Midnight's Knights?

rsridhar

``Until the mid-19th century, no Indian had ever heard of the notion that his ancestors could be Aryan invaders from Central Asia who had destroyed the native civilization and enslaved the native population``

...... it is also true that until the mid-19th century, no indian had heard of indoor plumbing or thought about climbing mount everest ..........and if you are trying to tell us that fair and beautiful kashmiris are from the same gene pool as the sideways head wagging golliwogs from kerala with six syllabuls in their names ,you must think we are a bunch of idiots ......... the bjp needs to come up wth something else to convince us that dravidians and aryans are from the same stock ............ jesus christ!

Stuka #54: ``Thank you for taking the time to reply. I appreciate it.``

No problem. It is always a pleasure interacting with you.

``Since you admit you have not read Naipaul, we can agree that you were agreeing with only half of this ``analysis``. ``

Yes, I was only talking about Rushdie. Don`t know much about Naipaul, other than he has a pretty cool name, a nice gottee, a Pakistani wife (I think) and that he doesn`t like Pakistan much. And is apparently has great control over the English language.

I have nothing against people creating controversy, provided it is based on fact. I think I create enough of it here on Chowk. But I try to be factful. Controversy is good. It challenges the mind and challenges the status quo social order. It forces people to think etc. This is what writers are supposed to do.

However, first and foremost, controversy has to have some factual basis. If I want to prove that Ram never existed, I have to present fact. Otherwise, I shouldn`t make such a statement. If you want to state that Muhammad never existed. You need to do the same. But, I don`t think anyone should have the right to just state the above, without fact. Creating controversy, by factlessly ridiculing someone`s feelings is terrible. It is not the work of reformers. It is the work of a self-serving businessmen. It is the worst form of freedom of speech.

Rushdie was only well-known in the literary circles before Satanic Verses. There are many many writers who have that level of recognition. After SV, he became internationally recognizable to the common man on the street. Not only that he became a symbol - for freedom of speech, for religious reform and God knows what else. Why?

If all it takes to become a symbol is to make factless statements about other religions, than anyone can do so. Would I become a reformer of Hinduism if I were to make fun of the Vedas or to distort them completely, and then state that I am only expressing an internal struggle between my Hindu ancestors and Muslim self?

I don`t think Rushdie expected nearly the controversy he caused. Had he known that there would be a death warrant out on him, maybe he would have though twice. I think the reaction to SV was equally terrible and equally self-serving. Just like Rushdie was out to make a buck, so was the maulvi brigade. This is why I dislike the self-serving mullah brigade and the self-serving secularatic brigade. The former hoodwinks the naive uneducated ill-informed about Islam Muslim folks through religion, the later hoodwinks the, educated but equally ill-informed about Islam ``Western`` freedom of speech folks through religion, as well.

Even if a single person had not died and a single word had not been said against Rushdie, I still would have the same opinion about people who exploit their own or others` religion through factless comments.

This is exactly what people like Fallwell try to do by calling Muhammad a terrorist. They want publicity by creating controversy. Even Muhammad`s biggest critics would not consider him a terrorist. What does Fallwell gain by doing so? I have heard many of his interviews. He once called a small children`s cartoon character (Tinky Winky of the Tellytubbies) gay and accused the presenters of the cartoon of promoting homosexuality. His logic behind his allegation was that the cartoon character had a triangle as a part of his character and carried a bag.

If we apply the Rushdie`s forumla on Fallwell, then Fallwell becomes an Islamic reformer also - not to mention a reformer of cartoons for babies and a reformer of homesexuality.

I am glad no one in the Muslim world reacted to Fallwell violently. That would be the stupidest thing to do. Why kill each other due to remarks made by opportunists who use religion to gain popularity? In any case, I am always amazed when Rushdie is interviewed by people who look to him for Islamic reforms etc. Westernized writers and Easternized mullahs who use religion are both part of the same mindset, if you ask me.

