Even Hindus are sick of R.S.S. and VHP!!!!!

[nonihal singh]

http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.ph...ontent_id=27599

Besides being morally wrong, events like Babri Masjid demolition, Gujarat riots harm Hinduism itself

Kaushik Basu

It is time for the average Hindu to reclaim his religion from the madness being unleashed in its name by the VHP and the RSS.

The most recent complaint against India’s Muslims, namely, that they did not accept the Shankaracharya’s ‘‘reasonable offer’’ is absurd. The Kanchi Shankaracharya, true to his reputation, had started out in earnest — to engage in dialogue, to take and to give. But what was offered in the end, under relentless pressure from the VHP, was quite egregious. The Hindus would make no concessions — not on Kashi, not on Mathura. And the Muslims would gift the disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus.

But this makes a travesty of the term ‘‘gift’’. You can urge your own side to give away something. But asking the other side to gift something to you is a misuse of the word. And when that something happens to be land, created by the illegal demolition of a mosque, this amounts to taking a person hostage and then asking him to ‘‘gift’’ his watch to you.

This Ayodhya deadlock is just one in a line of events, beginning with the 1992 destruction of the Babri Masjid and continuing with the massacre in Gujarat, and the bending of the law to protect its perpetrators. Not only are these events morally wrong, they do great harm, ironically, to Hinduism itself.

Writing in the middle of the 19th century, Karl Marx had marvelled at the quiet robustness of Hindu civilisation

. It would take blow after blow of invasions, the economy would shatter, the buildings break; but no sooner had the dust from the invading cavalry settled, it would become clear that Hinduism was intact, almost unchanged.

In some ways, it is also a religion of unrivalled openness. There is no central command that sets the rules of what a Hindu may or may not do. One can violate its rituals and still legitimately claim to be a Hindu. One can be an atheist and a Hindu, as was the sage Carvaka.

Aggression towards minorities, as are being preached by the VHP, is unbecoming of this great tradition. To whip up emotions by stoking fears that Hinduism is endangered and will perish unless it defends itself aggressively is to reveal an inferiority complex for which there is no basis.

The inclination to use the State to ban conversion is founded in this same complex and a failure to understand that Hinduism may not be loud, strident and proselytising, but it is strong. It faces no risk, except from its own fundamentalists, who, by imitating other fundamentalists, are for the first time threatening to change the very character of this ancient religion.

And while on this subject, I must add my own belief that, even if it were an endangered religion, there would be no moral reason to ban conversion. Religion is a personal matter. People should be free to preach; and if someone, as a consequence of this or simply because he is dissatisfied with his own religion, wants to switch to another faith, then so be it.

Hindus have often treated their own sub-groups poorly. ‘‘To the Untouchables, Hinduism is a veritable chamber of horrors,’’ wrote India’s most famous Untouchable, B.R. Ambedkar. He argued that Hinduism, as practiced, was ‘‘inconsistent with the self-respect and honour of the Untouchables’’ and that this ‘‘justifies (their) conversion’’. Ambedkar himself converted to Buddhism three weeks before his death on December 6, 1956.

If such conversions are thought to be offensive, th

en the lesson must be to reform the practices within Hinduism that lead to them, instead of using the State to block exit routes.

It is time the BJP government dissociates itself from the VHP-RSS combine. I know it is naive to expect politicians to live entirely by their morals. To be able to do what a politician wants to do, he needs to be in power, and this often necessitates compromises.

But at the same time even politicians must draw a line and decide that, beyond a point, it is better to lose an election than to be held hostage by a small fanatical group that has no respect for the law. The VHP has made it clear that if the ASI excavations yield no evidence of a temple, it will ignore the ASI; and if the Supreme Court does not rule in favour of a temple, it will use mass movement to counter the verdict.

One of the critical ingredients of a thriving economy is the rule of law. For the BJP government, this is a good occasion to drive this point home. A tragedy of this government is that it is spending too little time on things that matter (like creating prosperity for the people) and too much time on ‘‘politics’’. For a nation as poor as ours, the pressing need is to enhance growth, create employment and curb corruption.

India can achieve a growth rate of eight per cent per annum; it is in a position now to eradicate poverty. However, this will need determination, brainpower and time on the part of government to crafting and enforcing good economic policies. Our government is unfortunately so preoccupied with zero-sum political conflicts — Ayodhya, conversions, cow-slaughter, resurrection of Vedic Studies — that it is ignoring policies that can make a real difference to the lives of its citizens.

