were published by Hindustan Times way back in August 2001. Salman has since denied that the alleged voice was his. And there were absolute silence over the issue since then. Obviously because first, it violates the right to privacy that two consenting adults have in talking to each other on any topic and hence making it legally inadmissible in court of law, and two because since four years the police has failed to establish if it was genuinely Salman's voice.
Secondly, to contextualize the times, let’s look at what’s new happening in India leading the news media to suddenly revisit Salman (his acting career has not ceased and in fact his latest film was released only last week. Even his last film Lucky made good earnings.)
On the downside, the powerful Aishwarya Rai very famously and bitterly has decided to break off. Incidentally her arch-rival Sushmita Sen not only co-stars with Salman, but is pleading for the new movie not to be banned. The people keen on banning the film are the right wing brigade which have gone on rampage to ransack cinema halls across the country. Their leader, the Hindu leader Advani has been recently charged for his anti-national activities at Ayodhya. Hence, the focus of the media has successfully shifted from Advani to Salman now.
Amidst all these, the media houses are very hard pressed to “break” this news of underworld connection with cinema stars. Almost none of the journalists point out the obvious (bound as they are not to kill the suspense), that even the most patriotic of Indian movies are made by underworld money. World’s largest film industry has historically been financed by the underworld money and in this sense, Dubai’s contribution to promoting Indian cultural integrity (Hindi films and the Indian religion of Cricket) need not be dismissed as abrasively.
Without the involvement of the underworld, India-Pakistan series would never have been a success, making Cricket a South Asian extravaganza than a colonial classicism played by Aussies and Brits. Likewise most of the superstars, producers, actors and film fraternity today would never have risen as high without active financing of the laundered money. To get surprised at an Indian actor talking to the underworld is childish. The public memory may be proverbially short, but we all know the extent to which the filmdom celebrates its existence at the parties hosted by Dubai financiers. Money rules and indeed without a governmental support to filmdom as an “industry” there have been ways to legitimize allegiances.
Of course the domestic patriots could not allow such allegiances and they suddenly turned their ire. Resultingly for many years now filmdom has turned homeward to the other underworld (the Hindu Sainiks in Bombay after driving the Muslim gangsters down to Dubai), only this one rules upfront. Not only does this domestic mafia dictate whether it will allow certain entertainers (Pakistani artistes have been banned from coming to India, although Indian audience are known to be big fans of the artistes), and allow certain games (Pakistani cricket is widely watched in India), it also has enforced its dictates in such crude way that many film posters say on their cover “With blessings of the Balasaheb”. Now we all know that Balasaheb, the Hindu supremacist, used to be a good cartoonist, but we hardly knew him as a champion of films. Now imagine if some posters would come up with a slogan like “With blessings of the D-company”.
Looking back to Mumbai riots and Ayodhya clashes and the prevailing environment of suspicion among religious communities in India, one fails to find any difference among the preachers who want to ban the new Salman movie and the dead horses of Dubai who have nurtured the Bollywood so far.
Money (and what else does one expect in a commercial cinema industry? Aesthetics?) is obviously the guiding principle behind allegiance. Why do the media not get it and get over with it. And if the judiciary thinks a drunk actor’s bragging four years ago about his connections with underworld to a girlfriend he fought with is a matter of big concern, then it also must address the issues of cultural policing being done by a bunch of hoodlums on the street wearing saffron and threatening to censor a fun comedy people want to watch. For all the direct vandalisms inside the land, these right wing fanatics first must be booked before we witness another riot. Unless of course they consider Salman’s film as significant as Lord Ram’s birthplace to be made an issue of. In either case it would be a tragedy.
There is no news in the items being circulated by the media about Bollywood actor Salman Khan’s connection with the Underworld. Instead the news that should be worth a credential follow-up now is: Why is Salman in the news now?
First, the conversations that are making news now were published by Hindustan Times way back in August 2001. Salman has since denied that the alleged voice was his. And there were absolute silence over the issue since then. Obviously because first, it violates the right to privacy that two consenting adults have in talking to each other on any topic and hence making it legally inadmissible in court of law, and two because since four years the police has failed to establish if it was genuinely Salman's voice.
Secondly, to contextualize the times, let’s look at what’s new happening in India leading the news media to suddenly revisit Salman (his acting career has not ceased and in fact his latest film was released only last week. Even his last film Lucky made good earnings.)
On the downside, the powerful Aishwarya Rai very famously and bitterly has decided to break off. Incidentally her arch-rival Sushmita Sen not only co-stars with Salman, but is pleading for the new movie not to be banned. The people keen on banning the film are the right wing brigade which have gone on rampage to ransack cinema halls across the country. Their leader, the Hindu leader Advani has been recently charged for his anti-national activities at Ayodhya. Hence, the focus of the media has successfully shifted from Advani to Salman now.
Amidst all these, the media houses are very hard pressed to “break” this news of underworld connection with cinema stars. Almost none of the journalists point out the obvious (bound as they are not to kill the suspense), that even the most patriotic of Indian movies are made by underworld money. World’s largest film industry has historically been financed by the underworld money and in this sense, Dubai’s contribution to promoting Indian cultural integrity (Hindi films and the Indian religion of Cricket) need not be dismissed as abrasively.
Without the involvement of the underworld, India-Pakistan series would never have been a success, making Cricket a South Asian extravaganza than a colonial classicism played by Aussies and Brits. Likewise most of the superstars, producers, actors and film fraternity today would never have risen as high without active financing of the laundered money. To get surprised at an Indian actor talking to the underworld is childish. The public memory may be proverbially short, but we all know the extent to which the filmdom celebrates its existence at the parties hosted by Dubai financiers. Money rules and indeed without a governmental support to filmdom as an “industry” there have been ways to legitimize allegiances.
Of course the domestic patriots could not allow such allegiances and they suddenly turned their ire. Resultingly for many years now filmdom has turned homeward to the other underworld (the Hindu Sainiks in Bombay after driving the Muslim gangsters down to Dubai), only this one rules upfront. Not only does this domestic mafia dictate whether it will allow certain entertainers (Pakistani artistes have been banned from coming to India, although Indian audience are known to be big fans of the artistes), and allow certain games (Pakistani cricket is widely watched in India), it also has enforced its dictates in such crude way that many film posters say on their cover “With blessings of the Balasaheb”. Now we all know that Balasaheb, the Hindu supremacist, used to be a good cartoonist, but we hardly knew him as a champion of films. Now imagine if some posters would come up with a slogan like “With blessings of the D-company”.
Looking back to Mumbai riots and Ayodhya clashes and the prevailing environment of suspicion among religious communities in India, one fails to find any difference among the preachers who want to ban the new Salman movie and the dead horses of Dubai who have nurtured the Bollywood so far.
Money (and what else does one expect in a commercial cinema industry? Aesthetics?) is obviously the guiding principle behind allegiance. Why do the media not get it and get over with it. And if the judiciary thinks a drunk actor’s bragging four years ago about his connections with underworld to a girlfriend he fought with is a matter of big concern, then it also must address the issues of cultural policing being done by a bunch of hoodlums on the street wearing saffron and threatening to censor a fun comedy people want to watch. For all the direct vandalisms inside the land, these right wing fanatics first must be booked before we witness another riot. Unless of course they consider Salman’s film as significant as Lord Ram’s birthplace to be made an issue of. In either case it would be a tragedy.
Sarcastic Justice in Battlefield of Religions
By Saswat Pattanayak
In 1992-1993, more than 2000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed following the demolition of the Ayodhya mosque in India. Not only was destruction of this monument illegally conducted by Hindu fanatics, but they also went ahead to cause communal violence all over India. Not only the Hindu fanatics were the factors behind the violence, but the majority loss of human lives and properties were experienced by the Muslim community.
Deed of a devotee or Face of a fanatic!
After 10 years, the drama was reenacted. A train attack/accident left 58 dead. Hindu fanatics went on a rampage claiming that it was targeted at Hindus in the train. And in a state ruled by the rightists, around 2000, mostly Muslims, were murdered in broad daylight and robbed off their businesses.
Of course the perpetrators were never brought to book. Some of them very prominently became the rulers of India. One of them became deputy prime minister and evaded all charges. No arrests were made worthy of note.
Today, we hear two people, sorry militants, have been arrested. No, not for causing systematic communal violence. But for allegedly having helped attack the disputed mosque area earlier this month which caused no deaths except those of five other 'militants'. The case was solved with arrests done within two weeks! The fastest ever delivery of justice!
“It appears that the conspiracy to attack the temple was hatched by militants in Indian administered Kashmir”, police official SP Vaid said BBC.
The arrests basing on mere suspicion of an attack that led to no loss of lives, were done in record time. Within a month!
And its 13 years since justice is awaited in the case of Babri Masjid demolition. Who will be held responsible for death of thousands of people on baseless grounds. Baseless because if Rama was indeed born in Ayodhya, then he was not a Lord. If he is a Lord, he could never have been born.
In 1992-1993, more than 2000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed following the demolition of the Ayodhya mosque in India. Not only was destruction of this monument illegally conducted by Hindu fanatics, but they also went ahead to cause communal violence all over India. Not only the Hindu fanatics were the factors behind the violence, but the majority loss of human lives and properties were experienced by the Muslim community.
Deed of a devotee or Face of a fanatic!
After 10 years, the drama was reenacted. A train attack/accident left 58 dead. Hindu fanatics went on a rampage claiming that it was targeted at Hindus in the train. And in a state ruled by the rightists, around 2000, mostly Muslims, were murdered in broad daylight and robbed off their businesses.
Of course the perpetrators were never brought to book. Some of them very prominently became the rulers of India. One of them became deputy prime minister and evaded all charges. No arrests were made worthy of note.
Today, we hear two people, sorry militants, have been arrested. No, not for causing systematic communal violence. But for allegedly having helped attack the disputed mosque area earlier this month which caused no deaths except those of five other 'militants'. The case was solved with arrests done within two weeks! The fastest ever delivery of justice!
“It appears that the conspiracy to attack the temple was hatched by militants in Indian administered Kashmir”, police official SP Vaid said BBC.
The arrests basing on mere suspicion of an attack that led to no loss of lives, were done in record time. Within a month!
And its 13 years since justice is awaited in the case of Babri Masjid demolition. Who will be held responsible for death of thousands of people on baseless grounds. Baseless because if Rama was indeed born in Ayodhya, then he was not a Lord. If he is a Lord, he could never have been born.
Will Advani Serve?
By Saswat Pattanayak
It takes 13 years to imagine justice!
The most tragically inhuman day crafted in the post-British India was felt on the December 6th 1992. The most dastardly acts of religious dogmatism felt victorious on this day. Babri Masjid was demolished officially, with the help of the rightist Hindu fanatics at the State and the Center.
Far from being ashamed, the involved politicians rejoiced. They even mocked. One of them, MM Joshi resigned from his post after a court verdict, since he had earlier made a plumb remark that all those who the court will name must relinquish from post. But another of them, AB Vajpayee after returning from a foreign tour, rejected the resignation! No problem, the politicians must have thought: after all, we rule, and so we throw rocks.
