Anil Ambani Pursues Global Media Empire #8 by vengatramanan

We dont have anybody in the league of Balachander today...The good thing about the Tamil industry is, you dont have to be a son of a super star, director or a producer to get a chance and need not be stereotypically handsome to play the protoganist role.

Yes Vengat anna, the tragedy is that even Maniratnam, one of the most talented filmmakers we have relies on excessive commercialization to sell his films. We'll probably have to wait a while for another Balachander :-(

Anil Ambani Pursues Global Media Empire #5 by vengatramanan

It looks Bollywood is far ahead of Tamil vis-a-vis quality as of today. Its far more bold and experimenting than what it was a decade back.

Vengat Anna, Tamil movies may be bad in terms of quality, but technicians from the Tamil industry are in demand both in Bollywood and Tollywood (Telugu film industry). I can speak of the Telugu industry because I have friends associated with it; most of the cameramen, dance masters, fight masters and art directors are from deep South, especially TN.

As someone who watches both Tamil and Hindi films, I must say Hindi films are more glossy with less substance, while Tamil movies starring the lesser known stars fare better than big-budget films starring the superstars.

The \'One God\' Religions of Revelation Vengat Anna and Majumdar, NKG bhais

I believe in the earlier days, the caste system was not as rigid as it became in the later ages. Viswamitra and Valmiki were not Brahmins by birth nor was Parasurama a Kshatriya. Yet they came to be identified as such due to their actions/deeds. It is only in the later ages that it became rigid and inhuman. Thankfully at least in urban India, such distinctions are fast vanishing.

The \'One God\' Religions of Revelation #140 by SRK

GV Iyer did a service to humanity by bringing out that movie on one of India's most illustrious sons. Just loved it.

The \'One God\' Religions of Revelation #80 by Eklavya

Speaking of the caste system, did you (or anyone else) understand how Shankarcharya strengthened/reinforced the caste system (as per Murad Bhai)? I didn't, and would appreciate any help in figuring out the underlying logic behind that assertion.

I always thought that Shankara's argument about the oneness of atma and parmatma radically turned the whole casteist equation upside down.

Kaal bhai, Murad mian's understanding of Sankara's stance on the caste system is all screwed up. Here's an excerpt from an anecdote about his encounter with a Chandala (said to be Lord Shiva) and how this meeting transformed his prejudices. (Those interested in Sankara's brief biography can read it here: http://www.dlshq.org/saints/sankara.htm)

"Sankara was going along the street one day with his pupils to take bath in the Ganges when he met a Chandala who was also passing along the street with his dogs by his side. The disciples of Sankara shouted and asked the Chandala to clear off the road. The Chandala asked Sankara: "O, venerable Guru! You are a preacher of Advaita Vedanta and yet you make a great difference between man and man. How can this be consistent with your teaching of Advaitism? Is Advaita only a theory?". Sankara was very much struck by the intelligent query of the Chandala. He thought within himself, "Lord Siva has assumed this form just to teach me a lesson". He composed then and there five Slokas called the ‘Manisha Panchaka’. Every Sloka ends thus: “He who learnt to look on the phenomena in the light of Advaita is my true Guru, be he a Chandala or be he a Brahmin”."

But then, what better could we have expected from this automobile expert?

The \'One God\' Religions of Revelation #80 by Eklavya

Speaking of the caste system, did you (or anyone else) understand how Shankarcharya strengthened/reinforced the caste system (as per Murad Bhai)? I didn't, and would appreciate any help in figuring out the underlying logic behind that assertion.

I always thought that Shankara's argument about the oneness of atma and parmatma radically turned the whole casteist equation upside down.

Kaal bhai, Murad mian's understanding of Sankara's stance on the caste system is all screwed up. Here's an excerpt from an anecdote about his encounter with a Chandala (said to be Lord Shiva) and how this meeting transformed his prejudices. (Those interested in Sankara's brief biography can read it here: http://www.dlshq.org/saints/sankara.htm)

"Sankara was going along the street one day with his pupils to take bath in the Ganges when he met a Chandala who was also passing along the street with his dogs by his side. The disciples of Sankara shouted and asked the Chandala to clear off the road. The Chandala asked Sankara: "O, venerable Guru! You are a preacher of Advaita Vedanta and yet you make a great difference between man and man. How can this be consistent with your teaching of Advaitism? Is Advaita only a theory?". Sankara was very much struck by the intelligent query of the Chandala. He thought within himself, "Lord Siva has assumed this form just to teach me a lesson". He composed then and there five Slokas called the ‘Manisha Panchaka’. Every Sloka ends thus: “He who learnt to look on the phenomena in the light of Advaita is my true Guru, be he a Chandala or be he a Brahmin”."

But then, what better could we have expected from this automobile expert?

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder #65 by majumdar

MKG had great followers like Patel, Rajaji et al to choose from but he chose the likes of Jwahirullah, Maulana Azad et al. MAJ (pbuh) achieved what he did with a bunch of useless followers.

