V. S. Naipaul
Rashid Mughal March 22, 2004
#69 Posted by harimau on March 25, 2004 2:52:22 am
Ref sagittarius #64
[To the best of my knowledge ``... the burning of the train full of Hindu pilgrims at Godhra, Gujarat`` came about after some Muslim women were gang-raped by some Hindus on that train, and so began what I referred to as ``the Gujarat Burnings`` about which you`ve got so het up.]
That some Muslim women were gang-raped is ``fact`` that hasn`t come out in any news reports so far.
In fact, the justification for the Muslims riot mob to form, advanced shortly after the train was burnt, was that a Muslim Tea Vendor`s Daughter was kidnapped by the Hindu pilgrims. This line was propagated by every newspaper including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal without disclosing how the nameless Muslim Tea Vendor`s Daughter escaped from the carriage that was locked from the outside but 60+ Hindu pilgrims, by the wrath of Allah and due to the ineffectiveness of Ram, could not and perished in hellfire.
Even when the nameless Muslim Tea Vendor`s Daughter finally turned up to testify in court, nobody seemed to have asked the question of how Allah spirited her out of the locked carriage. (Incidentally, she actually turned out to have a name -- Sofia... something that fearless investigative journalists from across the globe couldn`t find out but I published on Chowk after reading the relevant newsreports.)
[I used the term ``Gujarat Burnings`` to encompass your prophet Newton`s theory to show that the burnings took place this side of action and that side of reaction.]
I guess I said something like ``how come I get the feeling that it doesn`t encompass the burning of the train``. Thanks for the clarification!
[As for your venomous ``By the way, after the Gujarathi [sic] Islamic Thugs were taught there is no fury like a Hindu scorned in today`s India, have you noticed how quite [sic] as a mouse they have become?`` let me just say that it is precisely because there are people like you and me around that the world is full of it.]
I am sorry you find my rhetoric venomous but not that of the Mullahs who excommunicate Muslims for singing ``Vande Mataram``. But I guess that is the way the Islamic cookie crumbles.
[Where is the wisdom of the Vedas, you Hindu? says the Muslim; and where is your compassion, O Muslim? says the Hindu.]
The Wisdom of the Hindus, as summarized by the words of Lord Krishna in Bhagavad Gita, is ``do your duty without consideration of reward``. If some Hindus took that to mean their duty involves killing Islamic Thugs, I think Lord Krishna allowed for that too. After all, he was telling the Pandavas to kill their cousins the Kauravas. And you and I merely happen to be cousins separated by a border!
[Finally, no comment about the verbal diarrhea that follows, and I quote: ``All of you hand-wringing Hindus who feel bad that the Best Bakery accused were acquitted for lack of evidence (and lack of zeal in pursuing the case by the prosecution, according to the Supreme Court), have you noticed how the We-are-born-to-rule-over-the-Hindus and We-shall-establish-the-1000-year-long-Mughal-Empire-in-Delhi-again crowd has been slinking around with its tail between its legs?``
I thought we lived in civilized times but now I am wondering: What is the relationship (or significance) of History to Faith?]
Hindus are just about as civilized as their Islamic thuggish neighborhood allows them to be. If you had publicly wondered aloud after Sept 11, whether those who were learning to fly were living in civilized times, your current wonderment would indeed be exemplary. Lacking that, it seems to have the usual the-whole-world-is-against-poor-innocent-Muslims flavor.
For the vast majority of Indians (Hindus if you want to be specific), what is Soysauce for goose is Soysauce for gander too. When the BJP gets re-elected, you are going to find Indian Muslim Thugs slinking around with their tails inside their shalwars for the next 5 years.
[To the best of my knowledge ``... the burning of the train full of Hindu pilgrims at Godhra, Gujarat`` came about after some Muslim women were gang-raped by some Hindus on that train, and so began what I referred to as ``the Gujarat Burnings`` about which you`ve got so het up.]
That some Muslim women were gang-raped is ``fact`` that hasn`t come out in any news reports so far.