I do not know how many more years will it take to get justice.
But it began today with a Allahabad High Court order clearly charging LK Advani along with five criminal revision petitioners Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, Vinay Katiyar, Ashok Singhal, Acharya Giriraj Kishore, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya and Sadhvi Ritambhara. They will be charged and tried for the offences under Section 149 and sub-section (1) of 505 of IPC ready with Section 149. Well, the section 149 of the Indian Penal Code deals with intention to provoke people for rioting, arson and indulging in rioting with intention to create disorder, while sub-section (1) of 505 deals with delivering fiery speeches which will hurt religious feelings and create discord among different communities.
One wonders why does it take so long a time to persecute people charged with serious crimes such as inciting religious passions to disrupt and destroy lives. At least why 13 years?
Religious sentiments are passion plays which are manipulated to result in violence instantaneously and after the steam is off, the public does not indulge in discourses any longer. The issue becomes of a national shame, racial crime, communal violence. The individuals become blurred. While discharging Advani the Court had earlier commented that “Only suspicion has been raised to implicate Advani." And with time, suspicions too pass.
Just hoping this time instead of passing out, they get validated.
It takes 13 years to imagine justice!
The most tragically inhuman day crafted in the post-British India was felt on the December 6th 1992. The most dastardly acts of religious dogmatism felt victorious on this day. Babri Masjid was demolished officially, with the help of the rightist Hindu fanatics at the State and the Center.
Far from being ashamed, the involved politicians rejoiced. They even mocked. One of them, MM Joshi resigned from his post after a court verdict, since he had earlier made a plumb remark that all those who the court will name must relinquish from post. But another of them, AB Vajpayee after returning from a foreign tour, rejected the resignation! No problem, the politicians must have thought: after all, we rule, and so we throw rocks.
I do not know how many more years will it take to get justice.
But it began today with a Allahabad High Court order clearly charging LK Advani along with five criminal revision petitioners Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, Vinay Katiyar, Ashok Singhal, Acharya Giriraj Kishore, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya and Sadhvi Ritambhara. They will be charged and tried for the offences under Section 149 and sub-section (1) of 505 of IPC ready with Section 149. Well, the section 149 of the Indian Penal Code deals with intention to provoke people for rioting, arson and indulging in rioting with intention to create disorder, while sub-section (1) of 505 deals with delivering fiery speeches which will hurt religious feelings and create discord among different communities.
One wonders why does it take so long a time to persecute people charged with serious crimes such as inciting religious passions to disrupt and destroy lives. At least why 13 years?
Religious sentiments are passion plays which are manipulated to result in violence instantaneously and after the steam is off, the public does not indulge in discourses any longer. The issue becomes of a national shame, racial crime, communal violence. The individuals become blurred. While discharging Advani the Court had earlier commented that “Only suspicion has been raised to implicate Advani." And with time, suspicions too pass.
Just hoping this time instead of passing out, they get validated.
Institutes of Higher Religions
By Saswat Pattanayak
I am taken aback by the growing number of religious organizations functioning smoothly in various campuses across the United States.
Working at an office for diversity, I should be the first one to applaud such an environment where different and often competing religions are represented in such democratic fashion. After all, student organizations can be composed from different bases.
That’s precisely what’s bothering me. This argument for multifaceted multiculturalism is also encouraging such an unhealthy trend, that it seems folks just don’t learn from history.
I have nothing much against religions. Except that they are the worst manifestations that can be. Each religion is backward by its very nature in that, instead of leading believers forward towards social progress by encouraging critical discussions on roots of existing injustices, it takes them back to the all pervading irrefutable canons all the while; that religions of the world are the only core factors behind all major wars and almost all the minor battles; that religions help in creating an illusory sphere to the extent that human beings start becoming impractical dreamers in alliance with fates instead of progressive activists in union with organizational potential; that at the crux, religions compete with each other and downgrade each others’ Gods; even within the texts religions are based on extremely disposable prepositions and yet are adhered so much that it fails one to understand why human beings need to be so uncritical of such mass con acts.
After having said this, I must again admit that I have not much to say against religions, as much as I have against those who practice them in various forms. This is because, texts (in this case, religious texts), are not so powerful all on their own. It takes the practitioners of the texts to do the damage, or the good, as the case may be.
And this is when I bring myself back to the campus scenarios and ask the question: Are the state education and church indeed separated as being claimed.
With the Bush administration, came the “Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools" which went into effect in March 2003 as part of the No Child Left Behind Act. The rules instruct schools to show "neither favoritism nor hostility against religious expression," including at graduation ceremonies and assemblies. Of course in such a free-for-all expressionist platform, as is characteristic in any other Spencerian institution, the stronghold beliefs prevail.
Consequently, at the universities, even if they are state-run, most student organizations are religion-based, indeed, Christian-based (the justification, needless to say, is because most students profess this religion). So there is a clear absence of balance of power even within the student community religion expressions. And the educational places are mere bystanders to the minority struggles of claiming My God Is Bigger Than Yours. And forget the Atheists of course. They are godless bas***ds.
I am taken aback by the growing number of religious organizations functioning smoothly in various campuses across the United States.
Working at an office for diversity, I should be the first one to applaud such an environment where different and often competing religions are represented in such democratic fashion. After all, student organizations can be composed from different bases.
That’s precisely what’s bothering me. This argument for multifaceted multiculturalism is also encouraging such an unhealthy trend, that it seems folks just don’t learn from history.
I have nothing much against religions. Except that they are the worst manifestations that can be. Each religion is backward by its very nature in that, instead of leading believers forward towards social progress by encouraging critical discussions on roots of existing injustices, it takes them back to the all pervading irrefutable canons all the while; that religions of the world are the only core factors behind all major wars and almost all the minor battles; that religions help in creating an illusory sphere to the extent that human beings start becoming impractical dreamers in alliance with fates instead of progressive activists in union with organizational potential; that at the crux, religions compete with each other and downgrade each others’ Gods; even within the texts religions are based on extremely disposable prepositions and yet are adhered so much that it fails one to understand why human beings need to be so uncritical of such mass con acts.
After having said this, I must again admit that I have not much to say against religions, as much as I have against those who practice them in various forms. This is because, texts (in this case, religious texts), are not so powerful all on their own. It takes the practitioners of the texts to do the damage, or the good, as the case may be.
And this is when I bring myself back to the campus scenarios and ask the question: Are the state education and church indeed separated as being claimed.
With the Bush administration, came the “Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools" which went into effect in March 2003 as part of the No Child Left Behind Act. The rules instruct schools to show "neither favoritism nor hostility against religious expression," including at graduation ceremonies and assemblies. Of course in such a free-for-all expressionist platform, as is characteristic in any other Spencerian institution, the stronghold beliefs prevail.
Consequently, at the universities, even if they are state-run, most student organizations are religion-based, indeed, Christian-based (the justification, needless to say, is because most students profess this religion). So there is a clear absence of balance of power even within the student community religion expressions. And the educational places are mere bystanders to the minority struggles of claiming My God Is Bigger Than Yours. And forget the Atheists of course. They are godless bas***ds.
Hindu Seer XIV- Postscript
21/11/04 23:12 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Memories
Well, I guess the debate around Hindu Seer will not
cease. But it sparked a type of continuation that was
amusing, to say the least. People got polarized, and
fought and most importantly took a side.
It is important to take a side in matters of issues. Some of course said they left the forum in disgust. But in reality, they never did! For, the temptation to defend their side was just so huge.
I shall see when next shall we rejoin in such a conversation. I have some new friends now: Chinmaya and Vulcan for sure! Good to see people from Orissa, staying outside the land, contributing to the ongoing debates.
It is important to take a side in matters of issues. Some of course said they left the forum in disgust. But in reality, they never did! For, the temptation to defend their side was just so huge.
I shall see when next shall we rejoin in such a conversation. I have some new friends now: Chinmaya and Vulcan for sure! Good to see people from Orissa, staying outside the land, contributing to the ongoing debates.
Hindu Seer XIII
Well, another attempt by me:
My dear comrades,
One of the major concerns: What kinds of questions are we asking?
None of us who opposed the religious discourses talked anything about "challenge", or any roadmap to "eliminate religions" etc. These are as non-issues as any other rightist rhetoric could be. They were brought up by a person who has left this group now, as conitnuation of a logical fallacy.
If AA's "challenge" be taken seriously, the counter will be something like, "Well, I challenge anyone to convert the entire world to believe in just one God" etc etc.. And here is where we miss the boat. Serious objections by some of us were raised precisely to oppose such kind of talks which served no real purpose. Instead what Chinmaya had brought to notice was an important news of the arrest of an alleged criminal who appeared to be held with esteem by some religious fanatics. That was it. Instead of talking in purely judicial terms and also analyzing the historiography of religious frauds, the self-proclaimed 'theists' took it personally!
I dont see why all these talk about "theist", "pseudo-atheist" etc. And I dont see why someone should even consider any "challenges" posed by a person who left the group because he felt the ones who held contrary views were "barking relentlessly"...Basically by someone who was so intellectually challenged so as to leave the group in a huff after hurling some abuses at people who differed from the mainstream.
If any so-called "challenges to eliminate religions (sic)" are accepted, it will sound like the democrats arguing within the republican framework--dealing with the later's concerns and trying to see how to face redundant challenges.
Seems to me that the issues as seen by Chinmaya or Vulcan or Anup or Sanjib or Saswat are radically different from how they were perceived by Mar, Man, AA or An and all other proclaimed "theists".
There lies the misunderstanding.
The "summery of the whole episode" is as one-sided as it could be, obviously because it has been narrated by someone who anyway belonged to one school than the other. Not just in degree, but in type as well.
Wheras one school is raising questions about the questions, the other is challenging the seekers to supply with answers else to 'stop barking'. Two different molds of thoughts here.
In solidarity,
Saswat
Read More...
My dear comrades,
One of the major concerns: What kinds of questions are we asking?
None of us who opposed the religious discourses talked anything about "challenge", or any roadmap to "eliminate religions" etc. These are as non-issues as any other rightist rhetoric could be. They were brought up by a person who has left this group now, as conitnuation of a logical fallacy.
If AA's "challenge" be taken seriously, the counter will be something like, "Well, I challenge anyone to convert the entire world to believe in just one God" etc etc.. And here is where we miss the boat. Serious objections by some of us were raised precisely to oppose such kind of talks which served no real purpose. Instead what Chinmaya had brought to notice was an important news of the arrest of an alleged criminal who appeared to be held with esteem by some religious fanatics. That was it. Instead of talking in purely judicial terms and also analyzing the historiography of religious frauds, the self-proclaimed 'theists' took it personally!
I dont see why all these talk about "theist", "pseudo-atheist" etc. And I dont see why someone should even consider any "challenges" posed by a person who left the group because he felt the ones who held contrary views were "barking relentlessly"...Basically by someone who was so intellectually challenged so as to leave the group in a huff after hurling some abuses at people who differed from the mainstream.
