The Conversion Chiaroscuro

farzanaji,
I THINK YOU SHOULD REALLY GO AND TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THE MOSLEMS HAVE DONE IN MATHURA.THE SHAMELESS ZEALOTS HAD BUILT AN UGLY MASJID RIGHT ON KRISHNA JANMABHOOMI!THE VEDANTISTS NEVER HAD A CONCEPT CALLED CONVERSION.BUT THE SEMITIC RELIGIONS BY VIRTUE OF THEIR ORIGIN BENG IN A DEPRIVED DESERT SURROUNDING HAVE ALWAYS WANTED SOMETHING TO HOLD ON TO.AND I FEEL THEREFORE CONVERSION IS THEIR WAY OF ASSERTING THEIR EXISTANCE.AS FAR AS YOUR DIDI GOES SHE HAS TAKEN THE DECISION THAT ANY SELF RESPECTING VEDANTIST WILL TAKE. SHUN THE RELIGION THAT ONLY PRODUCES TERRORISTS AND URDU POETS AND URDU WRITERS AND GRADUATES OF AMU,JAMIA MILIA,JAMIA HAMDARD ETC ETC.WAKE UP GUYS BEFORE THE CHRISTIANS ELIMINATE YOUR MEDINA AND MECCA.OF COURSE THE MOSLEMS IN INDIA WILL SURVIVE BECAUSE NO ONE HAS ANYTHING AGAINST THE VEDANTISTS.

m_souza (#129):
Aap kahein aur hum na sunein...aise tau haalaat nahin...Thanks for replying here to my post on ana`s board...
1. I do feel empathy, but for things more recent. I cannot even identify with the partition, so how can I with Mughal rule? But you have at least tried to understand my intent, if not the content...should I mail this post to Dabur and try and get a commission??!
2. Ok...but sensitive people are sometimes touchy.
3. Hmmm...

Kabhi kabaar waqt nikaala kijiye...samajhna asaan ho jaata hai...dhanyavaad!

veeresh: will try your ruse next time...do you eat paan at all? I like the occasional one, but being a bit well-bred, I stick to magai...and eat it in little bites. The one near Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan at Chowpatty is good...

godot: I think I am happy because I am not desperately seeking happiness, as is normally defined.
``Ghum aur Khushi mein farq na mehsoos ho jahan
Main dil ko us muquaam pe laata chala gaya
Barbaadion ka sog manaana fuzool thha
Barbaadion ka jashn manaata chala gaya...``

lo hum phir se bolney lagey....


#106 by FarzanaVersey on July 2, 2003 11:48am PT
m_souza (#45):

**1.This discussion is not about whether something is believable or not. It is about maintaining some decorum and civility in interactions. You say I too have violated the rules “as a serious interactor”. Please tell me in what manner, using the above-mentioned two dictums. **

You are modest but as I pointed out elsewhere…your style sometimes if not always, tends to become forthright to the extent of sounding sarcastic, esp when discussing hindu/gujrat issues. I have not read too many of your interactions but from your articles I conclude ‘you are sensitive and emotional’.
It is all right to point our any hurt that has been recently caused to your community by another one but at the same time please try to feel empathy towards any torture that the other community has gone through even if in the remote past. That’s it. And then things can be fixed up.
So, while I don’t recollect you having used any uncivil language, but the articles (esp. not so recent ones) themselves are so heavy that I have to digest them with dabur ka haajmola. Good writing anyway as you yourself would know by now.

**2.I have not stopped interacting; I merely choose who I wish to interact with. And at least you cannot complain on this score. (Yes, you did speak up for me when a nasty personal comment was made, and I thank you for it now; I did not do so then because it would amount to extending that dialogue.) Besides, when it comes to my articles, I almost always make an effort to clarify. How many writers do so? **

Yeaaah you did reply more often than not. Anyway..this place is not to be touchy about. It is to interact so as to gain some knowledge about minds.


++ 3.I have admitted in my post here that others have to put up with me as much I do with them. ++

We have to put up with others. That is what we are here for (and keep coming back to put up more..so fond of putting up we seem to be)


------
more next time, when I get time......

Ref Biker Chick #121

[godot: It means that even when I ``kill`` something, it does not die.]

Yeah, godot complains about his ravings not getting published, our own Mullah32 complains about his scholarly research on Indus Valley Civilization being ignored by Chowk editors and, boom, your article moves up so that godot has visible proof of favoritism at Chowk but he keeps his mouth shut and Mullah32 gets ``rewarded`` by getting his article published. But godot no longer complains about being ignored, isn`t THAT strange!

PS to Chowk editors: just ribbing you guys, don`t take it seriously!