People should live and let live when it comes to others` religion. It is too sensitive a subject. Just like I have a lot of views on India, Indian policies etc., similarly I have some views on Hinduism also. While you will see me commenting on India (without being an expert), you will never see me commenting on Hinduism (since I am not an expert) - distorting someone`s religion without full knowledge should be out of bounds. And if someone legitimately wants to reform religion, they should be damn sure they have their facts correct - and do it for the right reasons - not just to let out their own frustrations or to gain popularity.

As one of my favorite poets said:

``Learn no more knowledge, O friend!
This knowledge will be of no avail to you
You need to read only Alif
You read and read and pile your books into a heap
The Quran and other books are lying all around you
By reading and reading you become Mullah (my note: Fazl ur Rahman )and Qazi (my note: Salman Rusdie)
But God is pleased without their knowledge
Your avarice is whetted every day
you always aim at personal gain.`` (translated from Bulleh Shah)

re:#58 by GhalibZaman
``I know it is a dilemma to stay a hindu these trying times``
Not true. Now-a-days, i see many Indians (hindus) wear their hinduism on their sleeves in US. One guy comes to work with a Tilak on his forehead. There is no shame. We are not the targets. I work with white Americans (all my practice partners are whites) and educate them as to what is going on in South Asia. They understand.
Sridhar

re:#44 by Shah
Most people who are politically savvy understand that this Babri Masjid issue is a political one that came about as a reaction to Mandalisation of politics by V.P.Singh. Latter was dividing hindu votes while, thr` Rath yatra and arousing people`s emotions, L.K.Advani was trying to unite hindus into a single voting block. Both attempts have lead to disastrous results. As i have said already, BJP has milked this issue to the last drop and there is nothing in it for that party. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will give a good verdict and both parties will accept the verdict and there the matter should rest.
Sridhar

re: Aryan Invasion Theory
AIT has been discounted by leading Indologists. It does not stand to scientific scrutiny.

http://www.hvk.org/hvk/articles/1096/0082.html

Go to the following url to read about this in great detail:

http://www.atributetohinduism.com/aryan_invasion_theory.htm

Some useful quotes from the above site:
``...the British along with the Christian missionaries also used the Aryan theory to pit the lower castes and South Indians, supposedly the progeny of the victimized non-Aryan natives, against their ``Aryan fellow-countrymen. Contrary to the freedom movement, the anti-Brahmin and Dravidian movements were the fruits of British patronage. ``

Mountstuart Elphinstone (1779-1859) was one of the first dissenters. He was aware of the kinship in language between Sanskrit and European tongues, but found the theory of their ``spread from a central point...a gratuitous assumption.`` In his History of India, 1841, he observed, ``Neither in the Vedas, nor in any book...is there any allusion to a prior residence ....out of India...There is no reason whatever for thinking that the Hindus ever inhabited any country but their present one.``

British scholar F. E. Pargiter in his Ancient Indian Historical Tradition yet his inquiry into historical data from the Puranas led him, in 1972, to conclusions opposite to the accepted theories. With a rare commonsense, he first noted that ``there is a strong presumption in favor of (Indian) tradition; if anyone contests tradition, the burden lies on him to show that it is wrong.``
He also observed, with dry humor: `` Indian tradition knows nothing whatever of the Aryans` invasion of India through the north-west....All this copious tradition was falsely fabricated, and the truth has been absolutely lost, if the current theory is right; is that probable? If all this tradition is false, why, how, and in whose interests was it all fabricated.?``

Pargiter went even further, for he was convinced that Indian tradition clearly recorded ``an outflow of people from India before the fifteenth century BC.`` and thought that the Iranians may have been an offshoot from India.`` He pertinently observed that in the famous nadi sukta, the Rig Veda lists rivers of the subcontinent from east to west, and remarked: ``If the Aryans had entered India from the north-west, and had advanced eastward through the Punjab only as far as the Saraswati or Jumna when the Rigvedic hymns were composed, it is very surprising that the hymn arranges the rivers, not according to their progress, but reversaly from the Ganges which they had hardly reached.



