They Shoot Kashmiri Pandits, Dont They?

#224 by Studebaker on April 3, 2003 12:01pm PT

“To day just b/c i became muslim suddenly that AAlam Panah SHAHENshahs crime becomes mine to redeem????????????????????”

Then why do Muslims have these Allam-panahs as their heros? In Paksitan the missiles are Ghauri, ghaznavi, Abdali…
If most of the current Indian Muslims were converted by the fierce Shehenshahs then weren’t they as much( if not more) of victims of these Allam-Panahs than the current day Hindus?
But what can they do? They are Muslims now and have to stick to it, just by hating their previous relgigion.


#Ali87

And look at Ali…..if he could ..he would destroy all the temples of India..
Ali is very unhappy in India. He loves his religion from the core of his heart but has full right to insult and put down other religions. I personally feel Ali would feel more comfortable living with like-minded Pakistanis…..more at home with the present day Abdalis/Ghauris….Really such Indian Muslims can seriously think of going to Pakistan permanently, better late than never. One should feel happy in life whether you live in India or Pakistan or elsewhere.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

# 227 by ali87

ali87 might want to look thru a translation of Islamic Bangladesh`s national anthem ``Amar Sonar Bangla`` and compare it with his translation of Bande Mataram`s first stanza (only the first stanza has been recognized as the national song). He`ll be amazed to discover the striking similarity - they are both idyllic odes to the motherland.

It is also interesting that the music composition of both ``Amar Sonar Bangla`` and ``Bande Mataram`` are by the same composer.

#220 by sadna on April 3, 2003 11:52am PT
On bhajans written by muslims, Sure there are muslim muderers, Saddam Hussein is a muslim so are many others who do things not sanctioned by Islam.

What am I to do about those people?

#223 by sadna on April 3, 2003 11:54am PT

Its better to respect Hindus, even if you cannot respect their religion. I respect Islam because I find many Muslims very worthy of respect. I respect Christianity and Judaism for the same reason.

I made a mistake, not justifiable at all.

re:#229 by pmishra2
Mr Einstein,
Why don`t you offer some intelligent solutions to this vexed problem? Let us see what you have.
Sridhar

re:#205 by Studebaker
You are quite right. The motivation was loot. Religion was used as a pretext. Some rulers like Auranzeb genuinely felt they were being good muslims if they did what they did.
Sridhar

#220 sadna

Clever solutions are possible for hindu-muslims issues when intelligence and imagination are used. From Dara Shikoh to Kabir, from Guru Nanak to Abdul Kalam many individuals have demonstrated and exemplified these capabilities.

Those who simply quote some ancient scriptures and take them literally are of course not among such imaginative people. Those who denigrate other traditions in crude and demeaning ways are even worse.

Individuals such as ali87 (and his hindu counterpart, who is typically over-exercised over muslim personal law and muslim educational backwardess) and the Shahbuddin/RSS-type people are folks who are stuck in reactivity. These people have no program for india, no vision for the future. They are capable only of reaction and quarreling, for demanding a piece of the roti but without every helping build a big, huge dastarkhan for all us to share.

#202 by rsridhar on April 2, 2003 7:55pm PT

Again on Vande Mataram. What is about a song that defines nation hood? what if the nation changes it boundaries? What happens to the people and their songs?
I feel Nationhood should be identified by a set of Ideals. Its about people not so much about the physical land. (Though people have an attachment to the physical characterstics of a land). What is different between the land beyond the border in Pakistan? Or on the other side. Is burma substantially differnt from Tripura?

What changes the land is the people and their way of life and their belifs their Ideals.

Thus Hilly Bhutan has a differnt resonance from Siliguri. People change the land they live in according to their way of life. What is different across the border south of california in mexico? True there are some physical Identifiers which are unique in every place.

To rest nationhood on physical charcterstics is shallow.

True the song was symbolic of Indan freedom struggle and have inspired many leaders. It is also possible that they either over looked its context and Imagery because it did not bother them or the agreed with the context of its origins or they were not aware of its origins.

There are many things that were unique about Indian freedom struggle. Im sure there will be no shortage of symbolism which is acceptable to all. Also India is not short of poets musicians philosopers or writers or even old poems, songs that it cannot choose/define new symbols of unity and love.

I have no problem in knowing that hindus sing it in context of the imagery and symbolism and reject its original context inwhich it was written. However they can because they have no objectiosn to the religous symbols in it.
I cannot however sing it. Such a thing which divides or a makes a sizeable section uncomfortable should not be a symbol of unity etc(which by the way national symbols should be).

How can one sing a song and mentally reject its imagery. I thought that the purpose of singing is to take to heart what it says.
Otherwise it another meaningless exercise that we enact in our national life.

Regardless of what Sri Aurobindo says I cant agree with him on this. Incidently Sri Aurobindo had some very serious differences with Gandhiji and his polices(that is what the hindu sites say.)

Farzana:
I was somewhat reluctant in writing my previous post because, in some sense, your style is what makes you, you. After all, how many people can claim the level of interest that your articles generate? On the other hand, the problem with that style is well stated by yourself, ``But, and you will agree with me here, there are times when ‘I’ become the issue. And in those cases, the real subject becomes incidental and the responses are cryptic one-liners about me.`` I presume that you would prefer that while discussing your article, the ``issue`` remains the issue and not your personality. I believe you could do so by retaining your spice and spike while remaining sensitive to the sensitivity of those whose opinions you would like to influence.
Regards

# 214

ali87 wrote:
+++
``...to call him a devout mulsim you have to test him by whether he follows (at least agrees) with the basic principles of Islam.``
+++

Does ali87 know that in this day and age, there is a country where, under the law of the land, it is unlawful for members of a persecuted community to call themseves Muslims or evn to recite the kalima. The five million members of the community in that country are not allowed
into mosques and are prosecuted if they say Islamic prayers.

