The Conversion Chiaroscuro

re: # 75
Did in that post should read as ``Didi`` meaning sister. Sorry for the error.
Sridhar

re:#73 by einsteinwallah
Thanx for posting the lyrics. Simply beautiful. Goes to show how versatile Sahir was. He had good command of Hindi despite being a Urdu poet.
Only one correction. I believe (if my memory serves me well) the song is from Sariswatichandra and not Chitralekha. I may be wrong.
Sridhar

dost mittar #77 ``What true believer would use `he` for `Him`?) ``
God does not sweat the small stuff. :-)

[#77 by dost-mittar on June 28, 2003 8:15am PT
...
That song is attributed to Sahir but I dont think it was actually written by him. Some of Sahir`s `shudh` hindi songs were rumoured to be written by his buddy Prakash Pandit (some people claimed he was more than a buddy!).
Your translation could perhaps stand a little improvement. Anyway, it`s a brave attempt. ]

Thanks for the info and appreciation. I also suspected that it is probably not Sahir`s work. In the least he must have got help on Hindi. I translated to convey meaning, and agree that it was badly done.

#re: Bharata-natyam
I am intrigued. How did an art form like Bharata-natyam get associated with religion? This is just art. A lot of westerners are learning it. One Pakistani woman has made a career out of it (Ms Kirmani?).
However, it is a fact that Bharata-natyam has been resurrected to art form by the likes of Rukmini Arundale, Balasaraswati who were all hindus. I read an article in one of the Indian magazines how this art form has been completely taken over by brahmins. As if this is a sin! Brahmins have sanctified an artform that was the preserve of Devdasis. Now, middle class brahmin girls are learning it with gusto. There are umpteen number of dance schools run by brahmin dancers in Madras itself. So, the inevitable has happened. Because brahmins were so closely associated with this dance form, it has taken a religious hue. Who is preventing the muslims or christians from learning this dance form?
I also read somewhere that the Christian churches are now recommending bharata natyam to be used as a form of worship to Jesus Christ, much like it is for Krishna or Rama. How much more stupid can one get!
Here is one Tambrahm`s (for the uninitiated, Tambrahm means ``tamil brahmin``) take on the dance scenario on the cultural capital of India viz Chennai (Madras, for the uninitiated). I liked the concluding para of this article.
url:
http://www.indianexpress.com/columnists/renuka/20020129.html

``The performing arts are demanding taskmasters. Individuals have to come forward and make an effort. Whoever does, according to talent, invariably gets noticed, because the concert scene in Chennai is structured to give newcomers a chance. And the neo-classical beat goes on, be it a steel-spined Malavika Sarukkai (TamBrahm) or a pure-lined Alarmel Valli, Meenakshi Chitharanjan and Urmila Satyanarayanan (not). Can you tell? Do you care? Lots of people, whatever their caste, may learn an art. But only a very few make it to the magic league. For the untalented and the parasitic to distort history and conveniently blame their mediocrity on “TamBrahm monopoly” is a peculiar degree of silliness. Or is it like how Bal Thackeray needs Muslims and Pakistan needs India, to define personal identity?``.
Sridhar











sridhar

Alephnull#68&69
When I said that religious beliefs should not be an irreversible process and that people`s religious affliation should be similar to their political affliation, I also implied that people should be able to publicly discuss and promote their ideas regarding spirituality and philosophy of afterlife. But I would like to make a distinction between propagation and prosleytisation. I do not mind a TV evangelist doing his thing on the TV where I have the option to switch him on or off or in a church or a public place where I have the option to go or not to go, but I do object to someone pestering me at home all the time or to missionaries going to Iraq to trade in the miseries of the unfortunate people and sell religion in the garb of humanitarian aid.
As regards identities and unmerited recognition and protection, this is not true of all socieites. In countries like Japan, Korea (Rev. Moon notwithstanding!) and China, one`s identity is not tied to one`s religious beliefs. In the West the protection now seems to matter less and less. I think this protection may have been due to a historical link between religion and morality; this link is becoming weaker and weaker - for better or for worse, the society does not seem to shirk from questioning traditional morality based on religion on issues such as abortion, sodomy, homosexuality or euthanasia. Everything is now up for discussion. The West has once again fullly rediscovered its Greek roots of debate on the great issues not only of matter but also of spirit.

tahmed32#73:
Assuming there is a God, I agree with you.
I sometimes wonder if you are a true believer. (What true believer would use `he` for `Him`?)

einsteinwalla#73
That song is attributed to Sahir but I dont think it was actually written by him. Some of Sahir`s `shudh` hindi songs were rumoured to be written by his buddy Prakash Pandit (some people claimed he was more than a buddy!).
Your translation could perhaps stand a little improvement. Anyway, it`s a brave attempt.

