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?

#71 tahmed 32,
i agree with you.GOD HAS CREATED WORLD AND IT``S UP TO US TO EXPLORE IT.
HE IS NOT OFFENDED BY ANY OF OUR ACTIONS.WHY SHOULD HE?BECOZ HE HAS GIVEN US SENSE TO ACT ACCORDINGLY.

I remember having taken part in an Urdu Qawaali as a part of my school function..long time ago…”Parda uth ke salaam ho jaaye ..baat ban jaye kaam ho jaaye…aye habeeb mera tujh ko salaam.. aye habeeb mera tujh ko salaam”
And I loved it, the tune, lyrics, the dress(feather wali topi), the ‘adaab style’ we did. I used to hum it the whole day long that time..remembered it for all these years to come and I now taught it to some kids in my family
My cousin was a part of the team dance in India…..an Arabic one with the mouth-covering veil dress..and a ‘dafli’ type chan..chan karta Arabic instrument
….I remember vaguely the song she used to memorise..”Aye habibi khalke-gandam, jashney yaar aya”…some wording like that…And their group got an award..
(O maybe the judges were Arabic muslims…sooooo racist..hoho)

Hohoho..maybe we have become a Muslims by doing these songs/dances…ab kya karun…hare raam hare raam..tauba tauba!!!
(nonono.. tauba is also a Muslim word…hohoho..chchch……kya bolun..what Hindu word to say instead of tauba-tauba?)

#110 rsridhar, Leela Samson is a Jew. Sonal Mansingh`s first husband was an Oriya - well, not exactly, but someone belonging to one of the royal families of Orissa, which was originally Rajput, like most royal families in eastern India - hence her surname. All Singhs aren`t Sikhs!

# 112 and all your other posts. Studebaker, why do you get so apoplectic when you talk about Hindus? It really seems as though you have something personal against them! If you feel they`re invariably weird and evil, there are other, and rational, calm, ways to hit out at them, aren`t there?

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

#108, Dost-Mittar to msouza and #102, msouza:

I agree totally with msouza, particularly, in regard to Tipu. Dost-Mittar, it is kind of you to have been sensitive about your inadvertent offence though I do not believe you did any such thing. My experience with Tipu has been replete with crudities on his part. No worthwhile interaction can take place with him so I have stopped responding to his posts.

re:#92 by dost-mittar
Leela Samson sounds like a christian name. And, wasn`t Sonal Mansingh, the B.N dancer a sikh?
Sridhar

m_souza:
Tipu is upset about a brief post which he perceived to be a slight to Prophet Mohammed. In retrospect, I should have been more careful.
You and I belong to a tradition where people are not mindful of criticism or jokes about avtars as if they were mere mortals even though they are worshipped as incarnations of God . I have been on chowk long enough to have known that this is not so with the Muslims and Prophet Mohammed, even though he is supposed to be a mere mortal. 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.

Farzana, it`s too bad you killed it so quickly. It`s a good debate...oh, well, maybe some other time. Be well.

godot (#99):
If one has a pre-meditated destination in mind, then a path works. But if discovery is the goal, then one cannot walk on the straight road and count milestones. One would veer towards unknown territory. Since one has chosen it, it cannot make you miserable. Does it bring solace? That depends on what one finds. Sometimes, what we have and that we call stability causes us more misery.

This thread will be out soon...so thank you for engaging me in an `off-the-beaten-track` dialogue:)

Ref Meen-kari-kuzhambu #100

[Harimau:
I cannot decide which is worse: your reading comprehension or your crudeness in refering to Farzana the you have been.]

EVERYBODY, at least mostly everybody, gets a moniker from me. Farzana, depending on the context, is FartsAnna, Impacted Wisdom Tooth, etc. I myself have been called HaramiOu and I accept that with a smile.

As to deciding which is worse, you might want to refer to Doctor Artist Leader`s latest publication, an explanation of Tolkappiyam. If that book on Tamil grammar doesn`t explain everything in the universe as it is supposed to, you should then consult Father Big Man`s political writings for the sneakiness and snake-iness of brahmins.

[You`re a coward to hide behind the anonymity of the board while making fun of her name.]