Ref godot #123

[...and, Farzana, why do you torture yourself so much...be happy, the hell with everyone else... ]

Persecution complex. Joan of India.

Farzana, why cant you say ``Kya Kiam`` to the paanwallah? (or, for that matter, to the boiled baida/anda wallah?)

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

Thanks, harimau (#91). Although everyone knows that Krishna is worshipped in South India too - for example, notably as Lord Venkateshwara - I didn`t know that Bharat Natyam also celebrates Krishna. But I did hear about many non-Hindus performing it without any Hindu references and associations. So perhaps Farzana might remember that though it began as part of Hindu temple ritual Bharat Natyam is not confined to Hinduism, which was really my point!

My ``nitpicking`` was merely to suggest that it was strange that learning Bharat Natyan inspired Didi`s daughter to think of Krishna as her husband. Perhaps it was Amar chitra katha after all? I know that Indians in the US encourage their children to read these comics in the hope that they pick up something of their religion/culture/whatever. Why did this comment touch Farza to the quick? Did you think I was implying that you were disingenous?

And Farzana, sorry to continue this discussion, but your piece did read as though you thought Hindus were strange creatures. But I`m willing to believe that you didn`t mean that. Don`t you think you could have read over what you`d written a little more carefully to avoid that impression? No, I wasn`t influenced by anything you`d written earlier. And yes, I agree with you that Kamala Das`s so-called conversion hardly seems an authentic one, though she herself might have been quite genuine in her belief. What would you have to say about A. R. Rahman`s conversion, however?

Re: Farzana, #121

``It means that even when I ``kill`` something, it does not die.``

Seems like you need to get a sharper knife...and, Farzana, why do you torture yourself so much...be happy, the hell with everyone else...

farceanna doesn`t like hindus...what else is new?

Huh? How is this article still on when I took so much trouble to come in and say a few last words...

godot: It means that even when I ``kill`` something, it does not die. And ever thought about it -- agar hum iss thread ko khud maartey tau hum bhi tau mar jaatey...ahem, am in a filmi mood, so...excuse.

nb (#120):
You better agree with me about the bizarre bit, for nowhere does it come across as if I am suggesting Hindus are bizarre. About the wedding and idlis, it was a passing statement and observation by one who thought she was into some adventure, as I did. Of course my family has no problems with S. Indian food, which these days is even cooked at home, so please...

I did not question whether the Prophet would come to Kamala Das` aid, but Allah himself. What I was implying was that since she had `converted` her gods too, from a ras leela Krishna to an austere Prophet, there might be a backlash from the Muslims and then I would like to see if Allah would come to her rescue.

I hope I am clear now.

veeresh: Why are you glad this article is back?? Hey, I can`t say ``kya miyan`` to the paanwalla :( And who is the chamelion here??

Farzana 88,
I still can`t agree with you about the article sounding like you thought Hindus were bizarre,but I can see that you may not have meant that.When you said about Kamala Das that the prophet would not come to her aid, it seemed you were saying that was because she had in essence made him another Hindu God.But that`s fine...I appreciate that you took note of what I was saying and thought about it.
Many Hindus can`t live without meat either,and I can see it would have been a letdown not to have meat at a wedding,but just the once?It seems what really happened was that it brought home again to your family how different her life was going to be,so that even if they would have normally enjoyed idlis,they couldn`t that day.Or again,at least that`s what it sounds like.All families worry about their daughters,why should yours be any exception?

Studebaker Tipu and company

Now I will compare things with the scenarios in Australia. Obviously like many others, we Indians (of all religions) are a minority here as we are in UK and America but to a lesser extent there.

So, do we Indians keep asserting ourselves all the time? Do we keep shouting at the top of our voices: “Hey ..you aussies..don’t try to change us..don’t u dare try to tell us that we be like you. Don’t expect us to speak English and our women to wear western clothes”. Now we don’t assert all this.
I know am a minority in Australia because I chose to be one. Nor do we keep reminding ourselves ‘we’re a minority, how pathetic’, ‘we’re a minority…oh, what a pity’.
But many others do all this all the time.

The Lebanese Muslims want to own Australia. Their women and kids and men too refuse to change or come out of their ghettos. They are perpetually fighting with the locals. Most of the Pakistani women also refuse to wear any western dress. One of such woman I talked to, clearly expressed her disgust with Aussie women, all the time declaring herself to be the virtuous stay-at-home mum. Why the hell do they stay in democratic countries with versatile religions and culture, if you can’t change?????