If any so-called "challenges to eliminate religions (sic)" are accepted, it will sound like the democrats arguing within the republican framework--dealing with the later's concerns and trying to see how to face redundant challenges.
Seems to me that the issues as seen by Chinmaya or Vulcan or Anup or Sanjib or Saswat are radically different from how they were perceived by Mar, Man, AA or An and all other proclaimed "theists".
There lies the misunderstanding.
The "summery of the whole episode" is as one-sided as it could be, obviously because it has been narrated by someone who anyway belonged to one school than the other. Not just in degree, but in type as well.
Wheras one school is raising questions about the questions, the other is challenging the seekers to supply with answers else to 'stop barking'. Two different molds of thoughts here.
In solidarity,
Saswat
Read More...
Hindu Seer XII
16/11/04 07:05 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
Chinmaya gives it back to the AA:
Dear AA Babu,
Cool down. World is beautiful, and so your posts and everythings.
Have I asked you anything ? What was the need of answering so rudely to a news ?
Name it an ugly trick, whatever you please.You are entitled to judge people,and their acts in your own way.Who cares ? Hope, M bhai, Mark Bhaina, An bhaina would have understood the value of *excuse* in the proper context.
Do not know, if you do not prefer to use harsh words to others .A mail with caps and the conents in it might be mere deception to all of us.For reference, read your this mail one once more.
I asked you do not take things to heart, its because a news head line made you unnecessarily so reactive and irritated. If that was a trickery,take the burden of the discussion to your home,die with anguish and heartattack.I do not bother.
There was a smiley after that statement. Now, I am sure you lack the etiquette of conversation, or severely suffering with some kind of complex.Anyway, thats your problem.But,please, do not inflict others with that.
Enough; crap minded fellow, idiocy,burdens on society,and ..., what not ? Hello, who are you to fix limits for others, what one can do, or not ? Enlighten fellow, Why do not you sprinkle your knowldege over the poor people ?
Whenever we claimed ourselves atheists,pseduo whatever ?
Beg excuses, its an ugly tricekry.Huh. AA Babu, what more I should write ?
For rest of the things, barkings and others..you do not deserve a reply.
No sorry, No excuse this time.I do not think you deserve
it too.
Be happy.
Hindu Seer XI
My reply to a previous post:
Dear Brother Sar
I wish you could have shown similar level of sensitivity to adjectives in mails
directed at fellow members of this group! There were many more crude languages
used to refer to many of us (just for one example we were "barking"!)
Just because someone (who is obviously not part of this group) is proclaimed
religious, even though the same person is accused of highest criminal charges,
that became so personal?
I am sorry if my calling a guy a guy hurt some people. I should have called him
an "accused" or a "suspect" instead. But why should one suspect be addressed
better than any other? The police calls all names when it comes to a
suspect--you know the swears. But when it comes to someone is an influential
person and most likely can misuse his/her power, why this "plain bias"?
By the way, I am not firing up anything. I guess the reports are out and the
prime suspect (aka sankaracharya) is in judicial custody. His bail application
has been adjourned. The news is out there on the wall. I am not instrumental in
firing up anything. Every person involved in any way in a case of murder ought
to be treated in the same way as any other. Clearly this accused is on a higher
platform now, unfortunately. The police will not be kicking his ass to get the
answers out. Wont be treating him with third degree methods, would not be
spitting on his face or burning his cheeks with cigarette butts and wont be
swearing in choicest abuses questioning the parentage or sexual impotencies.
Just for the records I have witnessed the police doing all this and much more
even in case of people who have dared to steal bicycles or not cooperated in
giving bribes when demanded. Clearly there is a "plain bias".
We know of this judiciary system where in name of Tada or Poto we have caged
thousands of innocent people for no charges at all. People who have not seen the
face of the court since the time they are in jail. Not allowed to appeal for a
public lawyer or request for release. This accused who HAS been charged with
murder already has been allowed to move court!!! Clearly there is a "plain
bias".
To be the devil's advocate, the dangerous communalists Singhals and Tagodias
have joined the fray. Singhal compares this arrest with Somnath Temple
destruction! Clearly the politics and religions are now mixed up to "fire up"
issues. and the violent crusaders of peace, the trishul-bearing kar sevaks are
already on the street- yes making us--people like Sanjib or me--ashamed of being
called Indian--to see that representation of our country in name of religious
intolerance of a superstitious supremacist group. the non-violent, peacenik,
internationalist India has been reduced to a communal violent playground for
religious fanatics.
And I am not the one to fire up anything.
Clearly its a vibrant case to debate on. Chinmaya did a favor on all of us by
bringing in the article to our attention (not that it would have eventually
escaped, but most us would may have preferred to ignore it...who knows? Going by
P babu's mail, three regular contributors have already left the group! I
did not leave the group when they were discussing religious texts--if it is out
of disgust that the religious seer has been arrested and they refuse to be
identified as religious anymore and have trouble in being treated so, its nice
and they are more than welcome to be back. All of us realize our fundamental
fallacies at many junctures of life, anyway). And we are merely discussing the
pros and cons of such treatments to 'seers'. We are not alone. The whole of
India is discussing. Media are editorializing. People are asking pertinent
questions.
One of the questions of course is if a goonda could be a sankaracharya. Bhai
Sar, if you can go so far as to guarantee that its impossible, I at least am
of some opinion that it could be true. In the past and present we have seen all
mob violences in the name of religion. All those thousands of people have given
up their lives under one instruction of religious leaders. When the whole of
Mumbai was burning (just to cite one example of event that happened during my
lifetime), and many parts were being 'fired up' many people were charged with
being goondas. And goondas they were. those preachers of religious goods.
including advani who later most ironically accepted to become home minister when
charges were piled up against him of inciting communal violence.
We all clearly know of this sankaracharya's connection with right-wing politics.
What is there to be so sacred about him?
Biased I am, Sar, because I cannot afford to be neutral or objective or
unbiased -whatever that means and if thats possible in any way. Its time to take
a side. To take side either of the exploiting politicians who use religions to
their advantage and even nurture chances of getting away with mass murders and
communal clashes, or to take side of the people who have been taken for a ride
and who have potentials to question the blind beliefs.
We all have been taken for rides throughout. Sometimes by the founding fathers
of the nation (look at that holy cow business in the directive principles of
state policy. will we have any more tolerance for chicken or goat or pig as we
have for cow? to respect whom? Hindu country or secular country --even after the
late 70's when we got ourselves the secular tag), sometimes by the families and
social institutions (look at the widespread same-caste marriages, and the whole
thread ceremony stuffs--to prove what--as national geographic talks of, to quote
San--that we are born unequal?) and all the lies that our teachers told us
through the history of peace and glory and the golden age of indian culture
(sic).
'Tis time we questioned. San has sent an extremely insightful mail drawing
from his caste experiences. That should do more than good for all of us to ask
our conscience to examine if we have asked the right questions? have we
questioned the systems of exploitation founded on religious beliefs? what do we
owe to the generations of indigenous people for having perpetuated the class and
caste war on them for centuries. what can we give back? to seek forgiveness?
instead we still enjoy the privilege of belonging to a mainstream religion to
address issues from our narrowed lenses. to still wonder why saswat thinks a
sankaracharya could be a goonda. instead of thinking of all the crimes that have
been committed in the land of ours in the name of our religion? millions dead so
far, certainly, not in quest to create something novel, or struggling in a
revolution to feed every hungry child. millions have been condemned to death by
religious preachers by causing communal riots since the last sixty years. and
what have we got here? the leader of the pack is still around. sounds crazy. but
we should have arrested all those spokesmen and women of right wing politics who
have been instrumental in everything communal much before. the charge of one
sole murder was much belated.
Dear brother Sar, I am not here to offend anyone's feelings. That's the
least of the goals. But it so happens that in airing one's own perspectives,
there will be many others who will stand a chance of being offended. I have
never taken offense at the religious discourses in this group despite having
strong feeling about the irrelevance of those talks in face of the fact that
Orissa faces problems and questions of different types. No one really can help
if a section of hindus felt bad that the seer was arrested. He will be released
of course. Because of his clout. And some hindus will be dancing once again.
Like they did in gujarat, like the way they do in ayodhya or nearer home when
they cheered for dara singh.
That dance sucks.
With due respect
Saswat
_____
Follows a right mail. And explains why Chinmaya did not need to have been polite. But good he was. Who wants a riot?
This one is from another one threatening to leave the forum.
Dear Brother Sar
I wish you could have shown similar level of sensitivity to adjectives in mails
directed at fellow members of this group! There were many more crude languages
used to refer to many of us (just for one example we were "barking"!)
Just because someone (who is obviously not part of this group) is proclaimed
religious, even though the same person is accused of highest criminal charges,
that became so personal?
I am sorry if my calling a guy a guy hurt some people. I should have called him
an "accused" or a "suspect" instead. But why should one suspect be addressed
better than any other? The police calls all names when it comes to a
suspect--you know the swears. But when it comes to someone is an influential
person and most likely can misuse his/her power, why this "plain bias"?
By the way, I am not firing up anything. I guess the reports are out and the
prime suspect (aka sankaracharya) is in judicial custody. His bail application
has been adjourned. The news is out there on the wall. I am not instrumental in
firing up anything. Every person involved in any way in a case of murder ought
to be treated in the same way as any other. Clearly this accused is on a higher
platform now, unfortunately. The police will not be kicking his ass to get the
answers out. Wont be treating him with third degree methods, would not be
spitting on his face or burning his cheeks with cigarette butts and wont be
swearing in choicest abuses questioning the parentage or sexual impotencies.
Just for the records I have witnessed the police doing all this and much more
even in case of people who have dared to steal bicycles or not cooperated in
giving bribes when demanded. Clearly there is a "plain bias".
We know of this judiciary system where in name of Tada or Poto we have caged
thousands of innocent people for no charges at all. People who have not seen the
face of the court since the time they are in jail. Not allowed to appeal for a
public lawyer or request for release. This accused who HAS been charged with
murder already has been allowed to move court!!! Clearly there is a "plain
bias".
To be the devil's advocate, the dangerous communalists Singhals and Tagodias
have joined the fray. Singhal compares this arrest with Somnath Temple
destruction! Clearly the politics and religions are now mixed up to "fire up"
issues. and the violent crusaders of peace, the trishul-bearing kar sevaks are
already on the street- yes making us--people like Sanjib or me--ashamed of being
called Indian--to see that representation of our country in name of religious
intolerance of a superstitious supremacist group. the non-violent, peacenik,
internationalist India has been reduced to a communal violent playground for
religious fanatics.
And I am not the one to fire up anything.
Clearly its a vibrant case to debate on. Chinmaya did a favor on all of us by
bringing in the article to our attention (not that it would have eventually
escaped, but most us would may have preferred to ignore it...who knows? Going by
P babu's mail, three regular contributors have already left the group! I
did not leave the group when they were discussing religious texts--if it is out
of disgust that the religious seer has been arrested and they refuse to be
identified as religious anymore and have trouble in being treated so, its nice
and they are more than welcome to be back. All of us realize our fundamental
fallacies at many junctures of life, anyway). And we are merely discussing the
pros and cons of such treatments to 'seers'. We are not alone. The whole of
India is discussing. Media are editorializing. People are asking pertinent
questions.