Are we to presume that your parents named you Soysauce? That is entirely within the realm of possibility and I presume your sister is named Ketchup. That would be a tough choice, wouldn`t it; having to choose between Ketchup and Tamil Arasi?

Ref Karuvattu-kuzhambu #100

[#78 rsridhar
... Since even a student could observe the apparent effects of close marriage, it surely must have been studied with respect to tamils & brahmins. Why don`t you post something to that effect?]

Hey, you are the one who said that consanguinous marriages are common among Tamil brahmins. It is up to you to prove it.

Clue for the Clueless: Try a google search and see what you can find.

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

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

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

dost mittar ji

I feel no amount of your rational thinking or your polite explanations will go into the heads like Tipu etc..because they don`t want it to. They just can`t see what you are trying to say

If you give an example of some nice Indira Rehman and how she balanced her life with her secualar attitude..then this Tipu assumes you are telling all muslims to do bharatnatyam..
This is the major `defect` in their attitude..as long as it remains..nothing can be done about anything..
Anyway..keep trying..

Re: Farzana, 98

Yes, but it`s also known and predictable. There are enough problems in life as it is. Why
make life miserable? At times boring is good and healthy, skipping a beat means you have a deadly heart poblem. Straying off the beaten path does not necessarily brings solace. The path has emerged for good reasons.

#78 rsridhar
Traditions are just that. They are not based on need. You probably didn`t know anyone who died a ``dowry death`` or was sexually molested or abused. Does that mean these things don`t exist? As they say, the cat closed its eyes and thought it was night time...
Since even a student could observe the apparent effects of close marriage, it surely must have been studied with respect to tamils & brahmins. Why don`t you post something to that effect?

Harimau:
I cannot decide which is worse: your reading comprehension or your crudeness in refering to Farzana the you have been. You`re a coward to hide behind the anonymity of the board while making fun of her name.

godot:stability leashes you; homogeneity is linear and boring - it makes you take slow calculated steps when you want to skip (a beat?)...

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

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

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

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

Farzana, homogeneity is stable.

bharat natyam and conversion:
Back in the 1950s the name most associated with Bharat Natyam was Indrani Rehman. From the name it would appear that she was a Hindu married to a Muslim. If so, her devotion to Hindu gods did not prevent her from marrtying a muslim.

re: bharata-natyam versus religion
Talking of sheema Kirmani, she is both a Kathak and bharata-natyam dancer.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/20010822/edit.htm#8

``Kirmani studied classical dance forms in India with Leela Samson of the Kalakshetra, Mayadhar Raut at the Bhartiya Kala Kendra in Delhi and returned in 1990 on a one-year scholarship to train under Guru Aloka Pannikar at Art Kendra, also in New Delhi.``
Leela Samson is a bharata-natyam dancer. Kala Kshetra is the institute set up by Rukmini Arundale and is kind of a trend setter in this form of dance tho` there are other dance institutes and exponents who do not necessarily like Kalakshetra.
Ms Kirmani faced the classic charge which one would expect a Pakitani artist to face. Her dance was dubbed unislamic by Zia-ul-Haq. Her`s is an epic struggle against all odds. How did Bharata-natyam become unislamic? How was Zia qualified to say what is islamic and what is not? One has to ask Zia but unfortunately he is not around. Meanwhile art scenario suffered a lot in Pak.
A lot of Krishna imagery and symbolism exists in both Kathak and Natyam mainly because Krishna as an icon is very popular. Krishna the playboy, krishna the truant child who breaks pots and steals butter and so on. All these have been sung into songs and woven into dance forms in the past. In Islam, symbolism is discouraged,so it is impossible to get any islamic theme into a dance form. Christianity is waking up recently but it too had discouraged symbolism in the past. Dance is a way of artistic expression and has nothing to do with religion.
Sridhar

Convert shanvert who gives a .... oops my apologies a lot of people apparently - judging from the responses. Well all I care is that this time when I go to India my muslim cousin better get married (preferable at the same place where his elder brother did)....Ah the food..Yummm..

Ref FarzanaVersey on #87

[Some people have been nitpicking that if my niece learned Bharat Natyam then why did she talk about Krishna, who is celebrated in Kathak.]

