Autobiography of a Forgotten Indian

Truth:

``Now Bhindranwale may not have agreed with this formulation but in our minds we should be clear: Golden Temple was not a choice between God and Country. God and Country should never be in conflict.``

Its interesting that you mention that. Just yesterday, I had a talk with a Sikh friend of mine. He is one of the most patriotic Indians, I know of. 5 generations, inclduing his father, have served in the Indian Army. Yet, when I brought up this very topic, it was difficult for him to agree with your stance. For him, this was a choice between god and country.

In real life, people sometimes have to make choices. Wishing it away, does not change reality.

If the situation was reversed, and I had to fire at a ancient temple, in order to get to the terrorists, I would not hesitate. Not becuase I do not believe in my religon, but becuase, I feel that my religon is not based on one temple or structure. I also believe that God is all knowing, and its your intentions that are important.

But again, I respect your opinion.

AD

In reply to

adsmfg:

You wrote:

``I can speak for North India, speacially the metropolitan areas there are hardly any Islamic educational institution that caters to the Muslims. The ones that are present are of below par standard. The muslims that are educated (a minority) think that sending their kids to the hindu dominated school will keep their noses high.``

Education in today`s world should be based upon Science. It should be in English, and a second language, that is local to the state. That is it !

I don`t know what world you are stuck in ? What do you mean by a good Hindu school and a bad Muslim school ? Schools, in a secular country should simply teach the arts and science, and mathematics. Religon should NOT be a part of the ciriculum.

If you want to send your kids to an Islamic school were they learn more about the Koran than physics, perhaps Afghanistan might be a better choice.

You also mentioned that Indian Muslims are loosing their identity. Have you ever considered that it might be so, becuase of their poor education ? Most of the muslims, that get educated in the madarasas (religous schools that teach Islamic way of life), graduate without having the skills that are required to be successful today.

And if you are not successful, you will never be influencial.

My advise to you is that if you want to preserve the Indian Muslim culture, then try to raise your kids to be the best engineers and doctors etc. Only then will they have the power to preserve their culture.

AS an example consider the Jews in USA compared to the blacks. While the blacks out number the Jews 5 to 1, its the Jews who have the greater influence. Why ? CAuse they run the country ! The biggest banks, the best hospitals, the largest companies are all Jew owned/controlled. In fact that is why USA is ready to stand by the Jews, against the petro rich Arabians.

Trying to preserve your culture by putting your kids in Islamic schools, is not going to work, in today`s Internet world.

AD

truth # 32:

``A true country and a true religion are never in conflict. If they should be, you should take the side of whatever is righteous.``

From your posting it seems that you are not from India. (Correct me if I am wrong.)

Anyway, do you care to elaborate your above statement, in the context of what is happening in Afghanistan ? That country is a the poster child where the ``true country`` and ``true religon`` are perfectly alligned. OR are you just going to dismiss it by saying that they are following a convuluted form of Islam ?

Come on Truth, since we do not have a divine power to come down and tell us which version of which religon is correct, you can only hope that you will find a true country based on a true religon.

Untill then, religon and state/government should not mix. Which in other words means, Secularism.

AD

AD: Golden Temple analogy is false. Without going into whether Bluestar in hindisght was good and bad, the Sikh soldier attacking Golden Temple could legitimatley see himself fighting for his religion AND country because he was invading a haven for terrorists. So India could say to a Sikh soldier: we are NOT asking you to chose between your faith and your country. We are asking you to fight evil in the name of your country AND in the name of your faith. Now Bhindranwale may not have agreed with this formulation but in our minds we should be clear: Golden Temple was not a choice between God and Country. God and Country should never be in conflict.

What about Indian Muslim?

Indian muslim is soon to follow the path of Bosnian muslims, that is being slaughtered by their own neighbours.

Indian muslims (majority) are caught in a downward spiral, and if it`s not corrected soon will bring the same carnage that occurred in Bosnia. As in the case of Bosnia, Indian muslims are fast losing thier muslim identity, and trying to assimilate into Hindu culture. When the monster raises it head, it will not care if you don`t follow your religion or not, when the carnage rages it won`t discriminate. All that assimilating into a Hindu identity will not save them.

Right now in India, I can speak for North India, speacially the metropolitan areas there are hardly any Islamic educational institution that caters to the Muslims. The ones that are present are of below par standard. The muslims that are educated (a minority) think that sending their kids to the hindu dominated school will keep their noses high. It keeps their noses high, but plunges the future muslim into a hindu society, where celebrating the hindu culture comes first rather than Islam. There are are very pious muslims too, but the are a disappearing.

Although there are many Muslims who are rich enough, who if they wanted could start a school or two, but propagating Islam is far from their mind.

There are excellent muslim universities, but what happens to all their graduates? Even these universities are being run by the Hindu`s albeit a token participation of Muslims.