One of the questions of course is if a goonda could be a sankaracharya. Bhai
Sar, if you can go so far as to guarantee that its impossible, I at least am
of some opinion that it could be true. In the past and present we have seen all
mob violences in the name of religion. All those thousands of people have given
up their lives under one instruction of religious leaders. When the whole of
Mumbai was burning (just to cite one example of event that happened during my
lifetime), and many parts were being 'fired up' many people were charged with
being goondas. And goondas they were. those preachers of religious goods.
including advani who later most ironically accepted to become home minister when
charges were piled up against him of inciting communal violence.
We all clearly know of this sankaracharya's connection with right-wing politics.
What is there to be so sacred about him?
Biased I am, Sar, because I cannot afford to be neutral or objective or
unbiased -whatever that means and if thats possible in any way. Its time to take
a side. To take side either of the exploiting politicians who use religions to
their advantage and even nurture chances of getting away with mass murders and
communal clashes, or to take side of the people who have been taken for a ride
and who have potentials to question the blind beliefs.
We all have been taken for rides throughout. Sometimes by the founding fathers
of the nation (look at that holy cow business in the directive principles of
state policy. will we have any more tolerance for chicken or goat or pig as we
have for cow? to respect whom? Hindu country or secular country --even after the
late 70's when we got ourselves the secular tag), sometimes by the families and
social institutions (look at the widespread same-caste marriages, and the whole
thread ceremony stuffs--to prove what--as national geographic talks of, to quote
San--that we are born unequal?) and all the lies that our teachers told us
through the history of peace and glory and the golden age of indian culture
(sic).
'Tis time we questioned. San has sent an extremely insightful mail drawing
from his caste experiences. That should do more than good for all of us to ask
our conscience to examine if we have asked the right questions? have we
questioned the systems of exploitation founded on religious beliefs? what do we
owe to the generations of indigenous people for having perpetuated the class and
caste war on them for centuries. what can we give back? to seek forgiveness?
instead we still enjoy the privilege of belonging to a mainstream religion to
address issues from our narrowed lenses. to still wonder why saswat thinks a
sankaracharya could be a goonda. instead of thinking of all the crimes that have
been committed in the land of ours in the name of our religion? millions dead so
far, certainly, not in quest to create something novel, or struggling in a
revolution to feed every hungry child. millions have been condemned to death by
religious preachers by causing communal riots since the last sixty years. and
what have we got here? the leader of the pack is still around. sounds crazy. but
we should have arrested all those spokesmen and women of right wing politics who
have been instrumental in everything communal much before. the charge of one
sole murder was much belated.
Dear brother Sar, I am not here to offend anyone's feelings. That's the
least of the goals. But it so happens that in airing one's own perspectives,
there will be many others who will stand a chance of being offended. I have
never taken offense at the religious discourses in this group despite having
strong feeling about the irrelevance of those talks in face of the fact that
Orissa faces problems and questions of different types. No one really can help
if a section of hindus felt bad that the seer was arrested. He will be released
of course. Because of his clout. And some hindus will be dancing once again.
Like they did in gujarat, like the way they do in ayodhya or nearer home when
they cheered for dara singh.
That dance sucks.
With due respect
Saswat
_____
Follows a right mail. And explains why Chinmaya did not need to have been polite. But good he was. Who wants a riot?
This one is from another one threatening to leave the forum.
UGLY TRICKS OF PREUDO-ATHEISTS
------------------------------
The above statement asking for pardon from Chinmay has been repeated
in past several times - to M Babu to Ma Babu, to
An... He writes absurd stuff, illogical arguments; and then he
writes "I am sorry; I should have understood it; I am happy to be
enlightened..."
Besides, he poses a question, "why do you take things so seriously
by heart?" as he questioned the same to me recently.
These "poor people" do NOT take anything seriously by heart; that is
why all the mess. If we are not serious about what we speak, what
are we going to achieve? If you have to make light amusement, do so
in your own circle at a Tea-shop; not to some serious discussions. I
am against use of harsh words, but these people forced me to do so.
Plainly, these people can do nothing but question some dogma without
understanding or without trying to understand. Thus, they do not get
any benefit, nor does the society. Besides, this apathy does no
benefit to people like M Babu or Ma Babu either!
These are "psuedo-atheists". Because, an atheist is rational, and
does huge contributions to the society. These crap-minded fellows
are nothing but burden on the society just because of their
irrational idiocy. that's it.
Sanjib, in past I have explained several rationales in religion;
read my postings before branding me as someone blindly following
religion.
Saswat, I called your group "poor" not in terms of economy; economy
playes no role in intellectual discussions. I called your group poor
simply because you are poor in rational, logical understanding. And,
you understood economy! What a disgrace are you to such forum!
I know that you pseudo-atheists have no ability to do anthing except
barking. That is why none of you came forward in proposing a roadmap
to eliminate religion. If you are so much against it, why not remove
it? Who does your barking benefit?
I know: You cannot propose a roadmap nor can you execute it because
(i) you have no ability to do so; and (ii) religion is just.
Good bye. I wish you all safe opportunity of relentless barking.
Good Bye,
AA
Hindu Seer X
15/11/04 09:51 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
The professor declares he is out. He claims other
wise people have also left the forum in disgust. In
his own words:
It is the nature of some people to derive sadistic pleasures by asking
absurd questions, while they already know the answers. In this regard,
I have decided to leave the forum for a few of you who will have a
chance to attack Hinduism from every aspect. M babu is already out,
and so is AA babu. I am signing off from the group too because my
orthodox mind may instill evil in the young minds. I tried to be simple
but my emotions and learnings are too damaging. It was a free forum and
it would be unwise to be with the great minds. Before I leave, I would
like to tell you only thing, which you may find wrong. Read More...
Hindu Seer IX
I reply to AA's previous hurlings:
"These poor people"--referring to me and Chinmaya!
I sure am a poor person. But in my defense, duplicate posting was not
intentional. If it hurts to see the same mail twice, solution is clear: one just
has the option to delete the mails than to ridicule my economic status.
For clarification, I am not in IIT Mumbai. Secondly, I was using the outlook
express to send the mail. It went straight to the outbox. Hence used the webmail
to send the same. It must have landed twice. I apologize for that.
And as for the other adjectives, they are interesting too. Not surprising,
again.
When thousands of poor folks serve inhuman and indefinite jail terms for
sometime stealing money or other times drinking and swearing, and tribal women
rising against the existing systems getting raped inside the prison walls, its a
sane judicial system. When a sankaracharya (by the way i never said this guy was
any magician--magic gurus have at least some amusement values- so that whole
thing about saswat has to "know" before pointing fingers etc does not hold
relevance) having says in politics (proven fact) and charged with MURDER (which
ordinary suspect is given that kind of publicity anyway? this man is clearly
treated above the rest of us ordinary folks for some serious charge as this) is
arrested, it becomes "behavioural discripancy and "andhatwa".
And the 'holier than thou' principle as mentioned in the last paragraph of mr
acharya's mail is interesting. is there some kind of a warranty that no goonda
can be a sankaracharya? that hindu stuff is unlike the western history. how
blindly deterministic can we still get???
___
Chinmaya in solidarity with Vulcan:
___
Sanjib comes forward:
With due respect, you and others(which includes my father and mother
and other elders)just follow religion blindly. There is nothing
wrong to have faith in the superpower..But I have serious issues of
the way religion is practiced in India.
Still in India you decide the right to enter the temple based on
your caste and social status. If you have more money you get special
privileges in Jaganath temple..and our religion is still
exclusionary. Our old folks just DON'T get it. While trying to
respect our elders and not interested to rock the boat..we
youngsters still follow caste system in choosing our partners. We
talk about racism in US, but in India we have caste system that is
even worse. You might say why I am talking about caste system,
instead of religion. Dear friends that is engraved in the way our
religion is practiced.
National Geographic quotes " To be born Hindu in India is to enter
the caste system, one of the world's longest surviving forms of
social stratification. Embedded in Indian culture for past 1500
years, the caste system follows a basic precept:All men are created
unequal" I AM ASHAMED.
Many hundred years ago when galileo said earth goes around the sun,
he was ostracized..But the Protestant sect of Christianity was born.
I can speak of myself..I am not anti-religion..But I am certainly
against the way religion is practiced in India. The first thing we
need to be doing is challenging the caste system by marrying
someone who is from a higher/lower caste. Then boycotting temples,
who do not allow admissions based on birth. I have boycotted
Jagannath temple in Puri. The first step is to incorporate modern
outlook and values in your own life. Then influencing others.
Caste system and the distorted form of practice of Hinduism is more
than couple of thousands years old. The first thing we can do is
change ourselves. Then we try to influence school teachers and
others. Realistically speaking it won't be eradicated in my
lifetime.But it is certainly worth a try.
Thanks,
Sanjib
"These poor people"--referring to me and Chinmaya!
I sure am a poor person. But in my defense, duplicate posting was not
intentional. If it hurts to see the same mail twice, solution is clear: one just
has the option to delete the mails than to ridicule my economic status.
For clarification, I am not in IIT Mumbai. Secondly, I was using the outlook
express to send the mail. It went straight to the outbox. Hence used the webmail
to send the same. It must have landed twice. I apologize for that.
And as for the other adjectives, they are interesting too. Not surprising,
again.
When thousands of poor folks serve inhuman and indefinite jail terms for
sometime stealing money or other times drinking and swearing, and tribal women
rising against the existing systems getting raped inside the prison walls, its a
sane judicial system. When a sankaracharya (by the way i never said this guy was
any magician--magic gurus have at least some amusement values- so that whole
thing about saswat has to "know" before pointing fingers etc does not hold
relevance) having says in politics (proven fact) and charged with MURDER (which
ordinary suspect is given that kind of publicity anyway? this man is clearly
treated above the rest of us ordinary folks for some serious charge as this) is
arrested, it becomes "behavioural discripancy and "andhatwa".
And the 'holier than thou' principle as mentioned in the last paragraph of mr
acharya's mail is interesting. is there some kind of a warranty that no goonda
can be a sankaracharya? that hindu stuff is unlike the western history. how
blindly deterministic can we still get???
___
Chinmaya in solidarity with Vulcan:
Vulcano Bhai,
Yeah, your logic seems true to certain extent.
"Enviornment" plays a dominant role in controlling ones behavarial pattern, apart from ones genetical make up, and food habbits.