The theory of invasion is an invention. This invention is necessary because of a gratuitous assumption that the Indo-Germanic people are the purest of the modern representation of the original Aryan race. The theory is perversion of scientific investigation. It is not allowed to evolve out of facts. On the contrary, the theory is preconceived and facts are selected to prove it. It falls to the ground at every point. `

Dr. Ambedkar`s views on AIT:
``The Vedas do not know any such race as the Aryan race.
There is no evidence in the Vedas of any invasion of India by the Aryan race and its having conquered the Dasas and Dasyus supposed to be the natives of India.
There is no evidence to show that the distinction between Aryans, Dasas and Dasyus was a racial distinction.
The Vedas do not support the contention that the Aryans were different in color from the Dasas and Dasyus.....``


Koenraad Elst, Belgian scholar, has said that:

``Until the mid-19th century, no Indian had ever heard of the notion that his ancestors could be Aryan invaders from Central Asia who had destroyed the native civilization and enslaved the native population. Neither had South-Indians ever dreamt that they were the rightful owners of the whole subcontinent, dispossessed by the Aryan invaders who had chased them from North India, turning it into Aryavarata, the land of the Aryans. Nor had the low-caste people heard that they were the original inhabitants of India, subdued by the Aryans and forced into the prison house of caste which the conquerors imposed upon them as an early form of Apartheid.

All these ideas had to be imported by European scholars and missionaries, who thought through the implications of the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT), the theory that the Indo-European (IE) language family had spread out from a given homeland, probably in Eastern Europe, and found a place in Western and Southern Europe and in India as a cultural luggage of horse-borne invaders who subjugated the natives.``

Anyone who is interested in this may read the fascinating website. BJP is only trying to correct a historical error. But, the irony is, in trying to do so, it has embroiled itself into a controversy. BJP benefits if this theroy were to be accepted. BJP would be able to unite the hindus into one unit. There will be no Aryans, no dravidians. Psychologically, this would be a great unifying factor. Unfortunately, it excludes muslims and says these were invaders and came much later from outside (despite the fact that most were original inhabitants and converts). This is where the secularists are alarmed and are protesting.

Sridhar

re: Saraswati river

``On sale were books that show humankind originated in the upper reaches of that mythical Indian river, the Saraswati, and pamphlets that explain the mysterious Indus Valley seals, with their indecipherable Harrapan script: they are of Vedic origin. ``
Well, Saraswati was mythical until its riverbed was photographed by an American satellite. It is not mythical anymore. It existed until 1800 BC or thereabout and vanished into earth due to earthquake or other plectonic changes. There are interesting theories about this. It is inconceivable that people who sang Rig Veda would mention Saraswati river so many times if it had not really existed (in later Vedas, Ganges is mentioned; we know it exists to this day). This is another myth that has been proved to be not a myth anymore.
Sridhar

re:#53 by AAmir
The article you posted is written probably by a secularist who sees everything wrong with BJP. Facts are facts. AIT is bunkum and has been proved so. Saraswati river existed and has been proved so. BJP, as i said stands to gain on both scores politically. That is why all this noise.
Sridhar

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

tahmed

......... bernard lewis in ``what went wrong`` very clearly states the difference between a) and b) ..... it has been a while since i read the book, but the three main reasons why the ummah finds itself in such dire straits is a) their horrible treatment of women b) their ignorance of ``science`` and c) their total lack of appreciation for music ..........and that pretty much sums it ..............

............ here is the real scary part: some of the observations of the muslim diplomats and learned men about the west 4-500 yars ago are almost exactly what ghalib and urstruly are saying today - verbatim !.......... you could not tell the difference .......... nothing has changed - as a matter of fact we are regressing ..........

............ on the other hand, the rest of the world - horrible hindoos included - have understood the true essence of modernity and are on the right path while we seek siratul mustaqeem................

Harpreet #49
I hadn`t been following Naipaul`s remarks on recent events, but the darkness as you call it seems to have engulfed many many people. I wonder what possessed the Nobel committee to award him the Prize at such a time.

Thanks very much for the reference, I would certainly like to look up such an anthology.

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

Romair:

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I appreciate it.

Since you admit you have not read Naipaul, we can agree that you were agreeing with only half of this ``analysis``. Fine. Let us go on to Rushdie.

Am I correct in assuming that you believe (aling with Farzana I guess) that Rushdie manufactured the Satanic Verses controversy to gain popularity?