Tales of Krishna are told in Bharatha Natyam too; Krishna is not the sole possession of North Indians. ``Krishna Nee Begane Baro`` (``Krishna, Come Quickly``) , ``Thaye Yasodha`` (O, Mother Yasodha``), ``Theeratha Vilayattu Pillai`` (``Endlessly Playful Child``) are all songs to which Bharatha Natyam dancers dance.

I think I have mentioned earlier that there was a dance ``arangetram`` (first public performance) by a male Muslim dancer in Chennai who chose songs dedicated to Nature to avoid any possibility of paying obeisance to Hindu gods.

Alarmel Valli performed in the US recently. Except for the invocatory piece, all songs were selected from the Tamil anthology Pura Nanooru (400 Poems of the External World) which don`t reference any gods. It is entirely possible to dance Bharatha Natyam without reference to any Hindu gods, though personally I think it will be fun to see how may seconds a dancer can balance himself/herself on one foot when dancing to a song about Siva Nataraja such as ``Natanam Adinar`` (He Danced``).

PS. Zafar Al-Talib, Valli fan, eat your heart out.

I have no idea where some of the stuff is coming from, but as people have been honest enough to admit that they are going by my previous articles, I suppose I should have expected this.

My position is against conversions, and I have stated it in an earlier post. That is the crux. And it applies to Kamala Das’ to Islam as much as Didi’s to Hinduism. And yes, there will be two sides, two warm stories, a lot of twos in life. I was/am clear about this. If anyone wants to probe and impute motives, it reveals more about them than about me.

Re. this article: One has been born, bred and lived in India all along, and I am fairly confident about Indian mythology not to confuse my culture with religion. However, Bharat Natyam was a temple dance form.(The Pakistani, Sheema Kirmani, is a Kathak dancer.) People are learning it (and if my mother had my way, I would have too…so why did I not? Was I ‘communal’ even as a child? Heck, I did not want anything to intrude into my playtime…). But it does have a religious base – invoking certain gods. Some people have been nitpicking that if my niece learned Bharat Natyam then why did she talk about Krishna, who is celebrated in Kathak. I don’t see how it is assumed that every member of my family walks only on one track! She was obviously being taught about various deities, and anyone with access to even Amar Chitra Katha comics can gather enough information. Besides, Kamala Das, a South Indian, too speaks about
Krishna…For that matter, we have been provided an enlightened reason here itself: “Perhaps your Didi didn`t want her daughter to think of herself as a child bride to Prophet Muhammad. Sometimes, reality is too harsh to contemplate.” So there…

Was Didi forced into Hinduism? I wrote in post #38: “In India, even among educated urban families, the girl is always co-opted, whether she converts or not. Didi probably converted to fulfill her mother-in-law’s wish, but having never lived in the joint family and in fact in an open society, I could not understand her attitude. It does not appear that she resents it at all. In fact, she is clearly anti-Islamic as seen from the Western point of view.”

I believe that cross-cultural marriages should result in osmosis, and that is why I am disappointed with my cousin. And her alone. In her absence, we stay in touch with her in-laws and share a warm relationship with them. Please understand, with them it is understood that they are the ‘other’ as we are for them, so the expectations are not fuzzy.

When I mentioned the family’s attempt at trying to appreciate idlis etc as delicacies, it was not arrogance. Come on, I don’t know many Muslims who can do without meat and if anything I was looking on wryly at my family and not at the other family or their food, which I personally relish. But all those many years ago, the only avenue for such food was in homes of people or Udipi restaurants…it is a matter of exposure. If a Brahmin were to look at a plate of biryani with disgust I would perfectly understand it. So, stop implying that “you seem to be saying that Hindus are bizarre, whether born or made!” There has been no reference about my pulling up Kamala Das and wondering whether Allah would ever come to her rescue. It is not kosher to acknowledge this from me, right?

Re. author: She is touched that Chowk interactors ‘know’ her so well. She writes about the ills in Indian society, and she is seen as a pro-Pakistani jihadi; she writes about being an Aga Khani and she is said to be an “aadha mussalman”; and she writes about her Hindu connection and we get the great analysis, “But what Farzana is really looking for is approval from the Hindu side of audience. Or, more accurately a proof that she cannot get approval ever from the ‘other’ side.” So, taking all this into account, the author will never get approval from any side and spend the rest of her life rearranging spoons. (Never mind that author occasionally likes to use her fingers while eating…she will rearrange her hands, no problem….)

