Two Phases of Indian Secularism

what is an Iyer? Oh god i hope it is not a donkey or something, cuz last year you guys did that to a girl in india.

``Heck, my cousin in Delhi has married a Punjabi girl! ``
...Right. And my Panjabi niece married an Iyer. With the blessings of the parents of both!

re:#144 by soysauce
To answer your question, i am not orthodox. Did i say anywhere in my previous posts that i was even an Iyengar? You are just assuming things. Looks like you got brains in your balls.
I am a Delhite, born and brought up in Delhi. Our family used to visit Madras once a year. I went to Madras for my post-graduation many years ago. That is the extent of my link with Madras.
You are wrong about the rivalry between the Iyers and Iyengars. Now-a-days Iyers and Iyengars are intermarrying. Heck, my cousin in Delhi has married a Punjabi girl! Get the drift? What are you, a frikking moron ?
Sridhar

ballukhan#145
I did not consciously choose to ignore your question. It was not as clearly stated as in this post.

``Can we discuss why secularism cannot be thrown out from Indian Polity because no one (no mai ka lal!!!) can tamper with the Indian Constitution``

Actually, Indian constitution has been amended more than 40 times, more than half of them during Nehru`s time itself. It is more difficult to amend now than before when the Congress party had a steamroller majority in both the States and the Centre. Still, it is not impossible. When the BJP came to power, they constituted a panel of experts to go into the question of amending the Constitution, not for changing its Secular character but to make governments more stable. Its report must by lying in the same place where most committees`s reports end up in Delhi- File thirteen. The reason secularism cannot be thrown out from the Indian Polity, in my opinion, is that there is no demand or support for it in any quarter.
I am less knowledgeable about Pakistan. But here is my two-cents` worth. The pre-eminent position of the Pakistani army is primarily because Pakistanis, in general, are not willing to give up the option of using force - covert or overt - to change the status-quo in Kashmir against a much bigger enemy. As long as this situation continues, the army will continue to influence politics. In my opinion, the only solution is the one proposed by Musharraf, i.e., to accept this de facto reality into a de jure one via a National Security Council, with a permanent role for the army in it. This would be following the Turkish model whereby the politicians have accepted that the army would have a veto over them in certain area (secular character of Turkey) while not intervening in others.

``Religion was formally introduced as a political cause for the first time during the creation of Pakistan - directly or implied. ``


Very inaccurate... by 1937 religion was very much the issue in politics... even then the Muslim League only spoke about the political issues of a minority which happened to be based on a religious identity.... theology of religion was never the point!!! I suppose Mr. Nazar Hayat Khan has never heard of Khilafat Movement, Shudhi Sanghtan Movements, the Moplah uprising, and before that the religio-political reform movements of Sir Syed and Ram Mohan Roy...



But when you are amazing historian like NHK who thinks Wali Khan is the `secularist` in Pakistani history despite his support for radical Islamic elements... and his collusion with the most fanatical right wing Islamic groups time and again, and his famous slogan of `Nizam-e-Mustafa` (the system of the Holy Prophet), his support for Mufti Mahmood, and his wonderfuly `progressive` role in shooting down the `Honor-killing resolution` ... can one really put anything past people like Nazar Hayat Khan ?

-YLH

If ever there applied the famous saying `little knowledge is dangerous`, it applies most perfectly on Nazar Hayat Khan... Despite appeals by everyone he has shamelessly refused to atleast read before he writes absolute drivel... Now the `Nizam-e-Mustafa` totting, sharia honking, PNA-leading, Zia-colluding Wali Khan is a secularist....

Sigalph 325

Thanks again for standing for the facts... now NHK is going to take you apart for too Pakistani... Nazar Hayat Khan has once again showed us his utter and complete ignorance of history.

Here are Some other facts for Nazar Hayat Khan who tends to be `stark naked with truth`:

Bacha Khan aka Abdul Ghaffar Khan, his support for Gandhi notwithstanding, colluded with the Fakir of Ipi in the late 1940s to overthrow the government of Pakistan and establish the rule of Sharia in NWFP... and according to Nazar Hayat Khan he was a genuine secularist.

In 1977 Bacha Khan`s son, Wali Khan, joined the PNA and agitated under the slogan `Nizam-e-Mustafa` against Zulfikar Ali Bhutto... is this SECULARISM for Nazar Hayat Khan? Ofcourse Sigalph has shown us the pathetic stance of Bacha Khan`s `secular` party on the Honor killings resolution. Also Bacha Khan`s son Wali Khan was a major colluder with Zia ul Haq is a known fact. In 2003, the ANP, Pakistan`s most `secular` party according to the brilliant scholar NHK, voted in unison with the MMA for the establishment of Sharia in NWFP.... Some secularism!!!