On the contrary, Indian women strike a right balance. They maintain their culture and yet are working in good organizations and dress up like any other Aussie (a bit more conservative maybe). And Indian men also adapt. We believe, now that we are a part of a different country so we are the ones who have to adjust as per the language, culture, customs and day-to-day habits of the majority. And yet we have our own groups and social functions. Nobody stops us because we assimilate as well.

Indians started migrating in Australia much later than the Chinese (who are 4 times in numbers than Indians) and also the Lebanese. Even then Indians (esp. Hindus) try to assimilate in the Aussie lifestyle. We celebrate Christmas and Easter just like everyone. My ten-year-old Hindu nephew sometimes gives Christmas greeting cards to everyone in his class just like so many others in his class do. So when he gave it to one Ali (a Lebanese Muslim), he refused saying that in his religion is different. My nephew said, so is mine..so what! At this Ali said that his mum has strictly instructed not to take part in any activity of other religions.
Not to take part in any activity is not too wrong but it isolates the minorities when the whole city is rejoicing in festivities. And the kids of the minorities develop a negative attitude of, ‘we are different they are different’. This negative attitude can clearly be seen in the Lebanese Muslim youth in Aust..as they are very aggressive and revolutionary, are less educated than even newest of Indians. They just can’t adjust in the society, they are always shouting and making a self-pitying torture-story out of every Aussie move..

India, has been a thousand years old Hindu country for most of its existence whereas Australia is a very new country of the migrants, starting from the Anglo-Saxons to the Italians, Chinese and all others. So, no one language/religion/skin color should have greater right than others but they have. Christianity, English language and culture, English ministers and politicians, white CEOs ..yes.. it is a white English country now. But we don’t mind at all.

But currently secular India denies any such greater rights to Hindus, who have had India as the ‘only land’ of their roots, their ancient history, temples Gods etc. Indian Muslims have other lands like Mecca/ Medina to go to and still adore these places as much as or more than they like India. And their prophet himself was from another land. No Hindu ever went to Arabic lands to destroy the holy Muslim places and stay there forever (nor do they want to). Hindus have India to be their only one country to fall back on, as they don’t have any other Mecca-medina to adore. So much difference in situations of both..And yet, SOME Indian Muslims whine so much instead of realizing and analyzing where and why things always go wrong with them..why they can’t strike the balance.

Now, for Parsees in India. They are a class apart, the sensible people. They are really respected by most Indians. Whatever may be the reason, they have assimilated well in the Indian society. Even though they also have their customs and rituals different from those of Hindus, no one dislikes their activities and views. Because history says, they were embraced by India when their own ones turned them out. And the grateful people like they are, they assimilated so well like sugar in milk, as per the saying. Parsees are depleting in numbers and yet we don’t want them to go, we want them to be around us like lovely fragrant roses

But Muslim invaders came via Hindu-kush as ruthless attackers with a totally different attitude. With this kind of bloody background about them, there is a general negative impression about them that can only go with time, which only they themselves can rectify and improve on. SOME Indian Muslims (as some Hindus too) have to learn to be less aggressive and more accommodating so as to win over hearts around them. And once having done that…. once they have accepted India from their inner hearts, then only life can be easy for all. But if some hearts are half in Arabic lands, and have their conspiring confidantes in Pakistan, the situation will drag on…
They also have to accept that like it or not, the reality is that Hindus ARE a majority as they always have been. India is the ‘only land for Hindus’ although not at all ‘a land for only Hindus. If they can’t accept this fact, they only harm themselves…and if Indian Muslims really want to be a majority, well....there are many ‘pure’ Islamic lands around.
Jai Hind !!

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

#108 by dost-mittar on June 30, 2003 2:02pm PT
m_souza:
When Muslims say they do not worship the Prophet, they only mean that they do not perform sajda to him; their devotion to their Prophet is much more intense than the devotion of the Christians to their Lord Jesus or of the Hindus to their Lord Ram, Krishna and other avtars. One ought to be extremely careful, which I was not, in order not to offend.
-------------

I agree..this utter devotion is nothing short of sajda..

Hindus themselves have jokes about Krishans gopis or about Lord Rama`s lack of total trust in Seeta which made her go to dharti maa
Recently there was a debate (based on someone`s research) about Jesus being gay.

Definitely, the `blind undoubting pooja` that muslims perform towards the formless idol of the Prophet ...outdoes that of any other group.
But that is `their` wish, we shouldn`t bother...maybe..even if they do about ours...

``Kyaa mian`` slips out as easily as ``yaar pandit``, when asking for a paan bidi cigrut from the neighbourhood kiosks.

``Insha-Allah`` slips out as easily as ``Jai Mata Di``, when starting the journey with a Muslim porter for Vaishno Devi as it does with a Hindu driver for Ajmer.

Good to see this article back. Chameleon?