That opinion would be disregarding the facts of history. First, Rushdie was already popular whn Satanic Verses came out. He didn`t have to resort to controversy. Secondly, I doubt that Rushdie had an arrangment with the Government of Iran to raise controversy for his benefit.

As far as ``factless`` versus factual controversy is concerned, Rushdie`s work is fiction. He abundantly makes that clear. I have not read the book, therefore will not comment on its merit. But both you and Farzana (in her follow up comment) make it clear that you are not criticizing the works of the author, but his controversy. This is a classic example of blaming the victim. Rushdie did not call for the death sentence on an Ayatollah. The reverse was the case.

As fas as hurting the sensitivities of a Billion adherents of a religion is concerned, it speaks volumes that in the aftermath of Sept 11 a Christian leader can go on TV and call Prophet Mohhamed a terrorist and yet elicits very muted reaction from Islamic governments. But a writer with a limited audience finds himself the target of violence by a government of a country. Why did that change occur?

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

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

FarzanaVersey #46 you write ``So I have deal. I no getting angry for 24 hours...you pay me then? ``
We have a deal if you agree to add to the clause ``I no getting angry for 24 hours`` the following addendum ``AND write article on chowk when in happy mood``. Then I am sure I will be happy to pay you in the form of compliments.

#52: Hamidm

`` gur mujhhay iss kaa yaqueen ho, miray humdum miray doast``

You write:
[....defeated and disgraced cultures have to accept the facts, make the necessary adjustments and move on .............]

Sure. This is what the defeated and disgraced cultures ARE doing..REPEATEDLY..like recurring desimals.One province in Indi-Pak excels in this artform and has metaphorised the whole process. The West Indians, Gyuanese, and the Trinidadians have been going with this flow and have elevated their status from field-niggers to house-niggers to nation-niggers. ``Fcuk us not MeLord until and unless it is in english. WE mind not being thus fcukked meLord but please swear at us in english so that we could pass-on the knowledge & `ducation as a heritage ....who knows what color-coding has the Saviour in store for us. Look at Michael Jackson! Aint`t that lad a doll, who nobody ne`er now call a nigger. See `im rumbaa with the whitefolks now``

Mr. Hamidm2, the Pilipinos are another good living & thriving model of your theory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You further meditate aloud:

[....the fact of the matter is that mr simon and mr schuster publish more books than the entire arab/muslim world put together and there are more writers living in the village than in all of araby .......... ]

When a critique-type mentioned to Picasso that he cannot understand his art. Picasso asked him:
Do you understand the chinese language?

No

Remember over 1/4 of the world understands it.

``Tumm naa aayay tO kyaa sahar naa huee``?

It would blow your mind if you find out where the largest number of books are published & read, but then I`m not a very good educator either.
____________________________________________________________
Ferzaana Versey:

In 1947 at midnight there was no partitioning of any geographical mass. I am aware that the Nile was parted by Musaa (pbuh) but only to drown the Firaun. Etchings on survey maps can never be called a Partition .

The Partition is of the pods from the Saint-this & Taint-that system of education which have come to fruition in the form of Macaulay`s `writers` like the Gecko and the Iguana.

The two in reality are the Midnights` Ghouls.
___________________________________________________________
Harpareet:
It is always youngfarts who become oldfarts. You are welcome to the club. Are you thinking of becoming a Lit-lecher yourself? If you intend to do it in english, please attain some mastery in the art of alternate-orificing.

I detest Lit-lechers.
____________________________________________________________
rsridhar:
I think you are right. You have certainly arrived. The respect accorded to your kind is awesome.

My apologies Sir Apu and Sri Hurundi Bakhshee.

Please urge your calculated-types to release a movie to portray Amreekans, Goraas, Westerners in similar flattering & respectable role-models. IITs and bunyaagiri is a curse upon Starvistaan and Leperistaan ( now Aids-istaan?)

I know it is a dilemma to stay a hindu these trying times. Eternal compromise with every sitting-power is your destiny....until & unless you break this cycle and convert. Only then you become a new person. Like millions of your kind have already done through the ages and continue to do so today.

Enjoy!