No, I am not talking of the ``Great Satan`` USA or even of much maligned Israel. I am talking of Pakistan where Muslims of the Ahmadi sect can be
sentenced to death (under Section 295-C of Pakistan Penal Code) if they dare use Islamic expressions like Asslam-o-Alaikum, Bismillah and Insallah.

Sections 295-A and 298-C allow the state to put away an Ahmadi in prison for as long as 10 years if he dares to call himself a Muslim. And it is quite according to the laws of the land for the authorities to demolish the Ahmadis` place of worship if they dare call it a mosque. Five
million Ahmadis in Pakistan must live under the shadow of laws undreamt of even by blacks in South Africa during their darkest hours.

In Pakistan the law of the land very specifically bars non-Muslims from the highest positions in the land. In fact, it is not enough to be a Muslim, you must be so certified by the country`s ruling elite to qualify for the positions.

Nobel Laureate Abdus Salam, for example, was not entitled to be a Presidential candidate. As an Ahmadi, he was a mere Kafir according to Pakistani law.

When USA recommended an alumnus of the World Bank for succeeding Nawaz Sarif after his first stint as the Prime Minister, the ablest among the alumni had to be bypassed for he, too, was an Ahmadi. And earlier,
when Benazir Bhutto, as Pakistan`s Prime Minister, had attempted to post an Ahmadi as Pakistan`s top diplomat at the United Nations, she was roundedly accused of being an infidel by the press and the political
establishment. The diplomat was soon found dead in a Tokyo hotel under mysterious circumstances. Benazir, herself, was dismissed by President Ishaq Khan soon after.

In Pakistan, even the mere rumor that you are an Ahmadi can ruin a person. Some years back, when the office of the Chief Justice for the Supreme Court of Pakistan fell vacant, the nominating process said a lot about the guiding philosophy of ``Islamic`` Pakistan:

When the office fell vacant, the senior most judge took over as the acting Chief Justice and everyone assumed that he would soon be confirmed to the post. But the judge had enemies who promptly spread the rumor that he was a closet Ahmadi. The acting Chief Justice denied
vehemently that he had ever been an Ahmadi or ever will be one. But the damage was done. A junior judge was appointed the Chief Justice and the alleged Ahmadi was forced to resign from the Bench!!

Not even death will bring reprieve. Benazir Bhutto`s interior minister, General Naseerullah Babar, for example, came under nasty attack for merely attending the Namaz-e-Janaza of his Qadiani friend, Mumtaz Ahmed Malik.

Hazrat Mirza Tahir Ahmed (the spiritual head of the Ahmadis) visits India anytime he wants to. But, understandably, he never dares to visit Pakistan.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

ali87 #214

``If you find any suppourt for any misguided or silly practice of muslims many of which you and others have listed out in any of my posts let me know other wise please dont draw inferences where none are needed. ``

ali87, you do that too. Let me know when you find a Hindu who supports the silly customs and practices you have listed in your posts. Otherwise donot draw inferences about Hindus when none are needed.

``
Sadna note im not taking the opportunity to discuss the virtues of the god who was suppossed to have a 1000 wives, and who dalliyed with many gopis including the much married Radha. You accept him as your god i have no problem with that.``


ali78 please note, unlike you I am not taking the opportunity to discuss the virtues of a man who got his son to divorce his wife so that he could marry his daughterinlaw.

And why exactly am I supposed to care about what you think of Krishna? In my father`s native place, there was an ancient and famous Krishna temple, mentioned in contemporary narrations of the time, which was utterly destroyed by one of the Lodis a few hundred years ago, who it is written also took care to lay waste the large orchards around the temple. Now only ruins are left.

That guy`s sentiment in destroying the temple was similar to yours. In nearby Mathura, more Krishna temples were destroyed, in one case at least a mosque was built over the ruins. Inspite of all this destruction and desecration, Krishna is widely worshipped and respected in that region, and this is something you will evidently have no understanding or value for, though these are your fellow-Indians.

I suggest to you that this approach of yours of debasing Hinduism is not going solve the problem of Hindus and Hinduism for Indian Muslims, when even the Ghazis and Lodis with full armies couldnot make this approach work. And I have never heard when Hindus have converted to Islam just because their gods are badmouthed. Its better to respect Hindus, even if you cannot respect their religion. I respect Islam because I find many Muslims very worthy of respect. I respect Christianity and Judaism for the same reason.

Of course if anyone like LeT Pakistanis want a low intensity or high intensity civil war to punish those who still stick to their pagan ways, so be it.

dost-mittar #210

I am not sure what your point is? Could you elaborate? I donot know if Shahabuddin ever did or didnot use hate speech as well, like Hindutva-types do, I hope not.

According to me Shahabuddin is justified in promoting a point of view he holds about the official status of Muslims in India, that of eternal and `purified` separateness. But his view is in direct confrontation with the Constitution which claims to have sovereignty over all Indians affairs (and comes between Shahabuddin and his religious law) and which directs us to make a transition to a common civil code.

AND there is a general point to be made about Shahabuddin-type attitudes of looking after Muslim interests only. Just like for example Narasimha Rao `graduated` from promoting his state AP`s interests to promoting the whole of India`s interests as Prime Minister, I wish more Muslims(esp educated intelligent ones like Shahabuddin) would graduate from being leaders of the Muslim community to being leaders of larger more disparate groups of Indians. For this one must have respect and empathy for the problems of fellow Indians who are not Muslims.

I have the same advice for Hindutva politicians of course.