Sunday, March 24, 2013

Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Dear Navnith

Yes there is a broad consensus that "Hindu" refers
generally to persons who live to the  East of the River
Indus. This was supposedly later limited by later
Muslim/Mughal rulers to refer to non-Muslims, unbelievers,
heathens, pagans etc insofar as Islam is concerned in
their territories

"India" is what the British Empire called the territory they
conquered from the Mughal Empire and also annexed from
other Indian native rulers. After the negotiated partition of
British India, and the exit of unbelievers what remained behind
was this India. It is identical to the process whereby HRA's
India Against Corruption movement negotiated the exit of
all unbelievers from the movement to retain and preserve
the larger body and is in the spirit of the Indian Partition Act
a hoary law of British India still followed today.

Insofar as 2 children-8 children is concerned, you have evaded
the question. Pseudo-secularists find it very difficult to answer it
It has a very simple answer enshrined in India's Constitution ..

"Every religious community is entitled to freely practice
and propagate its religion so long as it does not interfere
in the rights of anybody else and is subject to law, order
and public morality."

Nothing to do with Uniform Civil Code which is a Directive Principle
of State Policy and is a noble idea to be attained via consensus
but is not enforceable if consensus is not forthcoming.

The best way to achieve Uniform Civil Code via consensus is to
incorporate whatever the Muslim Ummah wants and make it also
applicable to the Hindu Samaj, and vice versa. This is precisely
what IAC has mentioned in its Charter.

Please remember always that those Muslims who chose to
remain in India were exactly the "right" Indians who had faith
in India's ancient and deep tradition of "Hindutva" (or UNIFYING
FORCE of the Indian Nation).

Sarbajit

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Navnith Krishnan <navkris@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sarbajit,
 

You will agree with me that the word Hindu and India are both derived from the word Sindhu.The Persians  used to broadly refer to those living around the River Sindhu as Hindus.Since the river Sindhu or Indus is in Pakistan,by your theory is it not a fallacy to call our country as India? Ofcourse,Bharath is based on the mythological figure,Bharatha,who was a great Emperor.But this name is recognized by the Constitution of India,perhaps to highlight our great cultural heritage.We have enough issues already,so why waste time splitting our hairs about India and Bharath.Let both unite us.

With regards to number of children,it is not a question of two children per man or per woman. Why Muslims are allowed to have a separate personal law in a so called cecular democracy..Why should they be allowed to practice poligamy.Rajiv Gandhi did the biggwest blunder by getting the constitution amended to deny a poor Muslim woman alimony.Her rights as an Indian citizen was thus denied.Perhaps BJP is the only party demanding common civil code.


navnith

 

 


 
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 18:18:54 +0530

From: sroy.mb@gmail.com
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Dear Navnith

IAC is extremely focussed on 3 and only 3 words which are "India", "Against", and "Corruption".

The BJP and Aam Aadmi Party etc is not at all concerned about "India" they are only concerrnd about some mythical and non-existent "Bharat". The only party which makes mention of India is the 'Indian" National Congress (and we all know how Indian that party is. So please rest assured that IAC will eventually define "India" in a UNIFYING way which truly makes every one who shall remain in our movement very happy and proud..

Once everyone in IAC becomes an "Indian" (as agreed and accepted) , we shall unleash the power of  AGAINST. because that needs hardly any definition.

On population control, a simple question you can assist IAC on:-

If a monogamist Hindu family is ever limited to 2 children by law, should the family of a polygamist Muslim with 4 wives be limited to 2 children or 8 children ?
,
Sarbajit

On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Navnith Krishnan <navkris@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sarbajit,
Good, you are in the process of defining and clarifying IAC's ideological issues.Perhaps it may make IAC more focussed rather than making it a platform for members to comment on every issue under the sun. 
But do you think 'black money' and 'population control' are divisive issues which should be frozen?.Do you think corruption is a 'meaningless' issue?It looks more like Congress 'ideology'.
 

navnith

 

 


 
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:02:57 +0530
From: sroy.mb@gmail.com

To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Dear Major Sarwara etc.

IAC is now is the process of defining and clarifying certain ideological issues, and to see thereby which organisations can work with IAC and vice versa.

This is not the old IAC where "all good people"  came together on the simplistic (and meaningless) issue of corruption, and which old IAC collapsed under the weight of its own ideological and egoistical contradictions.

This IAC's platform and agenda  is going to be clear, and its stand on various issues , including religion which is a fountainhead of corruption in India and is deeply embedded in our political and economic culture, will be consistent.

IAC is determined to get as many of the troublesome and divisive issues frozen before we move forward with our campaign.  Religion is only one of them, "black money" is another, "population control" is a third etc etc.

We are also encouraging everyone to leave IAC who is not prepared to endure this painful learning process, or who has sympathy for the ways of the old IAC and its past leaders.

 I'm sorry to be so blunt, but its better to be disillusioned now than to be disillusioned later.

It is also a mark of how seriously HRA takes this process that I am personally tasked for answering all queries so that there is as little deviation as is possible, and since the time with us is so very short.

Since our public list is open, vario0us outside entities are "pinging" apolitical IAC through the maliing list to see what we now are and where we stand and where we are going.

Sarbajit

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:16 PM, <vartika.journalist@gmail.com> wrote:
Everybody please pay attention to what Major D S Sarvana Very rightly said ..
Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

-----Original Message-----
From: sarwara.super@gmail.com
Sender: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 08:12:52
To: <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Reply-To: sarwara.super@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Uf!what crap going on in IAC,every one is trying to show their knowledge to others on matters not concerned with IAC platform.Useless sub being discussed except corruption.Is deviation planned by   vested interests?......Major D S Sarwara
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from !DEA

-----Original Message-----
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sender: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:11:46
To: <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Reply-To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"



Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in


Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Posted by at No comments:

RE: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

First time I am hearing that actual Hindus don't constitute more than 37% of India's population.  Who are the remaining 63%? A very alarming data. 
 