Hindu Culture has been slowly trying to destroy the islamic identity, which has moved to a frantic pace since the right wing Hindu party came into power. Indian movies pet description of a muslim is:

Likes to sing qawwali`s ( borderline bida`h)

Is a grave worshipper ( Biggest sin for a Muslim is to worship anything else other than Allah (SWT), i want to point out the importance shown towards all the dargah`s)

Is uneducated

Has no problem with visiting temples and all

All these are the exact malaise that is affecting the Indian muslim.

If you put these question to a so called muslim from India, his/her answer is, well India is a secular country and they follow Hindu customs becuase they are more or less secular customs. Hello??? secular customs? being secular does not mean abandon your own religion? How come it is ok for ``muslims`` to celebrate Hindu culture, but not ok for them to celebrate ``Islamic culture``, even though they readily celebrate Sikh (4% of population) or Christian(.5-1% of population) culture?

It is because the Hindu wants you to assimilate you totally into Hindusim, or their own (hindu) version of islam.

Right now the picture is bleak for Indian muslim, and is bound to get bleaker. There are absolutely no Indian muslim leader who is honest and is dedicated to restoring the islamic indentity back to the Indian Muslim.

Being a good Indian muslim does not mean that we are disrespectful to Hinduism. We should respect (NOT FOLLOW) their choice, and should respect ours.

As Allah(SWT) said in the Al-Qu`raan``

In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful

Say : O ye that reject Faith!

I worship not that which ye worship,

Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,

Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

To you be your Way, and to me mine.

I pray to Allah (SWT) that show us the right way

Ameen

Re : Studebaker, Truth, Ad, Ur

I think the basic problem is a lack of trust between both the communities which was greatly fueled by the horrors of Partition.

In terms of patriotism, although most of us pay lip service to it, very few are actually willing to put their money where their mouth is and do anything for the country. Everyone complains about how bad the situation is but refuse to do anything about it. No one assumes reponsibility for anything, its always somebody else`s fault or problem. I can`t really speak for rural India as i haven`t had much experience of it, but in terms of our cities, we accept the state they`re in, but get all worked up about the `loyalty` of some communities, or in wasting resources renaming them.

Studebaker :

Thanks for your reply. I could not agree with your more. Although at times, one needs to make a choice between 2 things that are dear to him, as was the case in the Golden Temple.

UR:

`` The deciding factor should be right vs. wrong. I personally would have no problem stopping a Muslim or a Pakistani from doing something wrong against a non-Muslim or non-Pakistani.``

The above is an idealistic view. In the real world, it is not right or wrong that matters. It is the law of the jungle, where might is right, and your own strategic advantage is paramount. The reason why USA, is at the top today, is not by playing a fair policeman, but by playing the role of a smart one. You do things that give you an advantage and then repent for your ethicial volitions.

I, personally detest such a world, but this is reality. Now coming to the point. Right or wrong are very difficult to consider, when you are under attack. Say you are a soldier in the army and you know you will be fighting a war, that in your view is unjust. Would it be right for you to abandon your post ? Would it be fair to your country, and your countrymen, who have faith in you ? Deciding what is right or wrong is very easy when we are not in the midst of things as opposed to being neutral observers.

``In my limited understanding, the Muslim concept is to unite against, ``wrong`` being done, regardless of whether the wrong is being done by a Muslim or non-Muslim. So could you explain your statement in more detail.``

The definition of ``right`` and ``wrong`` has been changing since time began. What do Muslims consider wrong ? What do they consider right ? Are these not subjective ? I, for one feel that it is wrong for courts in Pakistan to equate 2 non muslim witnesses to 1 muslim witness. So should the muslims abolish such a practise, simply because in my view it is ``wrong``.

I think that eating pork is acceptable, however, muslims find that wrong. So should I be punished for doing so ?

You said, that muslims, are supposed to fight against what is ``wrong`` ? I think it is wrong, that a person is stoned to death simply because he committed the act of adultery. I think its wrong that muslims, in most muslim countries are not tolerant of other religons, despite the fact that the Koran tells them to be tolerant.

Some muslims consider it to be right, to issue death threats against people who have a right to express their view. Some muslims find that there was nothing wrong with plundering the houses of Kafirs and raping thier women. (It happened in History, and at that point in time, this practise was common, hence ``RIGHT`` ?)

UR, i guess by now you have understood what I am trying to get at ? ``Right`` and ``wrong`` are not as clear as Black and White. In such a world, making statements that ``Muslims fight against what is wrong`` is naive.

AD

AD: Religion or country is a false choice. They are two pillars that hold up the same thing - the human spirit. Alternatively, they are two wheels of a cart that take you through life. Religion should stand for truth, justice, peace, love, tolerance and hopefully, your country, also stands for truth, justice, peace, love and tolerance. A true country and a true religion are never in conflict. If they should be, you should take the side of whatever is righteous. Asking people to chose between religion and country is like asking people to chose between their mother and father.

In the context of the violence that has seared India because of religion, it is unfortunate that many people see religion only as a source of conflict rather than a holder of values that are eternal. That is the true role of religion.