Btw, “obsessional neurotic” is tautology. Just neurotic or obsessive would do. Thank you.

If anyone is interested, this is an excerpt from an old column of mine in Rediff (http://www.rediff.com/style/jun/16farz.htm):

``Secularism, in our contemporary context, is not a virtue. It is a Necessity. It should be propagated in the same way as family planning, self-reliance, ecology, health care and adult education, instead of a morally right position.

Those who marry across religions must be given similar privileges as those reserved for the scheduled castes and tribes. Their offspring should be provided state backup, whether in education, health or taxation. In fact, the state must encourage private elite institutions where these children can be educated without being tainted by our national obsession with party vengeance.``

[#69 by AlephNull on June 27, 2003 7:05pm PT
...One cannot restrict the activity of persuasion – in any domain - without limiting the right to free speech, which underlies all free societies. ]

I think so some restriction on acts of persuasuion should be put. They should not be coercive or terroristic. I would certainly not want to live in fear if I ask a proselytizing priest (accosting me on road or pestering me at my own home) to go away. I think so all preaching on public roads should be banned. I do not see such bans as limiting free speech. A preacher may preach on TV or private halls, he may advertise in newspaper but should never be allowed to be public nuisance.

[#83 by rsridhar on June 28, 2003 10:58am PT
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. ]

The song is from Chitralekha. That much I am very very sure. Besides the credit info was from the website from where I got the lyrics. So it was not like I was making an error in recalling. I found same credits elsewhere also.

Probably Saraswatichandra song you are confusing this with is probably following:

Chhod De Saari Duniya Kissi Ke Liye

Ultimately conversion represents ``separation anxiety``. Person converting is thought as leaving children of her former religion. Like a mother abondoning her children.

All communications which are by design and intention ``kind of, sort of`` broadcast communications are unltimately communication to mother. All show of maturity is like saying to mother: ``Look ma, no hands`` like you would say when you perform a magic trick to impress your mother. In this piece also Farzana makes a show of maturity. She knows Brat, Saminsha etc will declare her piece as great, enlightening, interesting blah blah. But what Farzana is really looking for is approval from the Hindu side of audience. Or, more accurately a proof that she cannot get approval ever from the ``other`` side.

Also here is a half hearted attempt to combine two stories which fails. They are becoming ``two warm stories`` instead. Farzana will continue writing such pieces for ever and ever attempting to combine two stories but like an obsessional neurotic who keeps rearranging spoons on dining table and who becomes disturbed when slightest disorder is percieved when entire rearranging must re-begin... Just like that neurotic she will continue writing such ``two stories``.

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.

ferzoo,
oye...the bimbo must be added on as well, foran! but not being entirely sure who the bimbo was at the time, twas not done then. i will ask one of the laundas how to do so, or zee bimbette could get me info from the bapu of the laundas!
love, ana xo

Farzana, could it be that your Didi`s renewed (no matter if you think it was only cursory?) interest in Islam was a genuine desire not to lose an integral part of her own personal heritage? She could want to retain it while still remaining a Hindu, you know. Perhaps it`s nothing about confused identity, more about wanting to keep to the best parts of one`s past. A Hindu is supposed to, and until recent times invariably did, respect all ways of reaching to God, call Him/Her by whatever name and follow whatever path. I would have thought it`s good that she doesn`t want to forget Islam.
Also, I found that bit about her daughter, who was learning Bharata Natyam, declaring Krishna was her husband was all a bit strange. (a) Learning Bharata Natyam has nothing to do with any one particular religion, as you should know - Indian Christians and Jews, as you know, perform this, and a Catholic priest has even suggested its use as a mode of worship. (b) Surely it`s Kathak that`s associated with Krishna? (c) Your little niece must have been the only child in the world who learned to call herself a bride of Krishna because she learned Bharata Natyam. Children of Indian parents everywhere in the West try to learn some of the arts and graces of their homeland, but to think of herself as a latter-day Mirabai?