Our Census data shows Hindus more than 80%. Also these more than 80% Hindus may be inclusive of Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs and others, but fact remains Vedas are the supreme scriptures of about these 80% Hindus other than Jains and Buddhists.  In that case faith in the supermacy of Vedas is enough to unite 80% Hindus. Thus any religion, sect, cult which accepts Vedas as their scriptures become part of Hindus.
 
Why only Hindus, even Muslims. Christians, Parsi etc should also consider as INDIANS than follower of any religion. Nation and religion are two different and independent concepts. Let us not mix these two different concepts. Definition of Hindus could also be linked to Vedas.
Prem Sabhlok
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 07:26:08 +0530
From: sroy.mb@gmail.com
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Dear Mr Sabhlok

Your line of arguments is too simplistic and will get you trapped when you come up against professional theologians or religious agitators.

1) It is inadvisable to use geological/territorial boundaries to define a religion. This is an extension of the Greek or Muslim view that all non-Greeks or non-Muslims in India are 'kaafirs' or Hindus. This distorted line of argument has been put into our history books by Left leaning intellectuals like Romila Thapar and you seem to have swallowed it, just as Nehru did when he rammed through the Hindu Code of 1955/56.

2) It is inadvisable to use the term "followers" to define the religion.

As a starting point you kindly read Koenraad Elst's work on this

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/wiah/
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/wiah/ch3.htm

It is wrong on very many points / places, but still a good enough starting point and as an introduction to the subject,

Today, actual Hindus don't constitute more than about 37% of India's population. So "we" should start defining ourselves more as Indians and less as Hindus if India is to survive into the next century..

Sarbajit


On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Prem Sabhlok <psabhlok@hotmail.com> wrote:
The followers of any religion/sect/cult/Samaj which originated in India are Hindus. Thus when we say India has about 80% Hindus, these include followers of Sanatan Dharma, Sikhs, Buddists, Jains, Kabir panthi, Balmiks, Ganpatias,tribals who are not converted to Islam, Christianity etc, Arya Samajists, Brahmakumaris, Parnamis like Mahatma Gandhi  and others.
 
The followers of any relgion/sect/cult which originated from outside India are non Hindus like Islam, Christianity, Jews, Parsi, Sufis   
 
etc.  Thus it is very difficult to define Hindu and "way of life" is the easiest definition. Follow "any way of life" you are Hindu.  
 
Regards
Prem Sabhhlok
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:47:14 -0500
From: ltcolttkishore@gmail.com
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
CC: ramyasistla@gmail.com; tavkmohan@gmail.com; apvn.sarma@gmail.com

Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"


Dear All,
Greetings.
Being alert to divisive forces of all types is by itself a hopeful and positive way.
One has to be careful not to throw the baby also out with the bath water.
Hinduism and being A Hindu is a way of life, as believed by most conscientious . Even a lazy chap (like me for eg.)  can be a Hindu doing NOTHING .There is no regimentation or institutionalisation for aHindu. He can pray without feeling superior or sinful  at a temple or mazar or church or stupa.Very accommodating ISM,is Hinduism.
 This "Spectrum" of  nonchalance to Seriousness is what makes it a perfect Medium( Heat Sink or the entity to absorb any energy) to assimilate all religious concepts AND that is what is not to the liking of MOST  fundu type Xians and Moslems.(The permissiveness of Hinduism is seen when a non Hindu can enter Portals of Balaji   by JUST signing a register he believes in Balaji. Sarvam Jagannatham)
So ,if you like to be Hindu you can be Hindu.That simple and no demands  made and is unconditional. Any body can ,"Garv se kaho  ham Hindu hai".
Vedic religion or Aryanism(  ?) is too nebulous and Lazy chaps like me are happy (Or fearful?) to pray to all gods of all  religions they come across.
In the meantime I remain a seeker of clarity and then truth in that order.
Veteran (Ltcol) TTKishore
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Archita Bhatta <architabhatta@gmail.com> wrote:
It is an old question and an old answer by now, but there is need o reiterate this... THERE IS NOTHING AND NO ONE CALLED A HINDU. THE WORD DOES NOT EXIST IN THE VEDAS, where the usual formal honorofic addressal to another person is Arya.

This has led many to believe that there is something called an Aryan race... a misnomer by any account...

Let me reiterate that the word called Hindu arrived on the eve of and gained currency after Alexander's conquest of what we now know as India, which then included the present-day Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The military history of Alexander's conquests show that they had planned to cross the River Indus, but due to propensities peculiar to the Greek language, they could pronounce the name of the river as Hindus. From there arrived the historically incorrect and unacceptable term Hindu, which has now become a divisive mantra for ultra-nationalist and militant organisations like the RSS and its political handmaid, he BJP.

If any intellectual worth his or her salt wants to make this as a brand name and a clarion call to accelerate their self-interests, history will take care of their coffins, InshaAllah.

For those who believe in the spiritual practices peculiar to this land the real term is Sanatan Dharm... a religion that has been co-existent with Creation ... but then, this is what all religious leaders would like their flock to believe in, because this is their business model, nothing less. 

Thanks

Archita


On 23 March 2013 01:12, J Raman <events@southasianoutlook.com> wrote:
Dear Mr Sarabjit Roy:
 
Your email makes interesting reading indeed.
 
Of course, it is absolutely a personal issue as to what religion one practices or does not.
 
Do you have a link to or transcript of the Legal Judgement of 1899?
 
If you have it, it will add more emphasis to your points in the email.
 
Thanks.
 
J Raman
 
 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice
 
Dear Mr. S.Kumar

I shall certainly address each and every one of your points with great pleasure if you can prove the following statement:-

"Sarabjiy Roy might be an aetheist or Communist."