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

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

ad: #27: You have mentioned an interesting anomoly, i.e. country vs. religion. That would be a tough choice for anyone to make. In my opinion, neither country, nor religion should be the deciding factor. The deciding factor should be right vs. wrong. I personally would have no problem stopping a Muslim or a Pakistani from doing something wrong against a non-Muslim or non-Pakistani. I think as long as one bases one`s decisions on what is right, and not on one`s country of origin or religion, then the decisions become quite easy. Infact basing one`s decisions on, ``country`` alone is just as wrong as basing one`s decisions solely on, ``religion.`` Blind attachment to religion and/or country are the cause of some of the biggest conflicts in the world today.

Finally, you stated, ``The muslim concept, is at odds with this belief. For them, all muslims together constitue a nation and muslims, should untie against non muslims only.`` I am assuming that, ``untie`` is supposed to be, ``unite.`` I do not know of any concept among Muslims of uniting against non-Muslims only. In my limited understanding, the Muslim concept is to unite against, ``wrong`` being done, regardless of whether the wrong is being done by a Muslim or non-Muslim. So could you explain your statement in more detail.

Regards,

UR

TRUTH & Studebaker

You said:

``I for one, never ask anybody to prove their love for India by asking them to love anything else less.``

I have had the pleasure of interacting with both of you in the past. I know that Studebaker has felt many prejudices against him, in India, as a Indian muslim. Some of these have been based on corruption and is faced by all of us.

Anyway, back to the point. Lets say India, and Saudia Arabia were to go at war. Indian ships were going to bomb the holy land. Would you Studebaker, as the captain of the Indian Warship authorise such an attack ? Could you act independent of your relion ?

Truth, its easy to say, that you never ask people to love something less, to prove their loyality for something else. However, everyday people are forced to make such choices. In Kargil, Captain Saifuddin, choose his country to be more important than the so called muslim brotherhood. Hence he is honored in India.

During operation Blue Star, it was under a Sikh, that the army fired at the Golden Temple. Again, he was respected because he held his country to be more important, than his personal beliefs.

I, feel that religon is something that is personal. IT is the relationship between you and God. It is something that should not be used to prevent or encourage people from doing their jobs.

The muslim concept, is at odds with this belief. For them, all muslims together constitue a nation and muslims, should untie against non muslims only.

This concept is what I find disturbing. Now granted that this is just something in the books, and reality is not always the same, but it is the growing regression amongst people today that i find scary. (Hindus included).

I for one, belief, in Univeral Brotherhood, where geographic boundaries are not relevant and we all belong to one huge ecosystem. However, that state of affairs is too far in the future.

In the mean time, we need to make a choice. Do we love our country more than our religon or not ? Because a time may come, when such choices show up their ugly heads, and at that time, making the correct choice is important.

AD

Studebaker: Let me explain my own views. I have no problem with Arabic, Persian names. I believe that Islam is universal, regardless of its roots. I have no problem if Indian Muslims feel an affinity for other Muslim countries, including Pakistan. In fact, I encourage it since I have always hated the two-nation theory. I wish Indian Hindus would feel the same affinity. And I have no problem if you wanted to hear Islamic rock and never wanted to see Sholay or Amar Akbar Anthony. At the same time as you feel affinity for Muslims of the world, feel affinity for your neighbour as well. We too are part of humanity.

I for one, never ask anybody to prove their love for India by asking them to love anything else less.

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

For a very human and sympathetic look at the life and times of Nizamuddin Auliya and Amir Khusro, I would recommend reading Khuswant Singh`s ``Delhi``. There is one chapter which deals with their lives as seen through the eyes of one Maganlal(?) Kayastha who becomes a follower of Nizamuddin Auliya. The rest of the book is great reading too.

For more on the music of Khusro: During the festival of India in the US, a special musical program devoted to Khusro and his contributions to Indian classical music was organized. Recordings of the same are still available. A must hear for anyone who appreciates Hindustani Classical.

Re the origins of the tabla and the Sitar: who cares who invented them? I am convinced that Khusro played a large role in making them popular, even if they had existed before him. They sound just as good either way. The same reasoning applies to who has claim on Khusro`s legacy: It is his who enjoys and appreciates it.



Khusro rain suhaag ki

jaagi pi ke saang

man mero tan aapko

dono bhaiye ek rang.

Gori soye sej pe

mukh par dare kesh

Chal Khusro ghar aapne

rain bhaiye chahun tej.

-narain

Studebaker:

You assumed I spoke to you as a representative of Indian Muslims. I spoke to you as Studebaker, a human being and an Indian. I do not expect Indian Muslims to do anything necessarily as Indian Muslims - as individuals, they must speak out against injustices against themselves, they must challenge the biases and misconceptions of all the people they interact with, including Hindus, including myself and they must keep the faith even in darkness. India is you and me, it is not ``them``. We are India and if India fails or continues to fail it is because Truth did not do enough and Studebaker did not do enough. I am not criticizing Indian Muslims. I am just cautioning against an attitude that expects India to change without realizing that we, you and me, are the agents of that change.

I have noticed in your posts a compassion for Pakistans faults and a disillusionment in India faults. Compassion is good, disillusionment is not. If I could be specific with regard to you, that may be my message to you.