All the emotional outbrusts are mere defense mechanisms because of ones deep love,tendentious approach towards a person/system/cause.Nothing_ unnatural_in_it.It's sometimes hard to digest the fact, even we understand the legal aspect of a problem.Our deep association with religion from the very childhood days have made us to think so. We have seen our mothers shedding their tears infront of the idols every dawn,and dusk for our well being.We are told hundreds/thousands of stories from Prahallad, Dhruva to Sudama etc by our parents/teachers, to give a first hand experience of religion,we are manytime forced to beleive the badtimes of our enemy is because of divine punishment. The influence of early childhood days experiences of religion/god has made an everlasting impression in our minds. Even today, the twilights reminds me the evening of village temple, the eye subconsciously goes on searching for a supreme soul to take to the realm of eternal peace and bliss. Fairs, festivals, gatherings, rituals with so much of things, we are associated with religions from the very day of our presence on the earth;Its not only difficult, but almost impossible to make oneself free from those *comfort* experiences.
The people who are born with sliver spoons, who has never confronted difficulties all alone in their life, or even never being privileged to be empathetic with the good/bad times of their fellow beings, a little interruption in their usual life lead them straightly near to GOD/god-man, religion etc.(I do not inlcude here those people who make mockery of religions,and exploits mass for their own benfits). We must understand, the support systems that religion has provided to them.
Discussing with the persons, who have killed their rationalities, logic being overpossesive of their thoughts, makes no sense really.
And yeah, whats the problem if some people are branded anti-religious ? My conscience says, there must be an anti-religious God to support them :=)
With Regards !
Chinmaya ...
___
Sanjib comes forward:
With due respect, you and others(which includes my father and mother
and other elders)just follow religion blindly. There is nothing
wrong to have faith in the superpower..But I have serious issues of
the way religion is practiced in India.
Still in India you decide the right to enter the temple based on
your caste and social status. If you have more money you get special
privileges in Jaganath temple..and our religion is still
exclusionary. Our old folks just DON'T get it. While trying to
respect our elders and not interested to rock the boat..we
youngsters still follow caste system in choosing our partners. We
talk about racism in US, but in India we have caste system that is
even worse. You might say why I am talking about caste system,
instead of religion. Dear friends that is engraved in the way our
religion is practiced.
National Geographic quotes " To be born Hindu in India is to enter
the caste system, one of the world's longest surviving forms of
social stratification. Embedded in Indian culture for past 1500
years, the caste system follows a basic precept:All men are created
unequal" I AM ASHAMED.
Many hundred years ago when galileo said earth goes around the sun,
he was ostracized..But the Protestant sect of Christianity was born.
I can speak of myself..I am not anti-religion..But I am certainly
against the way religion is practiced in India. The first thing we
need to be doing is challenging the caste system by marrying
someone who is from a higher/lower caste. Then boycotting temples,
who do not allow admissions based on birth. I have boycotted
Jagannath temple in Puri. The first step is to incorporate modern
outlook and values in your own life. Then influencing others.
Caste system and the distorted form of practice of Hinduism is more
than couple of thousands years old. The first thing we can do is
change ourselves. Then we try to influence school teachers and
others. Realistically speaking it won't be eradicated in my
lifetime.But it is certainly worth a try.
Thanks,
Sanjib
Hindu Seer VIII
13/11/04 19:17 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
Friend Ashrujit corrects the old guard:
Respected AA,
Any messages in CAPS is considering shouting. Please refer to the
netiquettes and email etiquette.
Respectfully, Ashrujit
___
Another one for the old gurard...this one is from Chinmaya
Dear Sir,
It seems, you have taken the discussion to your heart bit intensly.Thats not at all needed.Was the caps post a typo, or intentional ?
No social change takes place over night.With a road map, we can not bring about a change in a stipulated time period.This is a chimerical thought.
All that you are naming puking of venom is the doubt of the confused young minds regarding spirituality, and organised religion.
As like the religious talk in the forum goes without opposition, same must go with an anti-religious stand too.
Can we ask one to keep quiet, who speaks of religion ?
Extirpating religion should not be ones target, becoz its a vastly un-understood subject. A little shift in our belief structure may enhance its utility.
With Regards !
Sincerely yours
Chinmaya .. Read More...
Respected AA,
Any messages in CAPS is considering shouting. Please refer to the
netiquettes and email etiquette.
Respectfully, Ashrujit
___
Another one for the old gurard...this one is from Chinmaya
Dear Sir,
It seems, you have taken the discussion to your heart bit intensly.Thats not at all needed.Was the caps post a typo, or intentional ?
No social change takes place over night.With a road map, we can not bring about a change in a stipulated time period.This is a chimerical thought.
All that you are naming puking of venom is the doubt of the confused young minds regarding spirituality, and organised religion.
As like the religious talk in the forum goes without opposition, same must go with an anti-religious stand too.
Can we ask one to keep quiet, who speaks of religion ?
Extirpating religion should not be ones target, becoz its a vastly un-understood subject. A little shift in our belief structure may enhance its utility.
With Regards !
Sincerely yours
Chinmaya .. Read More...
Hindu Seer VII
13/11/04 17:56 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
The letter says it all:
And from a professor who is sure he does not learn from others:
Hi anti-religious youths (Vulcan, Saswat, Anup, Chinmay,...,...)
There is absolutely no benefit by your vomitting venoms in this
forum. Neither it will help your cause nor will it lessen my pro-
religious stand; nor will it affect millions unconcerned with your
venoms.
So, here is my challenge to all of you:
ALL OF YOU JOIN YOUR HANDS AND PROPOSE/EXECUTE A ROAD-MAP TO
ELIMINATE RELIGION FROM HUMAN MIND; AT LEAST FROM INDIANS. IF YOU
CANNOT, THEN STOP VOMITTING POISON.
IF YOU PROPOSE A ROADMAP AND CONVINCE ME IN YOUR CAUSE, I WILL BE
THE HAPPIEST TO JOIN HANDS WITH YOU.
However, be sure that I am not to be challenged for anything, for I
have not opposed any of existing religious concepts or establishment.
SO, ERADICATE RELIGION, OR ELSE KEEP QUIET. DONT BARK.
AA
And from a professor who is sure he does not learn from others:
Dear friends,
After reading all the wonderful postings on how
idiotic are the theists, I was wondering if I am a
Theist or an Atheist? I do not see any more
literature available either from the East or West; on
theism or atheism that has escaped my small mind.
After careful thinking, considering every experience
in my life, I have decided to be a theist. As
expected from any other human being (created by God),
my knowledge is finite and that is the reason it would
be impossible on my part to clash with the great minds
who do not believe in 'theism'. The formidable
intellects of the scientific minds, from Claudius
Ptolemy to Albert Einstein; religious minds, from
Zoarathustra to Vivekananda; and atheists, from
Charvakas to Bertrand Russell have added sparks in the
lives of many intellectuals of the present day world
and in history.
I feel fortunate that I possess fragments of such
sparks in my trillions and trillions of memory cells,
either conferred by my ancestors DNA or by chance.
Therefore, it would be unwise on my part to enter into
debates with people who are confused about their own
identities, let alone the basic principles of nature.
Long time back, in some context, I had stated that I
was an atheist when I was young. Things have changed
since I became a father and held my children in my
arms. I had prayed when the little helpless creatures
became sick. I had cried when they cried in pain.
But, becoming an atheist just because I am fortunate
to have a decent living in America, drive a used car,
and has a secure job? No way!
I would rather be an idiot and a theist, perhaps a
preacher too! To fit the last definition, I need to
learn more of the stuff called religion and science.
This would benefit some, rather than the harm that I
may cause boasting that 'I am intelligent' while my
brain is a store house of pumped up by hormones rather
than pure knowledge.
If anyone is interested to be an atheist, my
suggestion will be to become one like Neitzsche or
Walter Kaufmann. Educated people should not waste
their lives by making a profession out of the
idiosyncracies of materialism.
With regards,
MP
Hindu Seer VI
13/11/04 15:24 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
As expected, the old guard stood up! How dare two
young non-conformists? But whoa...so much passion to
defend a person who had no place to be in the seat of
crime, preaching as he has been of religious sermons?
Or was it because of this that he needed to have
committed the crimes being alleged?
Well, we have an advocate here:
Well, we have an advocate here:
I have a question to make:
Why did Chinmaya send this message twice, and importantly, with two
different subjects?
Likewise, why did Saswat send the response twice?
Do these poor people think that the gravity of the matter should be
better conveyed by the number of responses they post?
Well, I think IIT Mumbai is not as poor as my home town Varanasi is
(where it requires to click the "send" botton several times to send
a message; for most of the times it times out), as far as internet
is concerned. Thus, the above mentioned duplication is essentially
intentional. Then, what psychology can be behind such behaviour?
Needless to say, such a psychology these days has gripped most of
the Indian intelligentsia. For example, a few weeks ago a Karnataka
court and the state police enacted a drama: framing charge-sheet
against Uma Bharti, ordering her arrest, and backtracking afterwards!
My question is: why this drama? Was the judiciary/police efficient
enough to ascertain that Uma was innocent, that too within a couple
of days of her surrender? If yes, how come a court has again invoked
the case recently?
The root behind all the above behavioural discripancy is "andhatwa",
blindness! That is, Inability to know the truth, lack of patience to
investigate a fact, and hurriedness to show/tell something to the
people around - however misleading and disastrous may that be.
My point is: no Uma or Sankaracharya is above the law, and law
should take its route. But, while arresting someone, are you sure
enough that that someone is indeed guilty? Why cannot such actions
wait till completion of intensive investigation? In the above case,
a Chief Minister had to concede the chair, and much more political
chaos took place. Why? No satisfactory answer to this question,
because Karnataka government withdrew the case. Then, who will
compensate the personal and public trauma that the lady sufferred,
who will compensate for/undo the political turmoil (which had had
bearing on the state administration)?
Now, if the Sankarachaeya is released as was Uma, who will
compensate for the defame he was forced to face? Who will compensate
for the mass unrest that this act caused in the mind of millions of
Indians?
Nothing wrong in the referred action of TN police if he is found
guilty. But if he is upheld innocent, this blind trend in India will
turn too devastating for the common citizen to breath some air.
I personally think it is extremely unlikely that Swami Jayendra
Saraswati is involved in a murder. Because, a Sankaracharya is no
Pope who could order an "Albigensian Massacre" and still be the
highest religious leader of the World; I hope smart guys like
Chinmay, Saswat, Vulcan etc know what it (Albigensian Massacre) was.
Neither a Sankaracharya is a magic Guru (Saswat needs to "know"
before pointing a finger) nor any goonda can become a Sankaracharya!
Unlike the western churches, Indian Religious establishments (not
the fake Ashramas; one has to "know" the difference between myriads
others and the "dhAma") are unknown to be involved in sodomy, child
abuse, murder etc.-- AA
Hindu Seer V
13/11/04 14:52 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
One more from the right:
Following this, Anup surely has a point:
Why such an insecurity ? Whats the need to prove one's pshychology,
one's behaviour ? We have to see, if a point can be worth taken, or
not.
I have been observing the posts in the group silently since a long
days, what puzzles me the contumacies and unkind approach we
displayed towards the thoughts we never like to have.By labelling
people with the brand of arrogant, atheist, intentional,smart etc,
are not we trying to supress their views.