Another gentleman Mr Bhagwat Goel has just called me a FUNDAMENTALIST COMMUNIST ??? on another mailing list <ha ha>

So I will save you the trouble and unprove  it myself.

FYI, It is compulsory for a Communist to be an atheist, but not every atheist is a Communist. Similarly there are many atheists who are Hindus and many Hindus who are atheists. BTW, an atheist is simply a person who does not believe in existence of God.

Unluckily for both of you I am not an atheist.

I am a Theist. Kindly note the spacing between the "a" and "Theist" This means that I believe in God. In fact I am a firm and devout believer in God, so it means that I an not an atheist and therefore am also not a Communist. So the only thing which is left to prove is if I am a "Hindu" or not.

Luckily again, I am armed with a Legal Judgment of the Chief Court of the (undivided) Punjab of 1899 which is the most ancient  modern judgment of India (and further upheld in final appeal in the Privy Council in 1903) on Hinduism  which says as follows:-

a) That the term "Hindu" cannot be defined precisely, because Hinduism is a religion of wide elasticity and catholicism to the extent that one can eat beef, kill cows, have 10 wives simultaneously, drink, smoke, not go to temple, be married to a Christian foreigner  etc and still  be a Hindu. (please note this remarkably liberal judgment was given in 1899)

b) That Sikhs are Hindus and nothing but Hindus no matter how much they deny it.

c) That my religionists "may" or "may not be" Hindus at their discretion. What this judgment means is that if Sarbajit Roy (or my co-religionists)  states formally he is a Hindu then everyone else is NOT a Hindu for him.  In fact the entire Unform Civil Code which BJP is demanding for past 40 years is only  for Sarbajit Roy and his co-religionists and not because of any Shah Bano or Kashmiri Pandits.  If we (who reject temples and priests and babas and swamis ..) are Hindus then all their temple trusts revert to the State irrevocably and finally and cause massive problems in  Sanatan Dharam.

And Sir, because Dr. Kumar 2786 mentions you are a walking encyclopedia (like me) let me also clarify that even though this is a 1900's judgement it is used even today as the lead judgment to settle in SC who is a Hindu and who is not a Hindu in law. For example the Ramakrishna Mission judgement was based almost fully on this judgment.

Now it is my turn to ask you (because for all I know you may be Chinese) to answer only 2 small questions.

A) Are YOU a Hindu ?
B) If so, what is the name of your God ?

I have no difficulty in answering these 2 questions in 1 word each.

Sarbajit
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:52 PM, S kumar <kumar_8134@yahoo.com> wrote:
Why should you interfere in the administration and conduct of Hindu Temples only in the Country? Sarabjit Roy has a totally biassed negative opinion about Hindu-s when he says he sees only one temple in his region and religion that too abandoned and in ruins. Do you consider the thousands of temples all over the Country mismanaged and in ruins?
 
What don't you look all over the Country? Kerala State has Sabarimala Temple having over 200Cr. income per annum, followed by Guruvayur and the State controlled Religious body controls an annual income of over Rs.1500 Cr. which is administered by the Govt. The same happens in Tamilnadu and Andhra esp. Tirupathi Temple the income of which is the highest in India and has been looted by the former CM Samuel Reddy and used for Christian and Muslim purposes. Building and landed properties belonging to the temple were sold off by the Christisn CM, who used to carry sackfuls of currency whenever he visited Sonia Gandhi at Delhi, discontinuation of which cost his son the coveted position and harassment by ED, CBI and CBDT.
 
Over Rs.50,000Cr. worth of Gold ornaments, crows..etc. donated by King Krishnadevaraya, has been found missing and nobody has taken the inventory in Tirpuathi for several years!!
 
In Karnataka, CM Krishna openly declared in Assembly that Hindu temple incomes were mostly spent for building Churches and Mosques as well as run Madrassa-s in his State!!
 
Religion is not the monopoly of aetheistic Communists in WB or Kerala or other States!! While the State Religious board officials are paid Govt. pay scales from temple incomes, the priests and other cadres doing daily chores of Pooja..etc. from 3AM to 11 PM are not given even 50% of the amount paid to Board employees.
 
In case of the make shift temple at Ayodhya too, the income in Hundi-s are taken away by the Admninistraion- DC and expenses to conduct pooja-s are not even met from these collections, leave alone the salary of the employees.
 
Why should the Govt. control the Hindu Temples only? What about the millions of $ received by Missionaries every year besides the Saudi/ Iran funding millions for Moques and Dargahs?
 
Don't Hindu-s have the fundamental rights to observe their faith in temples and manage its affairs?
 
Sarabjiy Roy might be an aetheist or Communist. But he has no business to denigrate Hindu Trusts running temples. At best Govt. could appoint an executive officer as a trustee to monitor its working and Govt. has no business to take the temple incomes and spend it for Haj travel subsidies or building Churches
 
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 6:19 PM

Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice
 
Sir

I can say that because I know for a fact that it is not necessary to have temples to have a great religion. I can say this because my own religion had only 1 major "temple" which is abandoned and in ruins, and every time the State Govt approaches us to take it over for them to "renew" as a National monument or give us grants we shoo them away.

Only the mismanaged temples, whose ill-gotten gains acquired over decades of corruption, which trustees had fought and squabbled over, were taken over by the State. It is the foolishness, greed, ego and inter-fighting of Hindus which allowed this to come about - in other words, it is only POLITICS (not religion). See what is happening in the Sikh Gurudwaras which shall also come to the same pass if their squabbling and bickering continues.

Take another example - Lord Rama Janambhoomi Temple at Ayodhya. Who is fooling who ? Where is all the money collected from all over India and abroad over so many decades going ? Who benefits by the Temple not being built, not only in notes but also in votes ?