Ref soysauce #61

[A very common practice among south indian brahmins (harimau iyer`s community) is for girls to marry their maternal uncles or cousins on the maternal side.]

How did this issue come about? How is it relevant to FartsAnna`s article?

But anyway, not true at all. It is very rare among Tamil brahmins to marry a first cousin or an uncle. It is usually someone from the same village or one of the neighboring villages so that the closest you can trace a relationship would be second cousin or third cousin, except that it may be through multiple relationships. Any EXCEPTION of marrying a first cousin or an uncle would be primarily to keep property within the family or would be a peculiar custom of that single family. In fact, I know of only one uncle-niece marriage and the family is from the land-owning class in Tanjore district.

On the other hand, what Sangilikaruppan wants to hide is the fact that it is MANDATORY among Tamils to marry their sister`s daughters, that is, their nieces. The other is for first cousins to marry. In fact, the uncle or uncle`s son has the RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL over the girl. This is vigorously enforced by tribal customs despite high education and higher wealth. I know of a Duke MBA coming from a filthy rich family marrying his uncle`s daughter (first cousin). The father of the girl refused the girl`s hand in marriage and, lo and behold, the girl walks out of her father`s home to marry her first cousin! Because that is the True Tamil Tadition! True to the blood feuds that these sh!theads carry on when crossed, the parents of the girls didn`t attend the wedding and haven`t spoken to her since the wedding several years ago but at least haven`t attempted any honor killing so far.

Just watch any Tamil movie made up to the 1980s and you will find that the lovers are first cousins. Even the family feuds depicted would be where the uncle wants to marry the niece but the girl has different ideas, the dad supports the girl and the mom supports her brother. This has been the standard story line involving hundreds of MGR movies.

Sudalaikkannu, don`t blame your mental retardation brought on by thousands of years of in-breeding on somebody else. Now you will be telling me that the Tamils borrowed this tradition or were imposed this tradition by the invading Aryans from the North!

Tell me, did you marry your niece or uncle`s daughter? I know you are not going to give us any answer just like you refused to answer the question of how much dowry you got on the basis that the answer would incriminate you!

By the way, if you have any reading comprehension at all, you would have figured out that FartsAnna`s Didi likely married a South Indian brahmin (here is a clue: the food included idli, dosa, sambar, payasam, etc.) Tell me that the couple were first cousins!

Oh, what an utter fool! Please do leave your vestigial brain stem for medical research. Science would like to find out how anencephalic cretins like you are able to wander around freely. They may find that the remainder of your brain is located in your colon.

dost-mittar #60: Yes I did not pick up the reply correctly. My apologies. Now I understand it better. Still don`t know where you stand on religious and athiesm, though.....

The joke is funny. Makes a lot of sense also. Either one is in religion or out. Being an athiest could be a lot of fun. But even athiests have to follow some rules. They follow the rules of ethics, I guess. As well as the law of the land they live in. The trend amongst the Western nations seems to be becoming non-religious, but not athiest.

I think the poorer or less fortunate a person is, the more he/she believes in religion. It is the only thing he/she has to hold on to to justify his/her bad fortune, i.e. I got a bad deal here, but it will be much better in the afterlife. This is why when people with athiestic or secularistic tendencies try to persuade poor Pakistanis, that religion is the cause of their poverty and backwardness, they never have much success. If a poor person becomes athiest or even secularistic, he still remains poor. At the same time, he loses his one hope of getting a good deal in the afterlife. After that he has nothing to hold on to and no way to satisfy him/herself and justify his poverty in his/her present day life.

All I can say is that if there is no religion and no after life, then the world is an extremely unfair place, with such massive differences between rich and poor, and strong and weak, and fortunates and unfortunates. At the very least, religion gives people a hope (even if turns out to be a false hope) of continuing to struggle on in life.

So athiesism is for rich folks, and secularism will probably only succeed in rich societies.

tahmed32:
I was also poking fun at the whole idea of insurance, whether single or multiple policies.
I don`t think insurance principle will work in the faith business. You take insurance because you are uncertain about God (or in case of Hindus, maybe gods). But if there is a God, you are only fooling yourself because He knows All and He will certainly know that you are skeptical about Him. And He does not like skeptics any more than He likes non-believers.
So, if you are a believer, you don`t need insurance, and if you are a skeptic, the insurance doesn`t work. Catch 22, eh?