I am broken with this kind of news; a highest spiritual maestro is
undergoing a criminal charge.That is not though quite uncommon.We
have witnessed many issues of such kinds.Religius based things have
seen so much of bloodshed, and violence.Judiciary deals with the
common people, and we need not worry as to nothing is going to
happen with people of the highest kind.
Your concern for the traumatised experience of a convicted is worth
considering.Have you ever given a thought to hunderds of innocent
poor souls who are many times proved guilty and punished for none of
their mistakes ? Law can not take it own course.By then, it would
have generated so much of sympathiser, and preachers ? Who will/can
the punish the head of a family ?
I am baffled too. Where is the place of a spiritual elevated person
in politics.Politics is a mind boggling game, and its connection
with religion is again dangerous.Both the way, they sweep away mind.
Its not at all against any religion. Nothing to feel bad, or
overpossesive. Its my own view.
It indeed makes me think "It hapens only in India"; I dont know how many of us___
have that HUGE confidence on our Law; Had it happened with a Pope or a Muslim
Cleric, it wld have been impossible to arrest him. Secondly the Sankaracharya is
not going to fled anywhere; so where is the utility of arresting him? Thirdly,
we should think N-times before we question these ppl called Sankaracharya; these
are not so simply selected to become the head of a "pith"; Let Chinmaya and Jena
bAbu try to become one; they will feel the metamorphosis happening; I tell of my
experience; when I take simple boiled food for few days I feel so serene; and
these ppl have been trained through the life;
The problem in Hinduism is too obvious; Some painter paints nude pictures of our
gods and goddesses; we remain silent and feel that we are logical; I dont know
how ligical is such logic;
Bal Thakrey just asked the same painter to paint the most handsome guy and put
best cloathes and jewelleries and just name it as "allAh"; could he do it,
rather wld he dare to do it??
best regards, A
Following this, Anup surely has a point:
Why such an insecurity ? Whats the need to prove one's pshychology,
one's behaviour ? We have to see, if a point can be worth taken, or
not.
I have been observing the posts in the group silently since a long
days, what puzzles me the contumacies and unkind approach we
displayed towards the thoughts we never like to have.By labelling
people with the brand of arrogant, atheist, intentional,smart etc,
are not we trying to supress their views.
I am broken with this kind of news; a highest spiritual maestro is
undergoing a criminal charge.That is not though quite uncommon.We
have witnessed many issues of such kinds.Religius based things have
seen so much of bloodshed, and violence.Judiciary deals with the
common people, and we need not worry as to nothing is going to
happen with people of the highest kind.
Your concern for the traumatised experience of a convicted is worth
considering.Have you ever given a thought to hunderds of innocent
poor souls who are many times proved guilty and punished for none of
their mistakes ? Law can not take it own course.By then, it would
have generated so much of sympathiser, and preachers ? Who will/can
the punish the head of a family ?
I am baffled too. Where is the place of a spiritual elevated person
in politics.Politics is a mind boggling game, and its connection
with religion is again dangerous.Both the way, they sweep away mind.
Its not at all against any religion. Nothing to feel bad, or
overpossesive. Its my own view.
Hindu Seer V
13/11/04 13:11 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
At times I am sure, I can't beat our good friend
Vulcan!
He strikes back to AA:
I’m sorry AA babu, I don’t know nothing about Albigensian Massacre? Is that a criteria for pre-qualification by hindu preachers to be a smart guy? No wonder such preachers get arrested like a local goonda and I’m sure GOD will definitely come to rescue him.
Regards
JENA
Chinmaya replies to the earlier hurl:
No way ! I never think that way.
In the first click, I found the message did not appear in my inbox, where as the latter post had come. I felt, that might be the problem with yahoo, and sent that again with a new subject. By then, I had forgotten the title of first posting which I had copied from the net.
Hmm...Interpretation distorts the fact. Hope, I made it clear above.A post is a post, attack to the subject, not to the questioner. See,an innocent youngman is yelling with your agressive remark here
I only sent a link of a news.I have never tried to prove/disprove anybody. Thats it.
If it hurts your religious sentiment that intense, then I must apologise. If the sentiments are so deep rooted in us, we must put a restriction to this kind of posting.Personally, I think, what is the role of a spiritual guru in politics, why at all the seeker of highest kind of truth has to have nexus with Jayalalitha/karunanidhi ?
Its a question in common, the validity of religion and religious guru for a common mass ? We do not know, who is right/wrong ? The intensity with which we believe/pray to GOD,hope, Vulcano bhai, or Saswat are no exceptions to that. Despite of that, they have a concern for mass, and they are trying to adress that.And, we must not be that intolerant to their views.
Nobody can listen a word against relgion/relgious Guru, thats where our weaknesses lie.
Law will take it own course.
Rest, I am in full agreement with your points.
With Regards !
He strikes back to AA:
>>> I hope smart guys like Chinmay, Saswat, Vulcan etc know what it (Albigensian Massacre) was.
I’m sorry AA babu, I don’t know nothing about Albigensian Massacre? Is that a criteria for pre-qualification by hindu preachers to be a smart guy? No wonder such preachers get arrested like a local goonda and I’m sure GOD will definitely come to rescue him.
Regards
JENA
Chinmaya replies to the earlier hurl:
No way ! I never think that way.
In the first click, I found the message did not appear in my inbox, where as the latter post had come. I felt, that might be the problem with yahoo, and sent that again with a new subject. By then, I had forgotten the title of first posting which I had copied from the net.
Hmm...Interpretation distorts the fact. Hope, I made it clear above.A post is a post, attack to the subject, not to the questioner. See,an innocent youngman is yelling with your agressive remark here
I only sent a link of a news.I have never tried to prove/disprove anybody. Thats it.
If it hurts your religious sentiment that intense, then I must apologise. If the sentiments are so deep rooted in us, we must put a restriction to this kind of posting.Personally, I think, what is the role of a spiritual guru in politics, why at all the seeker of highest kind of truth has to have nexus with Jayalalitha/karunanidhi ?
Its a question in common, the validity of religion and religious guru for a common mass ? We do not know, who is right/wrong ? The intensity with which we believe/pray to GOD,hope, Vulcano bhai, or Saswat are no exceptions to that. Despite of that, they have a concern for mass, and they are trying to adress that.And, we must not be that intolerant to their views.
Nobody can listen a word against relgion/relgious Guru, thats where our weaknesses lie.
Law will take it own course.
Rest, I am in full agreement with your points.
With Regards !
Hindu Seer III
12/11/04 11:49 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
Immediate replies from the right direction:
I am sure the news was not a delightful one for this brother who mailed me this one. Of course, speaking for me, which other news could be the bigger ray of hope in post-British India?
Calm down , Saswat brother. World is not so white as someone tells you and nor it is dark as you think. There are shades and also light. Please do care to take a look. Conclusion is a step by step process !
I am sure the news was not a delightful one for this brother who mailed me this one. Of course, speaking for me, which other news could be the bigger ray of hope in post-British India?
Hindu Seer II
12/11/04 10:48 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
I thank Chinmaya for bringing the news to the group.
Since the group always revels in religious
discourses, it was the right platform, even if it was
of radically different taste this time. Bitter?
My letter:
I am not surprised! Not at all--
Remember how "Satya Sai Baba" fled the police several times and was accused of
child sexual abuses....
But he is still in the seat of esteem because of the irony that the judiciary
also comprises folks who legitimize these frauds' statuses.
And when Kavoor in his "Begone Godmen" challenged the spiritual gurus of the
world, none of them came forward to prove themselves.
Shame that we have to wait for the legal systems to take action....
and in the meantime these Con-men use the most fundamental concept to hypnotize
the masses: religion and god! And we innocents gulp down the sermons and start
preaching them as well and engage in advocating their languages and spreading
messages. Instead of locating the issues that concern the hungry and the
homeless, we practice the luxury of religious discourses....
Even a radical like Malcolm X paid for it too! By the time he discovered how the
religious were detached from the realities, he was swiftly eliminated by the
god-loving creatures. Little wonder we care to bother if the gurus practice what
they preach...
anyway, with such 'breaking news', its always better late than never...
thanks, Chinmaya,
Saswat
My letter:
I am not surprised! Not at all--
Remember how "Satya Sai Baba" fled the police several times and was accused of
child sexual abuses....
But he is still in the seat of esteem because of the irony that the judiciary
also comprises folks who legitimize these frauds' statuses.
And when Kavoor in his "Begone Godmen" challenged the spiritual gurus of the
world, none of them came forward to prove themselves.
Shame that we have to wait for the legal systems to take action....
and in the meantime these Con-men use the most fundamental concept to hypnotize
the masses: religion and god! And we innocents gulp down the sermons and start
preaching them as well and engage in advocating their languages and spreading
messages. Instead of locating the issues that concern the hungry and the
homeless, we practice the luxury of religious discourses....
Even a radical like Malcolm X paid for it too! By the time he discovered how the
religious were detached from the realities, he was swiftly eliminated by the
god-loving creatures. Little wonder we care to bother if the gurus practice what
they preach...
anyway, with such 'breaking news', its always better late than never...
thanks, Chinmaya,
Saswat
Hindu Seer I
12/11/04 07:07 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Reference
Arrest of Sankaracharya : This Movement is Progress
The arrest of Sankaracharya of Kanchi came as a big
surprise to most people. Of course one quarter asked
if anyone would dare arrest Pope if he were alleged
to have a hand in murder!
Hindus, I hear, are followers of extremely kind and accommodating religion. Well over a hundred Americans have already informed this to me. Of course they dont consider my being born in a family of Hindus make me Hindu. They know for sure, I dont agree we have to be part of any religion to be called human.
ut incidentally, I explain them back, that in India, being born makes all the difference. As our friend Vulcan Jena (in a recent posting at yahoogroup) made an excellent point recently, which I quote:
"What Manu did five thousand years ago, preachers of GOD still trying to continue & maintain it. Manu made Hindu society into four classes. There is no mobility. You are born a brahmin, that is the only way to be a brahmin. And that is the highest society, the topmost class. Then number two is the warriors, the kings: the Khyatriyas. But you are born in that caste, it is not a question that you can move. Then third is the class of the vaishyas, the business people; you are born in it. And the fourth is the sudras, the untouchables. All are born into their caste. That’s why, until Christianity started converting so many Hindus, particularly the sudras, who were ready, very willing to become Christians, because at least they would be touchable. Amongst Hindus, sudras are untouchable, and there is no way to get out of the structure.For your whole life you have to remain the same as your forefathers remained for five thousand years. For five thousand years there has been a stratified society. Hindus were not a converting religion, because the great question was, if you convert somebody, in what class are you going to put the person? Brahmins won’t allow you, and you would not like to be put with the sudras, the untouchables."
Well, not to say that one is better than the others. And if Pope can indeed not get arrested even after a murder case against him, then its a shame indeed. If not, lets investigate further and see why we have not made so many arrests so far.
But then people like you and me get arrested on daily basis. Laws like TADA or POTA or Patriot Act are already in place. See what they did in the post-riot Bombay or Gujarat or the fifty years of Kashmir.