Sarbajit

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Roy,
How can you say these are political and not religious issues. Hindu temples and matts are under the control of trusts and the trustees are appointed by the Govt. Donations(offerings) by common people to the deities are not used  for propogation of religion but all kinds of non-religious activities. Can you say the same thing for Wakaf and church donations and charities.
Every other day we see media reports describing wealth of Hindu temples. I have not seen report about donations -domestic and foreign-received by other religious institutions.
2. The Govt. is sympthetic to hear the exceasses of upper cast in the distant past on backward classes.
     But can you say anything about excesses of the British and Muslim rulers. You are immediately branded as communal.
regds JK
 
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 20:25:58 +0530
From: sroy.mb@gmail.com

To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice

Dear ShriRam

I hope we can agree that  common Hindus, common Muslims, common Indians etc are ORDINARILY least concerned about religion beyond their simple worship and daily devotions.

However, there are the vested interests in all religions, not necessarily only Brahmins and Sayyids etc. which want to communalise issues for their own gain and agitate, inflame and arouse the ordinary people. It is happening in all states of India, whether ruled by Congress or BJP or Communists (actually now there is hardly any Communist ruled State left since hard-core Leftists have essentially turned to extremism) or anyone else.

The need of the hour is a UNIFYING force. which transcends Religion, Caste and Regionalism. That will only come I fear when we must all face a common enemy so powerful which will cause us to set all our petty differences aside before it is too late.

Let me also say some very unpalatable things for Hindus so that we can all move forward from our standard defensive positions to actually solve the problems together.

A) Muslims ARE treated as 2nd class citizens in India, (and as 3rd class citizens in Gujarat).

B) Caste Hindus are terrified by upsurge of empowered dalits and other depressed caste and tribal demographics which is scaring the shit out of them.

C) Hindus are no longer monolithic and are fragmented between Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains  and so many other splinter groups who no longer identify themselves primarily as Hindus.

D) "Hindus" are desperately trying to keep their flock together by similar scare tactics and false propaganda to project that Hindus are discriminated against. These are all POLITICAL and not religious issues.

E) All parties are openly collaborating with Naxals and Maoists for electoral reasons, but this totally demoralizes the enforcement agencies at the local level. Or Political parties should openly state that Naxals will be accommodated in mainstream politics without their laying down arms (Nepal example is in front of everybody)

F) 2014 (or sooner) national elections will be one of the most bitter and divisive elections fought yet. However, Bharat Bhagya Bhidata has always come to India's aid in some strange and mysterious manner and we all fervently must pray that the Great Being who rules our destiny will not fail his humble servants who sit at his feet to serve him.

Sarbajit
 
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, <ssr.singh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sir,

Views expressed here are balanced. However, in one of your mails your comments vis-a-vis Mr Ksheersagar's letter in response to Ms Zaidi's letter, you have tried to brush aside the answer to the question related to demand of Shariayat as someone's personal/Internal matter.


I have no issue with your viewpoint but many a times you do seem to support Ms Zaidi, Seema Mustafa and many of their ilk  beyond required limits and hence I wrote to you.

I respect anyone's view if it is rational and based on healthy logic.

Regards.

SR
Regards,

SR

-----Original Message-----
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sender: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
 
 

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
 
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/


Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
 

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



--
Archita Bhatta
Science and environment journalist
09560109175

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



--
LTCOL(retd) T T KISHORE
FLAT NO-134, SECTOR-A,
AWHO COLONY, SIKH ROAD,
GAUTAM ENCLAVE,
SECUNDERABAD-09
Res-040-27840415
Cell-9912594602
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Posted by at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice

I don't agree with Mr Roy particularly his views on Hindu & Hindutva......................I am sure this is my third post and non of them have found space in this forum.

Regards,
CA Ramakant Pareek



On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear IAC subscribers

Many of you would have noticed a sudden increase in "Hindutva" and VHP type of messages in our group recently and may have drawn some wrong conclusions.

We wish to now inform you that these were part of a large international Chinese hacking attempt to penetrate computers of IAC members, to plant trojans by spoofing emails as sent from our list,  and also to hack our email servers. There is a large coordinated attempt by professional Chinese military hackers know as PLA 61398 and other Chinese military cyber hacking units posing as militant Hindus and joining various Internet forums and posting comments on blogs, Facebook, Indiatimes, NDTV  etc.

In the past 2 weeks IAC has identified over 300 fake persons and identities masquerading as Hindu / nationalist patriots, and we are eliminating most (but not all) from this mailing list. We hope that after this IAC has eliminated most of the anti-national persons from the movement and we can now get on with our work of cleansing India which has been hindered by one corrupt force or another.

with best wishes to everyone

Sarbajit
National Convenor.

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



--
CA RAMAKANT PAREEK
Mumbai - 400 057

Posted by at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Religion is more than life long debatable question/issue. what we r discussing is the customs n words which keep changing with time, accordingly the Hindu religion being one of the oldest has changed a number of names like puranik, sanatan, Vedic n Aryan etc, When one talks of all these words u find these related to certain cult or way of worship out of which springs up so many small organisations n temples for doing business n crores of money n jewels r donated to these organisations w/o any body accounting for it, in fact this is the best business or the only business with only profit n no investment. Where there is money ther is politics one can't avoid. In fact once we go back to Alagzander the greate the people living east of Sindhu river (pronounced by alagzender's solders as hindu)
were called Hindus meant only a nationality later some time in past came to be called as religion. Truly speaking when it come to practice there is hardly any difference in religion n politics these get mixed up in day to day working. What initially the word meant was a relation of the soul with the almighty whom we remember in extreme emergency when no help is expected from any other corner. In actual spiritual science/metaphysical science it can also be called a relation of mind with the matter. So it is futile to discuss such a issue on site like this which basically deals with the govt corruption though this also involves corruption but a social corruption which is difficult for govt to control. If we allow the govt to control the social corruption than every movement of our life will be controlled by the govt. Now the next question is who should regulate the temple/gurudawara/church/masjid's funds/donations. It should be society or the govt. In practice of religion alone it teaches us certain better way of living like truth, peace, sacrifice for others, no greediness, honesty n simplicity etc which r generally missing from our religious practice today. 
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Sent: Sunday, 24 March 2013 7:45 AMal 
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

----- Forwarded Message -----

Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (sroy.mb@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info
Dear Mr Sabhlok

Your line of arguments is too simplistic and will get you trapped when you come up against professional theologians or religious agitators.