re:#61 by soysauce
South Indian brahmins (especially Tamilians) are scattered across the country and outside. Most of the professional Tamilians in USA are brahmins. With mobilisation and better education, marriage practices have changed over the years. There is no need to marry one`s cousin or uncle or whatever. These practices probably existed in the past when society had not advanced and mobilisation was difficult. So, a bride or a bridegroom did not have to look far for a partner.
I do not know even one Tamil brahmin who has married his/her cousin or uncle. Lack of progress in many non-brahmin communities in T.N as well as glorification of this practice (as pointed out by Harimou) in movies etc ensured that the practice survives among non-brahmins. When i was doing my post-graduate studies in Madras (ICH, Egmore) many years ago, i used to be baffled by the number of consaguinous marriages in the non-brahmin communities. Consequently, the number of medical disorders related to consanguinity (genetic, metabolic etc) were much more common among such communities.
Sridhar

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

re: this article
So, this writer`s Didi (sister? cousin?) married a hindu, a South Indian brahmin? at that. Big deal. I hope she married out of love. I also hope that her conversion to hindu religion was done out of true understanding of what Hindu religion is all about and not just to please her future husband. South Indian brahmins (i being one) are very conservative. But many are also very broad minded. I am sure my parents would have had no problem if i had married a muslim girl (that is, after the initial shock phase is over). But a lot of culture and practices come as baggage, which no doubt this author`s sister inherited. Did she like it initially enough to embrace it? Looks like she did, well enough to learn how to make Upma and visit temples whenever she visited India!
It also seems to me that this author`s sister has migrated with her husband to U.S sometime ago. I am only guessing this from her statement that her niece has learnt bharata natyam in U.S.
So, after embracing another religion, author`s sis has been tormented off and on by her conscience. This is human nature. Despite being brought up in a liberal enviorn (author herself says her mom was liberal and dad spiritual), it is painful to give up one`s religion. But the question is: did her Did have to give up Islam completely? Was she forced to do so by her husband? her in-laws? Author gives no clues in her article about any of this.
If her Did is in U.S today, where is the problem? US is one place where you do not have to flaunt your religion. Her Did can continue to visit both mosques and temples or just mosques or whatever it is that gives her happiness. Religon is just a facade. The true thing is spirituality. People who have understood spirituality would not be bothered by the relgious customs, beliefs which are all just outer trappings. I hope author`s sis is more appreciative of this fact and does not end up resenting any particular religion.
Author has done well to publish this article. It gives some of us a glimpse of her state of mind. I knew author was rebellious by nature thr` her previous articles. I now know the reason why.
Sridhar
P.S: this is off the topic but i always thought that religious conversion to hinduism does not exist except among Arya samajis. More recently we hear of VHP goons reconverting some chrisitian tribals back to the Hindu fold but how they do it is beyond me. Hinduism, like Judaism, does not allow for conversions. A muslim can shed every trappings of being a muslim, adopt hindu way of life and say he/she is a hindu but that is another matter. Did author`s Didi have a formal conversion ceremony. I bet she did not.

Film: Chitralekha
Lyricist: Sahir Ludhiyanvi
Singer: Lata Mangeshkar
Music: Roshan

Song:

sansar sey bhagey phirtey ho, bhagwan ko tum kya paogey
iss lok ko bhi apna na sakey, uss lok me bhi pachhataogey


You are running away from world (which is but his creation)
And you have audacity to seek God (what loser)
You could not live even this life decently,
and you claim you are seeking life here after? (What bull)

ye paap hey kya, ye punnya hey kya, reeto.n par dharma kee mohare hey.n
har yug mey badaltey dharmo.n ko kaisey adarsh banaogey


What is good and what is bad, why bother?
These are but labels Dharma has put on our deeds
And Dharma changes! So, why be obsessed with (one version of) it!!
For what is good by today will be bad tomorrow

ye bhog bhi ek tapasya hey, tum tyag ke marey kya jano
apaman racheyta ka hoga, rachana ko agar thukaraogey


You are snubbing creator who created you
For I too am his creation, come lets have some good times
Fun too is a way that leads to him
You are pathetic loser, who has rejected fun so completely.
So, what would you know what the fun is?

ham kahate hai ye jag apna hai, tum kahate ho jhutha sapana hai
ham janam beeta kar jaengey, tum janam ga.nwaakar jaogey


I say this world belongs us,
you say it is all hallucination (Maya)? Come on!
We will spend time having fun of our lives,
you will just waste your time,
you loser (who dreams his fine fiction of the other world)