Asian Age in 1999 came out with a flyer story on how Indian army officers raided the house of a Kashmiri family and killed their dog. Reason: it was barking. And so the conclusion was simple: A dog that barks at Hindu army must be a pakistani dog!
India never had so much conflict with any other land on this planet as poor (economically at least) Pakistan because of religious differences. And common people and domestic dogs have been paying the prices. Whereas the ones like religious ‘seers’ and ‘imams’ (he has now come forward to support the sankaracharya...who knows the Muslim preacher might be having a pandora’s box too) call the shots...
Hindus, I hear, are followers of extremely kind and accommodating religion. Well over a hundred Americans have already informed this to me. Of course they dont consider my being born in a family of Hindus make me Hindu. They know for sure, I dont agree we have to be part of any religion to be called human.
ut incidentally, I explain them back, that in India, being born makes all the difference. As our friend Vulcan Jena (in a recent posting at yahoogroup) made an excellent point recently, which I quote:
"What Manu did five thousand years ago, preachers of GOD still trying to continue & maintain it. Manu made Hindu society into four classes. There is no mobility. You are born a brahmin, that is the only way to be a brahmin. And that is the highest society, the topmost class. Then number two is the warriors, the kings: the Khyatriyas. But you are born in that caste, it is not a question that you can move. Then third is the class of the vaishyas, the business people; you are born in it. And the fourth is the sudras, the untouchables. All are born into their caste. That’s why, until Christianity started converting so many Hindus, particularly the sudras, who were ready, very willing to become Christians, because at least they would be touchable. Amongst Hindus, sudras are untouchable, and there is no way to get out of the structure.For your whole life you have to remain the same as your forefathers remained for five thousand years. For five thousand years there has been a stratified society. Hindus were not a converting religion, because the great question was, if you convert somebody, in what class are you going to put the person? Brahmins won’t allow you, and you would not like to be put with the sudras, the untouchables."
Well, not to say that one is better than the others. And if Pope can indeed not get arrested even after a murder case against him, then its a shame indeed. If not, lets investigate further and see why we have not made so many arrests so far.
But then people like you and me get arrested on daily basis. Laws like TADA or POTA or Patriot Act are already in place. See what they did in the post-riot Bombay or Gujarat or the fifty years of Kashmir.
Asian Age in 1999 came out with a flyer story on how Indian army officers raided the house of a Kashmiri family and killed their dog. Reason: it was barking. And so the conclusion was simple: A dog that barks at Hindu army must be a pakistani dog!
India never had so much conflict with any other land on this planet as poor (economically at least) Pakistan because of religious differences. And common people and domestic dogs have been paying the prices. Whereas the ones like religious ‘seers’ and ‘imams’ (he has now come forward to support the sankaracharya...who knows the Muslim preacher might be having a pandora’s box too) call the shots...
Or religious discourse II
08/11/04 10:27 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Memories
Another right brother pitches in:
Our friend Chinmaya replies:
I must apologize before going to write a further word.I am shocked. I have never bothered of your profession, and how do you deal with your students.I have never focussed anything regarding indian/USA education system,secrets codes in the cut throats comptt to publish papers, and the expected interaction between faculties and students in either of the countries.Thats all out of context here.I know,I can not reach to your level of understanding, in terms of studying physical, metaphysical phenomena.Excuse me,and my opinions as the outbrusts of an insane towards religion. Playing with words is not my cup of tea either, and where the winning of word war will lead me to ? .Neither me, Saswat, subhendu bhai was attacking the view points baselessly, rather they were sharing it in their own way owing to their own understandings of matters.
I sincerely feel, your post is never devoided of ratioanlity and a proper sequence ,and you have never digressed of the main topic. All I opined, whoever is speaking of religion must be very concise and focussed with out aggrandsizement of the facts and figures, and fooling around the people. And, you mean the same anyway.The only difference is your acceptance of everything on religious matter thinking it might be conatining some worth, whereas I feel things, unless confirmed/properly understood must not be reproduced.That creates lots of misunderstanding/chaos, and another fraction of people take undue adavantage of it.
One must trust the "fundamental information" that one is served,
and acquire some knowledge thereupon before raising any question.
For example, if a child revolts against why the alphabet "A" is
written the way it is and why not otherwise, and sticks to not
believing the current form of "A", that child can never learn the
language as long as he keeps his revolt alive! Thus, the primary
thing is a "faith". As far as religion or spirituality are
concerned, Chinmaya or Saswat do not have that faith - at least that
is my reading of them! I know they must have trusted the initial
concepts in physics and chemistry before raising any question in
their minds. Only that they follow a different option while talking
religion and spirituality.
__
Our friend Chinmaya replies:
I must apologize before going to write a further word.I am shocked. I have never bothered of your profession, and how do you deal with your students.I have never focussed anything regarding indian/USA education system,secrets codes in the cut throats comptt to publish papers, and the expected interaction between faculties and students in either of the countries.Thats all out of context here.I know,I can not reach to your level of understanding, in terms of studying physical, metaphysical phenomena.Excuse me,and my opinions as the outbrusts of an insane towards religion. Playing with words is not my cup of tea either, and where the winning of word war will lead me to ? .Neither me, Saswat, subhendu bhai was attacking the view points baselessly, rather they were sharing it in their own way owing to their own understandings of matters.
I sincerely feel, your post is never devoided of ratioanlity and a proper sequence ,and you have never digressed of the main topic. All I opined, whoever is speaking of religion must be very concise and focussed with out aggrandsizement of the facts and figures, and fooling around the people. And, you mean the same anyway.The only difference is your acceptance of everything on religious matter thinking it might be conatining some worth, whereas I feel things, unless confirmed/properly understood must not be reproduced.That creates lots of misunderstanding/chaos, and another fraction of people take undue adavantage of it.
Of religious discourses
07/11/04 12:15 Filed by Saswat Pattanayak in:
Memories
In the group, a brother advocates something like the
following:
Ashrujit, my friend replies:
If Saswat and Chinmaya's views are considered arrogant and a mindset
without the desire to learn, then may be we can brand "believers"
views are religious fanatics.
Why do we always find the people on the other side bad? I think
Chinmaya, Saswat and all others who are asking the questions are
simply because "they want to learn". If they had an air of arrogance
or were not willing to learn anything they would be only ridiculed
here and there and stayed away from any serious discussion, arguments.
___
I am against the notion that those
> who know should keep teaching despite being challenged and
> ridiculed. Chinmaya or Saswat may feel hurt; but all questions
> raised by them symbolise a level of arrogance and challenge. This is
> not a right frame of mind to learn - as far as I have practised and
> understood. My opinion on Chinmaya or Saswat is my personal, and I
> am not bound to give any explanation. You are free to call me a
> hypocrite or any term that you think suits me. SB may also
> call me an "OSAite" (he recently termed A's views typical OSA-
> type). I dont mind.
Ashrujit, my friend replies:
If Saswat and Chinmaya's views are considered arrogant and a mindset
without the desire to learn, then may be we can brand "believers"
views are religious fanatics.
Why do we always find the people on the other side bad? I think
Chinmaya, Saswat and all others who are asking the questions are
simply because "they want to learn". If they had an air of arrogance
or were not willing to learn anything they would be only ridiculed
here and there and stayed away from any serious discussion, arguments.
___
On Religious Discourse I
By Saswat Pattanayak
My post to the Oriya group:
My friends,
And to all, especially involved in the religious discourses (and the lack of it),
Just as everyone else, I have an opinion to air. So here it is:
I read Chinmaya’s mail and feel this had more validity than any other mail on the subject of religion. He drew from a personal narrative to share what relevance did religion still hold for him and did generalize it to some extent. I appreciate the fact that he debated the contents of texts (“If you do believe in the first place that you are germinated from super soul *PARAMATMA*, it must have its own outlook in directing you.&rdquo and put up a contemporary
challenge (“Can you, the advocates of religion,
give a guarantee that, you are born with
efficacious grace, and other are destined to
eternal damnation ?&rdquo only after sharing with us what
had happened to him in terms of beliefs in god
and godmen.
We need not be intolerant towards opposing views. Especially when they attack the core of beliefs shaped by external factors and normalized by imagined circumstances. My friend, referring to your mail, do we have to ask Chinmaya to quit the thread of Mahabakya, because he challenges them? Since when the so-called ‘great’ verses become so indefensible? If there can be a positive discussion, there can be a criticism piece also. Lets be more democratic than shoving contrary thoughts to obscurity by force. Religious people, historically have been the most intolerant (any standard book or mass experience would show that). But by spirit of the age, we need to raise newer questions.
Who does religions benefit? Which class of people? Where does the discourses on religions lead to? Issues or non-issues? You say no one forces Hinduism on another. Lets not even talk of the array of conversions, the Dara Singh, the Sangh Parivar? Why even discussion of Mahabakyas in a group pertaining to development of the Oriyas in general? If we do so, what happened to other religious texts too? Do we need a Muslim to talk about Koran? By that assumption, are we becoming exclusive a club within the Oriyas? Why does one need to hear black metal (which is not a bad idea at all, anyway) when one starts an anti-religious discussion?
If there can be a fare share for the Oriyas who believe discussing the ‘great’ verses is alright, lets be democratic enough, if not progressive, to allow for discussions by other Oriyas who think little differently.
One thought about “religious jargons”. It thrived historically in order to exclude a mass section of society from practicing. In course of actions, the preachers have not only neglected a section of downtrodden people, they have also systematically exploited them in the name of religion. If not for other religions trying to ‘convert’ and what-nots, the mainstream religion in India would not have given two hoots to those people it subjugated through centuries---our own indigenous people. Its their land, after all. ‘Those’ Adivasis. Their It’s a shame that we still talk the talk of hindu supremacists while we don’t walk the walk of the civilized. High time not only we repented over what we did with the instrument of religion, to completely obliterate sections of people, we got to realize that we still dare to preach the same elitist texts that have always marked distinction among peoples and need “authorized” explanations from only a certain class of folks.
Must we wake up only too late, in our attempt at carrying the legacy of the forefathers who had gone blind to recognize their deadly fallacies? We are all offshoots of a racist, sexist, fanatically war chauvinist world, proudly claiming itself to be a thousands of years old civilization! Whose civilization has it been anyway? One where we relied on our religions to oppress the landless, and rule over women in our hypocritical houses? Shut our children up from asking critical questions, instead urged the child to surrender to the almighty who we had never anyway experienced of being of any use? The older generation never asked the pertinent questions. The younger ones grew up with complexes of identities revolving around families and personal gods. The legacy of rich and privileged continued and the state of the poor remained at the mercy of the manufactured god.
These don’t need any different thread. Or any different group. Or any different situations. Lets be democratic within, even without a phony political system. Lets be aware that not only different questions be welcome to be addressed within the parameters of what we are discussing, but also be properly addressed to and respected as much.
Regarding freedom of choices to make, and emanating frustrations, all I think of right now is between the bushes and kerrys of the worlds, we have not been given the choices, dear. We got to be the choices ourselves. And no freedom is granted by others. It has to be fought for because most times, its suppressed by the environment.