1) It is inadvisable to use geological/territorial boundaries to define a religion. This is an extension of the Greek or Muslim view that all non-Greeks or non-Muslims in India are 'kaafirs' or Hindus. This distorted line of argument has been put into our history books by Left leaning intellectuals like Romila Thapar and you seem to have swallowed it, just as Nehru did when he rammed through the Hindu Code of 1955/56.

2) It is inadvisable to use the term "followers" to define the religion.

As a starting point you kindly read Koenraad Elst's work on this

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/wiah/
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/wiah/ch3.htm

It is wrong on very many points / places, but still a good enough starting point and as an introduction to the subject,

Today, actual Hindus don't constitute more than about 37% of India's population. So "we" should start defining ourselves more as Indians and less as Hindus if India is to survive into the next century..

Sarbajit


On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Prem Sabhlok <psabhlok@hotmail.com> wrote:
The followers of any religion/sect/cult/Samaj which originated in India are Hindus. Thus when we say India has about 80% Hindus, these include followers of Sanatan Dharma, Sikhs, Buddists, Jains, Kabir panthi, Balmiks, Ganpatias,tribals who are not converted to Islam, Christianity etc, Arya Samajists, Brahmakumaris, Parnamis like Mahatma Gandhi  and others.
 
The followers of any relgion/sect/cult which originated from outside India are non Hindus like Islam, Christianity, Jews, Parsi, Sufis   
 
etc.  Thus it is very difficult to define Hindu and "way of life" is the easiest definition. Follow "any way of life" you are Hindu.  
 
Regards
Prem Sabhhlok
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:47:14 -0500
From: ltcolttkishore@gmail.com
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
CC: ramyasistla@gmail.com; tavkmohan@gmail.com; apvn.sarma@gmail.com

Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"


Dear All,
Greetings.
Being alert to divisive forces of all types is by itself a hopeful and positive way.
One has to be careful not to throw the baby also out with the bath water.
Hinduism and being A Hindu is a way of life, as believed by most conscientious . Even a lazy chap (like me for eg.)  can be a Hindu doing NOTHING .There is no regimentation or institutionalisation for aHindu. He can pray without feeling superior or sinful  at a temple or mazar or church or stupa.Very accommodating ISM,is Hinduism.
 This "Spectrum" of  nonchalance to Seriousness is what makes it a perfect Medium( Heat Sink or the entity to absorb any energy) to assimilate all religious concepts AND that is what is not to the liking of MOST  fundu type Xians and Moslems.(The permissiveness of Hinduism is seen when a non Hindu can enter Portals of Balaji   by JUST signing a register he believes in Balaji. Sarvam Jagannatham)
So ,if you like to be Hindu you can be Hindu.That simple and no demands  made and is unconditional. Any body can ,"Garv se kaho  ham Hindu hai".
Vedic religion or Aryanism(  ?) is too nebulous and Lazy chaps like me are happy (Or fearful?) to pray to all gods of all  religions they come across.
In the meantime I remain a seeker of clarity and then truth in that order.
Veteran (Ltcol) TTKishore
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Archita Bhatta <architabhatta@gmail.com> wrote:
It is an old question and an old answer by now, but there is need o reiterate this... THERE IS NOTHING AND NO ONE CALLED A HINDU. THE WORD DOES NOT EXIST IN THE VEDAS, where the usual formal honorofic addressal to another person is Arya.

This has led many to believe that there is something called an Aryan race... a misnomer by any account...

Let me reiterate that the word called Hindu arrived on the eve of and gained currency after Alexander's conquest of what we now know as India, which then included the present-day Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The military history of Alexander's conquests show that they had planned to cross the River Indus, but due to propensities peculiar to the Greek language, they could pronounce the name of the river as Hindus. From there arrived the historically incorrect and unacceptable term Hindu, which has now become a divisive mantra for ultra-nationalist and militant organisations like the RSS and its political handmaid, he BJP.

If any intellectual worth his or her salt wants to make this as a brand name and a clarion call to accelerate their self-interests, history will take care of their coffins, InshaAllah.

For those who believe in the spiritual practices peculiar to this land the real term is Sanatan Dharm... a religion that has been co-existent with Creation ... but then, this is what all religious leaders would like their flock to believe in, because this is their business model, nothing less. 

Thanks

Archita


On 23 March 2013 01:12, J Raman <events@southasianoutlook.com> wrote:
Dear Mr Sarabjit Roy:
 
Your email makes interesting reading indeed.
 
Of course, it is absolutely a personal issue as to what religion one practices or does not.
 
Do you have a link to or transcript of the Legal Judgement of 1899?
 
If you have it, it will add more emphasis to your points in the email.
 
Thanks.
 
J Raman
 
 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice
 
Dear Mr. S.Kumar

I shall certainly address each and every one of your points with great pleasure if you can prove the following statement:-

"Sarabjiy Roy might be an aetheist or Communist."

Another gentleman Mr Bhagwat Goel has just called me a FUNDAMENTALIST COMMUNIST ??? on another mailing list <ha ha>

So I will save you the trouble and unprove  it myself.

FYI, It is compulsory for a Communist to be an atheist, but not every atheist is a Communist. Similarly there are many atheists who are Hindus and many Hindus who are atheists. BTW, an atheist is simply a person who does not believe in existence of God.

Unluckily for both of you I am not an atheist.