(Acknowledgement: Lyrics taken from: http://www.geetmanjusha.com/hindi/lyrics/1590.html. Translation my own. Also some correction to lyrics. Also I have not verified credits as accurate)

dost mittar #63 i doubt if God`s ego is so weak that he needs all these 6 billion pathetic little termites walking around on this inconspicuous speck of sand in the vast ocean that is the universe to believe that he exists. but the termites certainly seem to think otherwise - in fact they think God is so desperate that the termites should believe in his existence that he will accept this belief even if they really dont mean it. and if the termites kill one another to prove that their way of believing in his existence is the only way, then i suppose that gives God even greater thrills (at least that is what the termites believe). well, i suppose it keeps the termites happy that they are so important.

meanwhile God probably has important conferences to attend, new universes of 11 dimensions to create, and so forth and assumes the termites he left behind on planet earth are happily enjoying all the good stuff he gave them - blue skies, clear springs, rainforests, and eyes and ears and brains and an entire universe and an entire microcosm to explore using them. he must be wondering why these termites ignore all this and instead keep trying to seek his favors. he has already given them all these favors...

assalamoalaikum h r u ? i think fine!
the passage with refrence of HOLY PROPHET( P B U H ) is best of all

[#28 by dost-mittar on June 25, 2003 7:35am PT
...
In my ideal world, religious conversion would be like voting in an election, one could change one`s mind about one`s religion several times in one`s life as one`s thinking evolves ]


1 pack of Silk Cut Ultra, 1 pack of Hinduism and 1 pack of Islam

may I see your id please

what for?

you need to be 18 plus for Cigarettes, 36 plus for Hinduism, 72 for Islam

Dost-mittar #28

{{I believe my right to convert myself to another religion is a fundamental human right, but not my right to convert others.}}

If you are talking about what should be permitted to adult members of a free society, rather than to what you will permit yourself, I beg to disagree. A religion as I see it is primarily a complex of ideas, notions, beliefs (with associated rituals and traditions, I suppose). The boundary between the religious domain and all others is fuzzy. Converting someone to a particular point of view involves persuading him that that point of view is sound. It is for each individual to decide claims of soundness of a particular system of ideas. One cannot restrict the activity of persuasion – in any domain - without limiting the right to free speech, which underlies all free societies.

The mere fact that many faiths – particularly the revealed Judaic religions, Christianity and Islam – are ill-founded and involve strongly-held beliefs for which no tangible evidence exists, is no reason to limit the right to preach these faiths. Free people ought to be permitted to make their own mistakes – if someone wants to buy snake-oil, or accept a blank cheque drawn on a non-existent bank, it’s his problem. At the same time, those who are opposed to a specific complex of religious ideas, or to the worth of religious ideas in general, should be as free as religionists to make their pitches. Let them all fight it out in the free marketplace of ideas.

Dost-mittar #28

{{In my ideal world, religious conversion would be like voting in an election, one could change one`s mind about one`s religion several times in one`s life … In such a world, religion would be no big deal but metaphysics/philosophy would be. …. It seems to me that India did, in fact, have approximately such a system until the advent of Islam in the country which made us all Hindus. …. Faith was the opium the masses needed and philosophy the nourishment for the minds of the scholars. But with the advent of Islam, faith became a one-way street which shut down all debates about metaphysics with the concept of blasphemy.

Unfortunately, we are not living in an ideal world and religion means more, a LOT more than just one`s faith. It`s a force that divides people into mutually antagonistic and potentially hostile identities. It changes people`s worldview, resulting in divisions of countries or creating new ones. … }}

I agree with your assessment of the grave harm caused by religion as a basis of crude tribal identity. I assert that a lot of the harm this continues to cause is a consequence of the unmerited recognition, special treatment and protection granted, not just to specific religions, but to religious beliefs and practices more generally – thereby allowing them to wield far more influence than they merit. The putrid notions of blasphemy and apostasy are predictable consequences of this special treatment. If there is a permanent way out, it is for free societies to cease to regard religion as a special category of belief, to be singled out for respect or even recognition. The only protections that ought to be accorded to religious notions or religious expression are those accorded to any thought or expression, no matter how foolish or ill-founded. Religious beliefs ought to wield no special authority where issues of demonstrable truth arise. The only rights religious communities ought to have are those derived from the rights of their current individual members. Religious communities should be regarded like ad hoc societies, associations and clubs, at liberty to form, grow, shrink, coalesce, split, or cease to exist; not permanent civic fixtures with an eternal life of their own or temporal authority over their members.

Cutting religion loose from institutionalised civic support and forcing it to survive on its own in the free marketplace of ideas, fighting for public mind-share with all other ideas, will in the long term force various religions to clean up their act and come to terms with the modern world. I don’t believe this change will be easy. In particular many of the charlatans who now make a fat living off religion, be they mullahs, priests, shamans or witch-doctors, and their fellow-travellers including politicians, will oppose it tooth and nail.