If supporting Gandhi, Nehru and Congress at the time of partition in 1947 is the only criterion for `secularism`, then here are some other `secularists` for the brilliant PAF hero NHK : 1) Maulana Ata ullah Shah Bukhari (his legacy is kept alive by Masood Azhar today) 2) Ahrar Party 3) Jamiat-e-Ulema-Hind and Darul-uloom Deoband

-YLH

Harimau:

``As to Ram Janma Bhoomi, I think you need to leave it to the people. I don`t think we need to accept YOUR analysis of what we need. ``

As far as I know, we all constitute the people. Yogiraj Patil is one of the people as well.

So, who do you really look up to? Your themes of collective punishment remind me of a certain individual - Reinhard Heydrich of the SS. Not a very admirable role model, I am afraid.

Dost Mittar, you have consciously chosen to ignore my earlier post at #81 by ballukhan on September 15, 2003 9:22pm PT.
Can we discuss why secularism cannot be thrown out from Indian Polity because no one (no mai ka lal!!!) can tamper with the Indian Constitution. On the contrary, Pakistan`s problem is that by putting Islam (i.e the Islamic books and its practices) as the foundation of its constitution it un-wittingly empowered the mullahs, the interpreters of Islam and any damn person who can say something about Islam as the interpreters of it`s constitution. It created extra-constitutional structures which can be used to tamper and amend its constitution by any one who can claim to be an Islamist. It all depends whether you are the powerful and influential person in your community or not , you can force an interpretation of Islam and also the Pakistani Constitution in your favour. Zia did this, Bhutto did this- and now our guy Mush is in the line.
I again reiterate- Secularism is the solution to Pakistan`s problem because Pakistan requires a stable Constitution and its rigorous implementation. For doing that only, Pakistan has to forget about basing it`s constitution on the so called foundations of Islam (or for that matter any religion). Only them you will dis-empower the mullahs and Islamist. Otherwise, the aggressive (literal) interpreters of Islam are sure to capture the Assembly and then they would change the constitution and trampel upon your (the moderates) freedoms like Taliban did in Afghanistan. You can then say goodbye to Chowk after that.

#141 Dear Sridhar Iyengar,
This was new information to you? You mean you didn`t know that vaishanavism was founded & visishtadhvaitam prpounded mainly in tamil nadu and vaishnavism was spreading like wild fire until the saivaites doused it with some cold theological water centuries ago? The resentment of the vaishnavites towards the saivites is so strong that to this day some orthodox vaishnavites would not dine even with saivite brahmins. If you were an orthodox iyengar you wouldn`t go anywhere near harimau iyer, altho it`s good in general to keep away from that rapid, deranged character...

roohi@134:
Women performing havans is now not that uncommon among Panjabis. This is another example of Hinduism`s flexible approach in these matters.
On aartis to Allah and Isa Masih, I agree with your husband. This is hailarious! But this could be perceived in two wasy: to hindus, it is an example of their tolerance but to a Sikh or a Muslim it could be the amorous Hindu trap that must be avoided to retain their pure identity.
....and I wont be surprised if after aarti to allah and Isa, they go out and vote for the BJP!

re:#122 by harimau
Thanks for the informative post.
Sridhar

Roohi ``- he already listens to you guys Mehmaan Ji (right?) `` - Yep Mehmaan Ji is right. Well, well so people actually listen in...you can hear it at http://www.brisvaani.com/downloads/MASTI.html (not my favourites but at least they are there). So when does he come on air? Must listen in.

subroto - he actually doing a show ... don`t know when it airs - seems to be enjoying it so far Mum says (can`t speak for his audience !) - he already listens to you guys Mehmaan Ji (right?)

Re Harimau #135 : Sure more schools are required in Uttranchal are but the literacy rate there is 72.28% (Source: Census of India; Economic Survey of India) substantially higher than Bihar`s 47%. Quite surprisingly the literacy rate for UP is 70%. And second only to Kerala is Meghalaya with 88.49% literacy. Another surprise Chandrababu Naidu`s cyber state has only 61.11% literacy.


Re Roohi #134 well if he can tune in 10:30 am this Saturday he`ll find a reason not to listen to it anymore :-)

Dost Mittar , NazarHayat, Mantolives, SR ji

---

Can you answer this question raised in the previous posts???

````Why the bane of confrontation has not been properly analysed and why right lessons not been learned from past experiences of political polarisation?

Three important aspects of the bane of confrontation between the government and the opposition which can threaten the country`s survival are one way or the other related to the failure of army and the political parties to redefine each other`s role. First, army as an institution in Pakistan has not accepted the fact that it should be subservient to the civilian rule. Since the death of the country`s first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan till today, army has always tried to prove that it is more responsible and better than the political parties because the latter are corrupt and inefficient. But, in the process of criticising political parties, the army has overlooked the basic fact that because of its interference in politics and its consistent effort to rule either through a proxy or directly, political process in the country has not taken roots. Hence, only politicians cannot be held responsible for various debacles because they were not allowed by the army to rule effectively. Even the governments of Z. A. Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who were considered to be strong civilian regimes, became a victim of army`s intervention and were subsequently overthrown.````