Like you, I have been leading life from the seat of privilege. We must not be blind to the oppression we cause in name of voluntary freedom. We don’t realize that freedom is freedom only when its freedom for all, or its freedom for none. When the parents are in shackle of superstitions, to assume that the child would not have utilized the freedom properly would be erroneous. Its not just freedom to think, which is needed, but also freedom how to think. We will be parents one day and must keep in mind that by going with age-old beliefs, there are more rigidity than flexibility to think around certain texts. And a traditional family does not go beyond providing the authoritative answers, not encouraging critical questions. What results is another generation, content with self, to afford the luxury of discussing religious codes at the time when we know majority are still sans basic necessities. In the US alone, 35 million people are homeless and will seek winter shelter. Orissa is another story. Lets talk about Orissa in a NEW thread.
Friend, in our long roads to progress in life, there will come several junctures in time when we got to stop for awhile and ask a question, “Could I have been wrong all throughout in my core beliefs? Is there a probability of such having happened?”
I have been wrong many times in my ‘core’ perceptions about people, events, places, ideologies and beliefs. May you not be as unfortunate like me in coming to terms with the radically opposing truths.
But may you ask the questions, nevertheless.
Peace.
In struggle,
saswat pattanayak
My post to the Oriya group:
My friends,
And to all, especially involved in the religious discourses (and the lack of it),
Just as everyone else, I have an opinion to air. So here it is:
I read Chinmaya’s mail and feel this had more validity than any other mail on the subject of religion. He drew from a personal narrative to share what relevance did religion still hold for him and did generalize it to some extent. I appreciate the fact that he debated the contents of texts (“If you do believe in the first place that you are germinated from super soul *PARAMATMA*, it must have its own outlook in directing you.&rdquo
and put up a contemporary
challenge (“Can you, the advocates of religion,
give a guarantee that, you are born with
efficacious grace, and other are destined to
eternal damnation ?&rdquo only after sharing with us what
had happened to him in terms of beliefs in god
and godmen.
We need not be intolerant towards opposing views. Especially when they attack the core of beliefs shaped by external factors and normalized by imagined circumstances. My friend, referring to your mail, do we have to ask Chinmaya to quit the thread of Mahabakya, because he challenges them? Since when the so-called ‘great’ verses become so indefensible? If there can be a positive discussion, there can be a criticism piece also. Lets be more democratic than shoving contrary thoughts to obscurity by force. Religious people, historically have been the most intolerant (any standard book or mass experience would show that). But by spirit of the age, we need to raise newer questions.
Who does religions benefit? Which class of people? Where does the discourses on religions lead to? Issues or non-issues? You say no one forces Hinduism on another. Lets not even talk of the array of conversions, the Dara Singh, the Sangh Parivar? Why even discussion of Mahabakyas in a group pertaining to development of the Oriyas in general? If we do so, what happened to other religious texts too? Do we need a Muslim to talk about Koran? By that assumption, are we becoming exclusive a club within the Oriyas? Why does one need to hear black metal (which is not a bad idea at all, anyway) when one starts an anti-religious discussion?
If there can be a fare share for the Oriyas who believe discussing the ‘great’ verses is alright, lets be democratic enough, if not progressive, to allow for discussions by other Oriyas who think little differently.
One thought about “religious jargons”. It thrived historically in order to exclude a mass section of society from practicing. In course of actions, the preachers have not only neglected a section of downtrodden people, they have also systematically exploited them in the name of religion. If not for other religions trying to ‘convert’ and what-nots, the mainstream religion in India would not have given two hoots to those people it subjugated through centuries---our own indigenous people. Its their land, after all. ‘Those’ Adivasis. Their It’s a shame that we still talk the talk of hindu supremacists while we don’t walk the walk of the civilized. High time not only we repented over what we did with the instrument of religion, to completely obliterate sections of people, we got to realize that we still dare to preach the same elitist texts that have always marked distinction among peoples and need “authorized” explanations from only a certain class of folks.
Must we wake up only too late, in our attempt at carrying the legacy of the forefathers who had gone blind to recognize their deadly fallacies? We are all offshoots of a racist, sexist, fanatically war chauvinist world, proudly claiming itself to be a thousands of years old civilization! Whose civilization has it been anyway? One where we relied on our religions to oppress the landless, and rule over women in our hypocritical houses? Shut our children up from asking critical questions, instead urged the child to surrender to the almighty who we had never anyway experienced of being of any use? The older generation never asked the pertinent questions. The younger ones grew up with complexes of identities revolving around families and personal gods. The legacy of rich and privileged continued and the state of the poor remained at the mercy of the manufactured god.
These don’t need any different thread. Or any different group. Or any different situations. Lets be democratic within, even without a phony political system. Lets be aware that not only different questions be welcome to be addressed within the parameters of what we are discussing, but also be properly addressed to and respected as much.
Regarding freedom of choices to make, and emanating frustrations, all I think of right now is between the bushes and kerrys of the worlds, we have not been given the choices, dear. We got to be the choices ourselves. And no freedom is granted by others. It has to be fought for because most times, its suppressed by the environment.
Like you, I have been leading life from the seat of privilege. We must not be blind to the oppression we cause in name of voluntary freedom. We don’t realize that freedom is freedom only when its freedom for all, or its freedom for none. When the parents are in shackle of superstitions, to assume that the child would not have utilized the freedom properly would be erroneous. Its not just freedom to think, which is needed, but also freedom how to think. We will be parents one day and must keep in mind that by going with age-old beliefs, there are more rigidity than flexibility to think around certain texts. And a traditional family does not go beyond providing the authoritative answers, not encouraging critical questions. What results is another generation, content with self, to afford the luxury of discussing religious codes at the time when we know majority are still sans basic necessities. In the US alone, 35 million people are homeless and will seek winter shelter. Orissa is another story. Lets talk about Orissa in a NEW thread.
Friend, in our long roads to progress in life, there will come several junctures in time when we got to stop for awhile and ask a question, “Could I have been wrong all throughout in my core beliefs? Is there a probability of such having happened?”
I have been wrong many times in my ‘core’ perceptions about people, events, places, ideologies and beliefs. May you not be as unfortunate like me in coming to terms with the radically opposing truths.
But may you ask the questions, nevertheless.
Peace.
In struggle,
saswat pattanayak
Criminal minds
The Human Resource Development Minister of India,
Murli Manohar Joshi, met the Prime Minister, Atal
Bihari Vajpayee to discuss with him his resignation
from the Council of Ministers.
Kind of funny because he actually resigned on September 19. the power hunger still has kept the right wing politician awaiting chargesheet on October 10 (for inciting communal violence).
In the misdeeds, folks don’t have conviction. But what if the misdeeds are all the deeds they commit?
Shame!
Kind of funny because he actually resigned on September 19. the power hunger still has kept the right wing politician awaiting chargesheet on October 10 (for inciting communal violence).
In the misdeeds, folks don’t have conviction. But what if the misdeeds are all the deeds they commit?
Shame!
Hindu seer pioneers innovative methods of mass disturbances
Kanchi Sankaracharya, Jayendra Saraswati, the Hindu
seer has of course gone ahead and come down on the
rejection of his formula on the Ayodhya issue by the
All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).
He would not agree for a court to settle Ayodhya issue (the most shameful mass behavior in India since the times when we tolerated the British on Indian land).
Jayendra Saraswati has said: "a solution to the Ayodhya issue will not be possible through court. It is possible only through talks".
Indeed, how can a reactionary like him who instigate people to kill-haul each other in name of communalism agree for court interferences. A true believer in anarchy in a Hindu fanatic society? Hardly. When the religious seers say “Talks” they mean talk between them and other power brokers. Just let them dare to confront the masses and see how history is gonna be rewritten!
Down with the Acharyas and all other conmen.
He would not agree for a court to settle Ayodhya issue (the most shameful mass behavior in India since the times when we tolerated the British on Indian land).
Jayendra Saraswati has said: "a solution to the Ayodhya issue will not be possible through court. It is possible only through talks".
Indeed, how can a reactionary like him who instigate people to kill-haul each other in name of communalism agree for court interferences. A true believer in anarchy in a Hindu fanatic society? Hardly. When the religious seers say “Talks” they mean talk between them and other power brokers. Just let them dare to confront the masses and see how history is gonna be rewritten!
Down with the Acharyas and all other conmen.
Jul 2007
Jun 2007
May 2007
Apr 2007
Mar 2007
Feb 2007
Jan 2007
Dec 2006
Nov 2006
Oct 2006
Sep 2006
Aug 2006
Jul 2006
Jun 2006
May 2006
Apr 2006
Mar 2006
Feb 2006
Jan 2006
Dec 2005
Nov 2005
Oct 2005
Sep 2005
Aug 2005
Jul 2005
Jun 2005
May 2005
Apr 2005
Mar 2005
Feb 2005
Jan 2005
Dec 2004
Nov 2004
Oct 2004
Sep 2004
Aug 2004
Jul 2004
Jun 2004
May 2004
Apr 2004
Mar 2004
Feb 2004
Jan 2004
Dec 2003
Nov 2003
Oct 2003
Sep 2003
Aug 2003
Jul 2003
Jun 2003
Jun 2007
May 2007
Apr 2007
Mar 2007
Feb 2007
Jan 2007
Dec 2006
Nov 2006
Oct 2006
Sep 2006
Aug 2006
Jul 2006
Jun 2006
May 2006
Apr 2006
Mar 2006
Feb 2006
Jan 2006
Dec 2005
Nov 2005
Oct 2005
Sep 2005
Aug 2005
Jul 2005
Jun 2005
May 2005
Apr 2005
Mar 2005
Feb 2005
Jan 2005
Dec 2004
Nov 2004
Oct 2004
Sep 2004
Aug 2004
Jul 2004
Jun 2004
May 2004
Apr 2004
Mar 2004
Feb 2004
Jan 2004
Dec 2003
Nov 2003
Oct 2003
Sep 2003
Aug 2003
Jul 2003
Jun 2003
- Academic
- Activism
- Afghanistan
- Africa
- Atheism
- Australia
- Black Power
- Blog
- Bollywood
- Bush
- Canada
- Capitalism
- Casteism
- Chile
- China
- Christianity
- Cold War
- Colonialism
- Communism
- Cuba
- Economics
- Environment
- EU
- Feminism
- Film
- France
- G-8
- Greece
- Haiti
- Health
- Hinduism
- History
- Humor
- Immigrant
- Imperialism
- India
- Indigenous
- Interview
- Iran
- Iraq
- Islam
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Korea
- Law
- Lebanon
- LGBT
- Literature
- Media
- Music
- Nepal
- News
- Orissa
- Pakistan
- Peace
- Philosophy
- Poem
- Quote
- Racism
- Russia
- Saswat
- Sports
- Technology
- Terrorism
- Third World
- Uganda
- UK
- UN
- Urdu
- USA
- USSR
- Venezuela
- Vietnam
- War