In fact, the justification for the Muslims riot mob to form, advanced shortly after the train was burnt, was that a Muslim Tea Vendor`s Daughter was kidnapped by the Hindu pilgrims. This line was propagated by every newspaper including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal without disclosing how the nameless Muslim Tea Vendor`s Daughter escaped from the carriage that was locked from the outside but 60+ Hindu pilgrims, by the wrath of Allah and due to the ineffectiveness of Ram, could not and perished in hellfire.
Even when the nameless Muslim Tea Vendor`s Daughter finally turned up to testify in court, nobody seemed to have asked the question of how Allah spirited her out of the locked carriage. (Incidentally, she actually turned out to have a name -- Sofia... something that fearless investigative journalists from across the globe couldn`t find out but I published on Chowk after reading the relevant newsreports.)
[I used the term ``Gujarat Burnings`` to encompass your prophet Newton`s theory to show that the burnings took place this side of action and that side of reaction.]
I guess I said something like ``how come I get the feeling that it doesn`t encompass the burning of the train``. Thanks for the clarification!
[As for your venomous ``By the way, after the Gujarathi [sic] Islamic Thugs were taught there is no fury like a Hindu scorned in today`s India, have you noticed how quite [sic] as a mouse they have become?`` let me just say that it is precisely because there are people like you and me around that the world is full of it.]
I am sorry you find my rhetoric venomous but not that of the Mullahs who excommunicate Muslims for singing ``Vande Mataram``. But I guess that is the way the Islamic cookie crumbles.
[Where is the wisdom of the Vedas, you Hindu? says the Muslim; and where is your compassion, O Muslim? says the Hindu.]
The Wisdom of the Hindus, as summarized by the words of Lord Krishna in Bhagavad Gita, is ``do your duty without consideration of reward``. If some Hindus took that to mean their duty involves killing Islamic Thugs, I think Lord Krishna allowed for that too. After all, he was telling the Pandavas to kill their cousins the Kauravas. And you and I merely happen to be cousins separated by a border!
[Finally, no comment about the verbal diarrhea that follows, and I quote: ``All of you hand-wringing Hindus who feel bad that the Best Bakery accused were acquitted for lack of evidence (and lack of zeal in pursuing the case by the prosecution, according to the Supreme Court), have you noticed how the We-are-born-to-rule-over-the-Hindus and We-shall-establish-the-1000-year-long-Mughal-Empire-in-Delhi-again crowd has been slinking around with its tail between its legs?``
I thought we lived in civilized times but now I am wondering: What is the relationship (or significance) of History to Faith?]
Hindus are just about as civilized as their Islamic thuggish neighborhood allows them to be. If you had publicly wondered aloud after Sept 11, whether those who were learning to fly were living in civilized times, your current wonderment would indeed be exemplary. Lacking that, it seems to have the usual the-whole-world-is-against-poor-innocent-Muslims flavor.
For the vast majority of Indians (Hindus if you want to be specific), what is Soysauce for goose is Soysauce for gander too. When the BJP gets re-elected, you are going to find Indian Muslim Thugs slinking around with their tails inside their shalwars for the next 5 years.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#68 Posted by harimau on March 25, 2004 2:52:22 am
Ref Sudalaikkannu #60
[I think this name issue is quite silly. Haven`t you heard of names like Ram Das and Ananda & so on & so forth that folks choose when they convert to hinduism? I think it`s supposed to be more of a religious identity than a cultural one.]
How about the Maasanamuthus, Somasundarams and Chinna Karuppans? How does one explain their adopting names like Tamil Mani, Tamil Arasan (King), Tamil Kudimagan (Citizen) or even better, Thanga Tamil Magan (Golden Son of Tamil) while they continue to bite into the necks of live chickens during the function called Mayanak Kollai celebrated in the town`s burial grounds? Particularly when their leader continues to call himself Karunanidhi (Karuna - Compassion, Nidhi - Source, fund; both from Sanskrit).