I am a Theist. Kindly note the spacing between the "a" and "Theist" This means that I believe in God. In fact I am a firm and devout believer in God, so it means that I an not an atheist and therefore am also not a Communist. So the only thing which is left to prove is if I am a "Hindu" or not.

Luckily again, I am armed with a Legal Judgment of the Chief Court of the (undivided) Punjab of 1899 which is the most ancient  modern judgment of India (and further upheld in final appeal in the Privy Council in 1903) on Hinduism  which says as follows:-

a) That the term "Hindu" cannot be defined precisely, because Hinduism is a religion of wide elasticity and catholicism to the extent that one can eat beef, kill cows, have 10 wives simultaneously, drink, smoke, not go to temple, be married to a Christian foreigner  etc and still  be a Hindu. (please note this remarkably liberal judgment was given in 1899)

b) That Sikhs are Hindus and nothing but Hindus no matter how much they deny it.

c) That my religionists "may" or "may not be" Hindus at their discretion. What this judgment means is that if Sarbajit Roy (or my co-religionists)  states formally he is a Hindu then everyone else is NOT a Hindu for him.  In fact the entire Unform Civil Code which BJP is demanding for past 40 years is only  for Sarbajit Roy and his co-religionists and not because of any Shah Bano or Kashmiri Pandits.  If we (who reject temples and priests and babas and swamis ..) are Hindus then all their temple trusts revert to the State irrevocably and finally and cause massive problems in  Sanatan Dharam.

And Sir, because Dr. Kumar 2786 mentions you are a walking encyclopedia (like me) let me also clarify that even though this is a 1900's judgement it is used even today as the lead judgment to settle in SC who is a Hindu and who is not a Hindu in law. For example the Ramakrishna Mission judgement was based almost fully on this judgment.

Now it is my turn to ask you (because for all I know you may be Chinese) to answer only 2 small questions.

A) Are YOU a Hindu ?
B) If so, what is the name of your God ?

I have no difficulty in answering these 2 questions in 1 word each.

Sarbajit
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:52 PM, S kumar <kumar_8134@yahoo.com> wrote:
Why should you interfere in the administration and conduct of Hindu Temples only in the Country? Sarabjit Roy has a totally biassed negative opinion about Hindu-s when he says he sees only one temple in his region and religion that too abandoned and in ruins. Do you consider the thousands of temples all over the Country mismanaged and in ruins?
 
What don't you look all over the Country? Kerala State has Sabarimala Temple having over 200Cr. income per annum, followed by Guruvayur and the State controlled Religious body controls an annual income of over Rs.1500 Cr. which is administered by the Govt. The same happens in Tamilnadu and Andhra esp. Tirupathi Temple the income of which is the highest in India and has been looted by the former CM Samuel Reddy and used for Christian and Muslim purposes. Building and landed properties belonging to the temple were sold off by the Christisn CM, who used to carry sackfuls of currency whenever he visited Sonia Gandhi at Delhi, discontinuation of which cost his son the coveted position and harassment by ED, CBI and CBDT.
 
Over Rs.50,000Cr. worth of Gold ornaments, crows..etc. donated by King Krishnadevaraya, has been found missing and nobody has taken the inventory in Tirpuathi for several years!!
 
In Karnataka, CM Krishna openly declared in Assembly that Hindu temple incomes were mostly spent for building Churches and Mosques as well as run Madrassa-s in his State!!
 
Religion is not the monopoly of aetheistic Communists in WB or Kerala or other States!! While the State Religious board officials are paid Govt. pay scales from temple incomes, the priests and other cadres doing daily chores of Pooja..etc. from 3AM to 11 PM are not given even 50% of the amount paid to Board employees.
 
In case of the make shift temple at Ayodhya too, the income in Hundi-s are taken away by the Admninistraion- DC and expenses to conduct pooja-s are not even met from these collections, leave alone the salary of the employees.
 
Why should the Govt. control the Hindu Temples only? What about the millions of $ received by Missionaries every year besides the Saudi/ Iran funding millions for Moques and Dargahs?
 
Don't Hindu-s have the fundamental rights to observe their faith in temples and manage its affairs?
 
Sarabjiy Roy might be an aetheist or Communist. But he has no business to denigrate Hindu Trusts running temples. At best Govt. could appoint an executive officer as a trustee to monitor its working and Govt. has no business to take the temple incomes and spend it for Haj travel subsidies or building Churches
 
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 6:19 PM

Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice
 
Sir

I can say that because I know for a fact that it is not necessary to have temples to have a great religion. I can say this because my own religion had only 1 major "temple" which is abandoned and in ruins, and every time the State Govt approaches us to take it over for them to "renew" as a National monument or give us grants we shoo them away.

Only the mismanaged temples, whose ill-gotten gains acquired over decades of corruption, which trustees had fought and squabbled over, were taken over by the State. It is the foolishness, greed, ego and inter-fighting of Hindus which allowed this to come about - in other words, it is only POLITICS (not religion). See what is happening in the Sikh Gurudwaras which shall also come to the same pass if their squabbling and bickering continues.

Take another example - Lord Rama Janambhoomi Temple at Ayodhya. Who is fooling who ? Where is all the money collected from all over India and abroad over so many decades going ? Who benefits by the Temple not being built, not only in notes but also in votes ?

Sarbajit

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Roy,
How can you say these are political and not religious issues. Hindu temples and matts are under the control of trusts and the trustees are appointed by the Govt. Donations(offerings) by common people to the deities are not used  for propogation of religion but all kinds of non-religious activities. Can you say the same thing for Wakaf and church donations and charities.
Every other day we see media reports describing wealth of Hindu temples. I have not seen report about donations -domestic and foreign-received by other religious institutions.
2. The Govt. is sympthetic to hear the exceasses of upper cast in the distant past on backward classes.
     But can you say anything about excesses of the British and Muslim rulers. You are immediately branded as communal.
regds JK
 
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 20:25:58 +0530
From: sroy.mb@gmail.com

To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] URGENT: Important group notice

Dear ShriRam

I hope we can agree that  common Hindus, common Muslims, common Indians etc are ORDINARILY least concerned about religion beyond their simple worship and daily devotions.