It needs to put Ayodhya behind it as quickly as possible. If its current stance is making an early resolution so difficult, I suggest that it tries what is only a slight modification of the venerable Shankaracharya’s plan. Ask the Hindus to gift the land where the Babri Masjid o

nce stood to the Muslims.

— The writer is professor of economics at Cornell University and visiting professor at the Delhi School of Economics

[Guest mehtab]

i posted the same article months ago...not a single reply was posted...and i dont expect any now either

[japmans]

theres a very very interesting discussion at akj.org about a group of hindu people who attacked a sikh jatha. so of course, everyone was saying like, all hindus hate sikhs, and stuff like that..

there's this one guy, preetum kumar, and he's hindu, but he's got many amritdhari friends, according to him, and many muslim friends as well. he's done lots of research on many religions, and he essentially says the same thing as the article. his main focal point is that sikhs say hindus are bad after 1984, essentially due to indira gandhi. he replied by saying that, by definition, she's not a hindu because hindu's are not to commit acts of violence on anyone.

this, of course, got a huge backlash from the majority of the respondants at akj.org, and they insisted she was hindu, and that so were all of those who committed the dastardly acts in delhi.

p.k's response was saying that because of a small percentage of people, you've branded hindus as something they're basically not. he said basicaly as a rhetorical question:

"was kps gill a sikh? despite having a sikh name?

was ajit sandhu a sikh??

was beant singh chief minister a sikh?

was general brar a sikh??

was badal a sikh??

can u asnwer yes to any of these?? if not then how was indra ghandi a hindu if her actions were agianst what hindu sacred texts teach?"

his point was that we're so quick to generalize... we always say that a guy with a sikh name who drinks and parties is not a sikh, but a hindu who commits violence must be a hindu because he/she showed anger towards sikhs..... it's the exact same thing, but we look at it biasedly

because of the acts committed against us. i'm not saying that's wrong, but it's definitely not right... i, for one, definitely learnt alot from that thread....

[Guest mehtab]

good one

[DhadiMania]

bout time they get fed up of sum extremists.

they want all the countries frm burma 2 iraq 2 convert bak 2 hinduism (those countries were hindu b4, wow thats massive)

they wanna launch a war on them countries once they get in power n make all them countries in2 "bharat"

good luck RSS, start a war n bin laden, n all the otha fundamentalists will run afta u

:D hindu fundamentalists vs islamic militants :wub:

hu du think will win????

[Deep Singh]

hindu fundamentalists vs islamic militants 

hu du think will win????

tuff compitition dude....for now i think musalmanns will take the trophy, maybe pandits have a chance if they get some help from christian missionaries...lol.

[DhadiMania]

tuff compitition dude....for now i think musalmanns will take the trophy, maybe pandits have a chance if they get some help from christian missionaries...lol.

same, 1 bomb n there ded. christain missionaries cud help convert the musalmans, then convert the RSS fanatics

:D :wub:

[jagjit_waheguru]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

Pyare jio, that discussion on akj.org is a old one. That preetum kumar was fake. He was actually a nakli nihang from Uk. He was just going on akj.org under fake aliases to disrupt the site, with endless arguments.

I responded to him, pointing out the Hindus had damaged themselves more than any other community with practices like caste, sati, dowry, etc. Unfortunately many punjabi have turned towards some of these practices.

Anyway, this person then just used that thread to write loads of rubbish on sikh awareness. When I refuted him and questioned many of his points, he went on to personal attacks. Again I refuted him. Only then he realised his mistakes, and apologised for writing lies, and deleted all of his posts on sikhawareness. I am not sure if that thread still exists.

By the way, all of them names mentioned were not sikhs, but punjabis. Not every punjabi with a turban is a sikh, sikhi is earned...(kamaii - ed).

Hope veer ji that clears things up.

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

[DhadiMania]

sad how sikhs r turning in2 hindus, now even hindus r startin 2 turn 2 equality, (except the brahmin, but wot u expect???)

[japmans]

hmm... he was fake?!

i'm not sure how to react, cuz the message is still useful.. before he got all detailed his message was pretty good.. i mean.. like.. if our Shri Guru Granth Sahib Jee says that this is what must be done to be a sikh, and if their Hindu texts say the same in reference to hindus, then shouldn't we be able to understand that someone acting out of that order, in their respective religions, is not a sikh, or in the case that preetma kumar was talking about, is not a hindu?

that was one madddddddd run-on sentence, but i mean like... how can our characterization of a non-sikh exist, but the characterization of a non-hindu can not..