[Women wearing shuttlecock burkha in the hot, humid climate of south india because it`s a ``muslim attire``, now that`s something else. They must be trying to show they`d rather be in arabia.]
How about you guys? A hundred or so years back, you guys were suddenly going to barbers to get your uncut and unkempr hair fashioned into Brahminical tufts, leading to riots. Now you go to a modern salon and get your hair layer cut and blown dry. When are you guys going back to a single piece of cloth around your waists and unkempt hair? Don`t you think there is a contradiction between names like Nedunchezhiyan and wearing of tube pants (trousers)?
[I think this name issue is quite silly. Haven`t you heard of names like Ram Das and Ananda & so on & so forth that folks choose when they convert to hinduism? I think it`s supposed to be more of a religious identity than a cultural one.]
How about the Maasanamuthus, Somasundarams and Chinna Karuppans? How does one explain their adopting names like Tamil Mani, Tamil Arasan (King), Tamil Kudimagan (Citizen) or even better, Thanga Tamil Magan (Golden Son of Tamil) while they continue to bite into the necks of live chickens during the function called Mayanak Kollai celebrated in the town`s burial grounds? Particularly when their leader continues to call himself Karunanidhi (Karuna - Compassion, Nidhi - Source, fund; both from Sanskrit).
[Women wearing shuttlecock burkha in the hot, humid climate of south india because it`s a ``muslim attire``, now that`s something else. They must be trying to show they`d rather be in arabia.]
How about you guys? A hundred or so years back, you guys were suddenly going to barbers to get your uncut and unkempr hair fashioned into Brahminical tufts, leading to riots. Now you go to a modern salon and get your hair layer cut and blown dry. When are you guys going back to a single piece of cloth around your waists and unkempt hair? Don`t you think there is a contradiction between names like Nedunchezhiyan and wearing of tube pants (trousers)?
#67 Posted by FarzanaVersey on March 25, 2004 12:49:16 am
#57 by warpster:
Re. Indian Muslim insecurity: It came to the fore after the Bombay riots and got further consolidated post-Gujarat. But the fear psychosis has to do with the fact that in both instances the Establishment was an active participant. And then to be blamed for the terrorist acts by wayward members of their community only adds to this sense of betrayal, if I may say so.
Re. demagoguery: It is my view that education does not immunise you against it; if you notice, the militants of today are themselves educated individuals; the people in the forefront of a `cultural renaissance` are the middle class urban people; a Shahabuddin can be far more dangerous than an Imam Bukhari, who has little currency. Now, compare this with the Shankaracharyas and the hold they have.
Re. cultural diversity: I do believe that food, movies, work etc are adequate. You had mentioned acceptance of another culture. I find that even in these areas people can get into isolationist mode. And you are right; it applies to regions, castes and classes as well. My mother may have learned Sanskrit shlokas in her school days and she has never had any conflict with Vande Mataram; I sang hymns in my convent school and I did not find it clashing with what then constituted my religion (as of now, my affiliation is purely based on a `community` identity, as I do not practise any rituals).
Re.religious symbols vs. theocracy: You say that the two cannot be clubbed together. I would agree, but in today`s politically vitiated atmosphere symbolism buffers theocracy. When Iran issued a fatwa against Rushdie, `The Satanic Verses` were burned in various parts of the world. The latter was a symbol of protest, but it legitimised the theocracy of one State. Likewise, rath yatras, havans, maha-artis are symbols, but they are legitimising the call for a `Hindu Rashtra`. Must they be banned? Yes, in public places in a secular, welfare state there ought not to be a place for these. I have repeatedly said the same about the use of loudspeakers and the namaaz in public spaces.