However, there are the vested interests in all religions, not necessarily only Brahmins and Sayyids etc. which want to communalise issues for their own gain and agitate, inflame and arouse the ordinary people. It is happening in all states of India, whether ruled by Congress or BJP or Communists (actually now there is hardly any Communist ruled State left since hard-core Leftists have essentially turned to extremism) or anyone else.

The need of the hour is a UNIFYING force. which transcends Religion, Caste and Regionalism. That will only come I fear when we must all face a common enemy so powerful which will cause us to set all our petty differences aside before it is too late.

Let me also say some very unpalatable things for Hindus so that we can all move forward from our standard defensive positions to actually solve the problems together.

A) Muslims ARE treated as 2nd class citizens in India, (and as 3rd class citizens in Gujarat).

B) Caste Hindus are terrified by upsurge of empowered dalits and other depressed caste and tribal demographics which is scaring the shit out of them.

C) Hindus are no longer monolithic and are fragmented between Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains  and so many other splinter groups who no longer identify themselves primarily as Hindus.

D) "Hindus" are desperately trying to keep their flock together by similar scare tactics and false propaganda to project that Hindus are discriminated against. These are all POLITICAL and not religious issues.

E) All parties are openly collaborating with Naxals and Maoists for electoral reasons, but this totally demoralizes the enforcement agencies at the local level. Or Political parties should openly state that Naxals will be accommodated in mainstream politics without their laying down arms (Nepal example is in front of everybody)

F) 2014 (or sooner) national elections will be one of the most bitter and divisive elections fought yet. However, Bharat Bhagya Bhidata has always come to India's aid in some strange and mysterious manner and we all fervently must pray that the Great Being who rules our destiny will not fail his humble servants who sit at his feet to serve him.

Sarbajit
 
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:23 PM, <ssr.singh@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sir,

Views expressed here are balanced. However, in one of your mails your comments vis-a-vis Mr Ksheersagar's letter in response to Ms Zaidi's letter, you have tried to brush aside the answer to the question related to demand of Shariayat as someone's personal/Internal matter.


I have no issue with your viewpoint but many a times you do seem to support Ms Zaidi, Seema Mustafa and many of their ilk  beyond required limits and hence I wrote to you.

I respect anyone's view if it is rational and based on healthy logic.

Regards.

SR
Regards,

SR

-----Original Message-----
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sender: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
 
 

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/
 
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/


Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
 

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



--
Archita Bhatta
Science and environment journalist
09560109175

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



--
LTCOL(retd) T T KISHORE
FLAT NO-134, SECTOR-A,
AWHO COLONY, SIKH ROAD,
GAUTAM ENCLAVE,
SECUNDERABAD-09
Res-040-27840415
Cell-9912594602
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net" Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists" Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in



Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Posted by at No comments:

Re: [IAC#RG] Definition of "Hindu"