We do not know what compelled Gandhi to prefer JLN over SP so it is better that we not speculate. But couldn't you find anyone other than that Jauhar dude? That is my question. As for JLN, except for the Chinese fiasco, I feel he did OK if not great.

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder Majumdar bhai why do you have to pick the worst specimens amongst Gandhi's "followers"? Is it because they make Jinnah look better? Why can't you pick folks like Ghaffar Khan, Nirmala Deshpande etc. to compare?

That said, even Gandhi's worst followers fare better than Jinnah's most trusted followers like Liaquat Ali Khan who is rumored to have asked a doctor if the old fool (Jinnah) was still alive when the man was on his death bed.

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder #56 by majumdar

Surely MAJ (pbuh) couldnt have asked his people to abandon their legitimate right (Pakistan) just 'cos of threat of violence.

It is the very threat of violence (oppression actually) that drove him to demand Pakistan, or so he claimed.

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder #53 by rf786

There is a difference here, MAJ was the indisputable leader of the pre-partition muslim masses whereas IK has yet to establish his credentials as a politician leave alone claim to be a leader.

Arif bhai, fear is a very potent binding factor. All Imran has needs to do is scream that his community is in danger and project himself as the savior and things could change very quickly :-)

#50 by majumdar

He acted as a recruitment agent for Brits in WW-I during his stint in South Africa, during which time he famously compared the blacks to as being little different from animals.

Majumdar bhai, as someone pointed out the other day, Gandhi was only as prejudiced as everyone else during those days.

There was a lot of violence during DAD but DAD specifically was not a call to arms. There was a lot of violence by Hindoos too during Partition and should we not ascribe it to MKG, if we are ascribing Muslim violence to MAJ (pbuh). Is there any single statement or speech where MAJ (pbuh) asked Muslims to sluaghter non-Muslims?

Majumdar bhai, not everything needs to be explicit; the context is very important. When things are calm even if you ask people to slaughter their enemies, they probably won't do it. OTOH, when things are charged as they were in the months preceding the DAD, even a simple call to "Direct Action" could mean violence; Jinnah couldn't have been ignorant of that. Besides, his minions were issuing blood-curdling threats to violence; if you want, I can provide the evidence. The man instead of asking them to calm down boasted that "Muslims have forged a pistol and were in a position to use it". Of course you could argue (as Yasser did) that it was metaphorical but during those days, it meant much more than just a metaphor.

As far as appealing to communal feelings is concerned, who started the game, MKG or MAJ. Pkaistan and TNT came much later than MKG's call for Khilafat and Ram Rajya.

This is a lame copout. Can you please quote a single instance where Gandhi was as provocative as Jinnah was?

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder #43 by rf786

Arif bhai, I have nothing either for or against Imran Khan. All I was pointing out to my dear friend Majumdar bhai is that whatever allegations he has against IK can be levelled at Jinnah too. And even there IK comes out smelling of roses :-)

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder #42 by majumdar

He could have acted as a recruitment agent for the Brits during WW-I (like an alleged Mahatma did).

Majumdar bhai, did Gandhi claim to be a revolutionary? Double standards again? Besides AFAIK, Gandhi returned to India in 1919, the year the WWI ended. Looks like you're faithfully echoing Yasser.

Yes, mercifully IK has not condoned the violence the Moplahs did in 1920s.

Do I take it as you have no answer to this because you seem to be off on a tangent?

Btw when did MAJ (pbuh) incite Muslims to attack Hindoos/Sikhs?

Majumdar bhai, if you're still asking me this question after reading Beej bhai's thread on the Direct Action Day violence, I can only presume that you aren't serious.

When did MAJ (pbuh) hobnob with the Khilafatists, Deobandis et al?

Just because Jinnah held the Mullahs in contempt doesn't mean he wasn't communal. The man appealed to communal feelings of Muslims and completely out-Mullahed the Mullahs. No wonder he caused the deaths of lakhs of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs, a feat no Mullah could ever have managed.

Aitzaz’s Monumental Blunder #34 by majumdar

The guy was cheering for Mushy in 1999 and has been hobnobbing with the sarkari maulvis since then.

Majumdar bhai, this is a blatant case of double standards on your part. What you accuse Imran Khan of doing sounds very similar to what Jinnah did. First, being an establishment man (a "constitutionalist", someone who submits token and meaningless petitions pretending to be for the common man while being careful enough not to upset the applecart and helping the establishment maintain the status quo) and then openly hobnobbing with the communal forces (and in Jinnah's case, becoming their numero uno). Yet you fawn over Jinnah while dissing IK. At least IK doesn't incite people to go against people of other religions like that man did.

Restoring the Civil Rights of Ahmadis #73 by MantoLives

Really? Poor Yasser. Being victimized for no fault of his. Why don't you demand a Pakistan on Chowk where no Hindus and Sikhs are allowed?

Restoring the Civil Rights of Ahmadis LOL! Sad to see Yasser reduced to such whimpering.

Restoring the Civil Rights of Ahmadis #67 by _arjun5

IBM bought daksh..so IBM is an Indian company

Yep and Daiichi bought Ranbaxy so Daiichi is an Indian company now...LOL!