Farzana,
A very common practice among south indian brahmins (harimau iyer`s community) is for girls to marry their maternal uncles or cousins on the maternal side. Paternal cousins, on the other hand, are supposed to be as close as blood brothers or sisters. The blood line does not extend on the mother`s side.

dost mittar #60 LOL. That was a good one. The moral I picked was that if you want decisions, pray that there is no bureaucracy.

Romair#57
You obviously had a little trouble understanding my post. If anything, I was trying to poke a little gentle fun at the Hindu characteristic of `bey-painde-ka-lauta`. You obviously haven`t heard of the following joke:
During an earthquake, a Muslim, a Christian and a Hindu neighbour prayed to their respective gods. The Muslim prayed to the Allah, the Christian to Lord Jesus, and the Hindus to Ram, Krishna and Hanuman. The Muslim and the Christian were saved but the roof fell upon the Hindu`s house who died and went to meet his gods. He first met Hanuman and asked him why he did not save him; Hanuman replied that when he had invoked Ram, how could he, a mere bhagat of Ram dare to supercede him. He then went with the same question to Krishna who replied that since he had invoked Ram first, he left it to Ram to save him. At last he went to Ram and repeated the same question. Ram replied that by the time he found out that Krishna and Hanuman had not come to his assistance, it was too late and the roof had already fallen.
The moral of the story is that you either have complete faith or you don`t.

Harimau #53 ``You are telling me that in Pakistan Hindu girls willingly marry Muslim men and that the girls are allowed to remain Hindus? And their children can be raised as Hindus?``
What I wrote is clear enough. Dont try to make a song and dance story out of a plain and simple sentence.

PS: I think it is only on chowk that one runs into grown up men who start calling names the moment they are stressed. Is this all you got out of attending the Jay Thakeray School for Maturity-Challenged Hindutvas?

Romair #56

I actually did read your post in its entirety. Your argument is not exactly complex or subtle or profound; it doesn’t take much to follow it, or refute it. So spare me that bilge about ‘not understanding what you wrote’, etc. etc. ad amusem. Here is what you wrote.

{{Being an athiest is actually a very poor business proposition. It`s all risk, with no potential for long-term profit. Believing in a religion has no risks or chance of loss, but does have potential for profit.}}

i.e. invocation of the profit motive, which, together with the ensuing case analysis, is the essence of Pascal’s assertion about potential profit contingent on religious belief. Your added wrinkle of ‘subway station’ changes very little and does not protect the argument from refutation along the familiar lines of Pascal’s wager.

To spell it out even more concretely, the refutation of the ‘subway station’ hack is to posit that the ‘real’ state of affairs is a deity who rewards only those who DO NOT believe in ‘him’ or in any deity or combination of deities, and who savagely punishes everyone else. Not a pleasant eventuality for believers of any flavour. Pleading that you only got to the subway station, didn`t board the train, isn`t going to save you here. This is a specific case where believing in a religion - any religion - runs risks and chance of loss, whereas the atheist alone stands to `profit`, contrary to your claim.

Ferz:

forgot to mention earlier…interesting heading:

[chiaroscuro n:
the disposition of highlight and shadow in a painting chiaro=bright, oscuro=dark]

and interesting discussions shaping up…my khota paisas:

(…being wired as we are…allegedly as human beings…we profess to follow or not follow the faith we were born into as we grow up…the degree of adherence and questioning varies…and this is lifelong…the only individuals who consciously suppress this questioning and follow blindly are the die-hards and they are condemned harshly by all good and thinking individuals world wide…after this long preamble this is what i wanted to say..)

…in the end only this matters: if you feel good and if you spread goodness

…this simple temporal test is applicable to all of us…those who are born in any faith or system and those who later in life reject it, modify it, or accept another faith or set of beliefs…you must feel good and spread goodness (happiness) around…

...this is the best set of core values available now...local franchise enquiries welcome:)

peace

t