Judicial opinions on Hindu religion and Hindutva
Irfan Engineer
Definition of Hinduism has confounded the Indian judiciary. Hindu nationalists and Hindureligious institutions benefit from this confusion. The pendulum of judicial opinions swing from defining Hinduism as a religion, albeit one that embraces a multiplicity of gods, texts and religious rites in Commr. Of Wealth Tax, Madras Vs. Late R. Sridharan, to "Hindutva is the way of life", as in Manohar Joshi's judgment, and "Hinduism is neither a religion, nor Hindusconstitute a religious community", as in the recent judgment by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal in Nagpur. The former interpretation suits religious establishments and temples while the latter suits Hindu nationalists as they conveniently seek to impose Hindu religion as national culture.
The IT Appellate Tribunal, persuaded by the Appellant Shiv Mandir Devasthan Panch, described Shiva, Hanuman and Goddess Durga as super powers of the Universe, not representing any religion. The Appellant wanted to claim exemption under section 80G (5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that expenses for maintenance of the temple and worship of Shiva was not religious activity and open to members of all the communities and therefore charitable in nature.
Jurisprudence on Hindu idols:
Contrary to the view that Shiva was a super power and not god, earlier Judicial opinions have held idols as Gods and gave human persona and attributes. In Deoki Nandan v. Murlidhar, Supreme Court held that under the Hindu law, an idol is a juristic person capable of holding property and the properties endowed for the institution vest in it. In the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi temple case, the Allahabad High Court held idols to be a minor in perpetuity with property vested in it, hence law of limitation does not apply. Deities can even seek partition of the undivided property under Hindu law by filing a suit in Court. Gift to the Deity reflects fiduciary capacity or position in shebaits (Sri Sri Sridhar Jew v. Manindra K. Mitter).
Swaminarayan Sampraday argued before Supreme Court (Shahstri Yagnapurushdasji v. Muldas Bhunadardas Vaishya) that they were distinct and separate from Hindus, in order to claim that the Bombay Hindu Places of Public Worship Act, allowing dalits entry into the temples, did not apply to it. The Supreme Court although accepting the diversity in religious practices in Hinduism and that Hinduism was way of life, held that "beneath the diversity in all these aspects lie certain basic concepts – acceptance of Vedas as the highest authority and philosophical matters, the great 'Rita' of the universe and belief in rebirth and pre-existence".
Way of life:
Hindu Nationalists have claimed Hinduism to be a religion or culture and way of life according to convenience and context. When surya namaskar, yoga and teaching Gita in schools was made compulsory for all school students in Madhya Pradesh, the BJP led State Government claimed that Gita was not a religious text as Article 28 of the Constitution of India prohibits teaching of religious texts in Schools receiving grant-in-aid from state. However, when state prosecutors initiated action against Russian edition of Bhagvad Gita in Tomsk in June 2011 to ban it on charges of religious extremism, BJP delegation sent a copy of Gita to the President of Russia along with a letter claiming that Gita promotes spiritualism. Minister of External Affairs S M Krishna in his statement to the Parliament on the subject described Gita as a "religious text". MP Government even sponsors the senior citizens to perform pilgrimages to various religious places – only the pilgrimage centres are centres for Hindu pilgrimage. MP Govt. has belatedly included Ajmer in the itinerary after protests by secularists.
In the Manohar Joshi case's judgment, the Supreme Court conflated Hinduism with Hindutva and opined that Hindutva was also way of life, contrary to the fact that Hindutva was political ideology constituting and defining Hindu community as a race by Savarkar and Golwalkar. Communal boundaries were defined to exclude Muslims and Christian from the nation and race and constitute them as enemies of Hindu Rashtra. Savarkar distinguished betweenHinduism and Hindutva. While conflating Hinduism with Hindutva, the Court gave no reasons whatsoever, let alone cogent reasons. Savarkar's Hindutva was to position Hindu race rather than Hindu religion as superior. According to Savarkar, 'Hindus are not merely the citizens of the Indian state because they are united not only by the bonds of love they bear to a common motherland but also by the bonds of blood of the mighty race incorporated with and descended from the Vedic forefathers'. But Savarkar did not stop at this concept of a common fatherland and a common racial bond. Rather, for him, a Hindu was also one who inherits Indian civilization 'as represented in common history, common heroes, a common literature, a common art, a common law and common jurisprudence, common fairs and festivals, rites and rituals, ceremonies and sacraments'. Hindus are thus defined in terms of their common cultural heritage. A Hindu, according to Savarkar is a 'person who regards the land of Bharatvarsha from Indus to the Seas as his fatherland (pitrubhumi) as well as his holyland (puniybhumi) – that is the cradle of his religion. It is through this elision of fatherland and holyland that Savarkar constructs the political category of Hindu in opposition to non-Hindus, particularly to Muslims and Christians. Despite the fact that Muslims and Christians 'have inherited along with Hindusa common fatherland and a greater part of the wealth of common culture – language, law, custom, folklore and history, (they) are not and cannot be recognized as Hindus.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order in a way is a double edged sword and cuts at the root of Hindutva ideology. Hindutva claims Hindus to be not only a community, but also a political community, taking advantage of the diversity of belief of Hindus. Hindutva aims to emulate the religions that it is opposed to in many respects. Hindutva aims to homogenizing the beliefs of Hindus and militarize Hindu religious community. The political structure of such a community would be a benevolent authority to which all the members should submit and those who resist would be dealt with by necessary force and subject to punishments. The Tribunal's order runs contrary to such a vision of Hindutva by opining that Hindus did not even constitute a religious community.
Discrimination:
The underpinning of all the varied judicial opinion is that they see varied cultural and traditional practices of Hindu religion and not its doctrines. Whereas when Islam or Christianity comes up for judicial scrutiny, they rely on doctrines and texts, not how it is actually lived by the communities professing the religion. Hence Hinduism appears to be diverse but Islam and Christianity appears to be doctrinaire and dogmatic. There are varied interpretations of Islam and Christianity and lived religion is as diverse as Hinduism. Thus Muslims in Lakshadweep and Christians in Meghalaya are matrilineal societies. There is lot of shared cultural and religious practices between Hinduism, Christianity and Islam. While Shiva, Hanuman and Durga are super powers of universe, even Allah is described in Quran as Rabbul Alamin, God of entire universe and not Rabbul Muslimeen – God of Muslims. One of the many names of Allah in Quran is "Jabbar", as God is powerful, therefore, Allah is also a super power of the Universe. In Christianity, God is the eternal being that created and sustains the universe. Church and Mosques are more inclusive spaces than temples as opined by the Tribunal. While dalits do not have entry in most temples, everyone is welcome in sufi shrines, mosques and churches. However, Islam and Christianity will always be held as religion and Muslims and Christians to be one overarching community.
New meanings of religion in nineteenth century:
In the nineteenth century India, religion assumed new meaning. The term "Hindu" was used more as a geographical term to describe people inhabiting the geographical territory on the south-eastern side of River Sindhu which was mispronounced as Hindus. Hindus were people following diverse traditions and religious practices which had absorbed from various influences in different historical phases. However, this diversity was also punctuated with exclusion and caste based hierarchy. Diversity was perforce to maintain graded inequalities, forced traditional occupations and exclusion of vast sections from privileges. Rules of purity and pollution were invented to justify the exclusion. Excluded communities were left to their own religious traditions and rituals so long as they respected the boundaries of exclusion and followed their traditional occupations. While the privileged upper-castes guarded the purity of their traditions to justify their privileges, the excluded lower-castes were liberal in absorbing from various influences and traditions, including Islam and Christianity, as they had little stake in the hierarchical caste structure. On one hand this gave rise to religious diversity and on the other hand syncretic traditions emerged wherein community practices included traditions of more than one religion. It was difficult to clearly demarcate religious boundaries of the followers.
Colonial rulers needed to, and believed in enumerating their subjects and naming their religions. It is the process of enumeration that necessitated rigid religious boundaries to be constructed. Religious identities were arbitrated by the colonial state. As numbers could mean power, the native upper caste elite triggered Shuddhi movement to Sanskritize and Tablighi movement to Islamize the fuzzy communities, and deepen and strengthen religious boundaries.
It is this reality and history that judicial opinions have ignored which has resulted in discrimination of and othering of minorities in spite of many landmark judgments protecting their rights. The judicial opinions are taken advantage of by the Hindutva forces as their stand gets legitimized. Hope this trend is arrested for survival of democracy in India.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)