One can take pride in one`s culture by being a part of its progress. The Muslims in India have not chosen to be `backward`. The madrassa culture is often an add-on and not the only education they get, if they get any. I often pass the Anjuman Islam School and see girls stepping out with books that are not religious at all. People keep mentioning Azim Premji as an example of how he rose to such great heights despite being a Muslim. We must remember that people come from different backgrounds and therefore have an advantage. Premji does not have to answer questions on Islamic terrorism, but the man in Bhendi Bazaar, even if he has only set up a cart on the road to sell his wares, will have to do so. Besides, if Azim Premji made it the policy of his company to employ only Muslims how would this same society react? Whereas you will often see that many business houses employ people only from their community. I might add that had Premji chosen to do so, I would have been disgusted.
I suppose except for my refusal to accept the use of the term `Hindutva` as implying pride in Indian tradition (not in today`s political climate), you are I are on the same page, albeit with a few different lines.
PS: I suppose the writer of this article might rightly prefer that people discussed Naipaul instead!
Re. Indian Muslim insecurity: It came to the fore after the Bombay riots and got further consolidated post-Gujarat. But the fear psychosis has to do with the fact that in both instances the Establishment was an active participant. And then to be blamed for the terrorist acts by wayward members of their community only adds to this sense of betrayal, if I may say so.
Re. demagoguery: It is my view that education does not immunise you against it; if you notice, the militants of today are themselves educated individuals; the people in the forefront of a `cultural renaissance` are the middle class urban people; a Shahabuddin can be far more dangerous than an Imam Bukhari, who has little currency. Now, compare this with the Shankaracharyas and the hold they have.
Re. cultural diversity: I do believe that food, movies, work etc are adequate. You had mentioned acceptance of another culture. I find that even in these areas people can get into isolationist mode. And you are right; it applies to regions, castes and classes as well. My mother may have learned Sanskrit shlokas in her school days and she has never had any conflict with Vande Mataram; I sang hymns in my convent school and I did not find it clashing with what then constituted my religion (as of now, my affiliation is purely based on a `community` identity, as I do not practise any rituals).
Re.religious symbols vs. theocracy: You say that the two cannot be clubbed together. I would agree, but in today`s politically vitiated atmosphere symbolism buffers theocracy. When Iran issued a fatwa against Rushdie, `The Satanic Verses` were burned in various parts of the world. The latter was a symbol of protest, but it legitimised the theocracy of one State. Likewise, rath yatras, havans, maha-artis are symbols, but they are legitimising the call for a `Hindu Rashtra`. Must they be banned? Yes, in public places in a secular, welfare state there ought not to be a place for these. I have repeatedly said the same about the use of loudspeakers and the namaaz in public spaces.
One can take pride in one`s culture by being a part of its progress. The Muslims in India have not chosen to be `backward`. The madrassa culture is often an add-on and not the only education they get, if they get any. I often pass the Anjuman Islam School and see girls stepping out with books that are not religious at all. People keep mentioning Azim Premji as an example of how he rose to such great heights despite being a Muslim. We must remember that people come from different backgrounds and therefore have an advantage. Premji does not have to answer questions on Islamic terrorism, but the man in Bhendi Bazaar, even if he has only set up a cart on the road to sell his wares, will have to do so. Besides, if Azim Premji made it the policy of his company to employ only Muslims how would this same society react? Whereas you will often see that many business houses employ people only from their community. I might add that had Premji chosen to do so, I would have been disgusted.
I suppose except for my refusal to accept the use of the term `Hindutva` as implying pride in Indian tradition (not in today`s political climate), you are I are on the same page, albeit with a few different lines.
PS: I suppose the writer of this article might rightly prefer that people discussed Naipaul instead!
#66 Posted by sagittarius on March 24, 2004 9:33:17 pm
Arjun_M says I`m ``just pissed off at Naipaul because he said something about Islam`` as if Islam was my personal property.
I have no subjective attachment to any form of organized religion and I don`t practise any ritual mumbo-jumbo. I believe not so much in religion as I do in spirituality, so there goes your presumption about myself.
Naipaul baffles me, and I have shared my bafflement with you. I am concerned that a genius like Naipaul can be such a nasty social misfit and that he can stoop so low as to play right into the hands of the BJP.
With all the Hindu-Muslim war-games associated with this article and the interacts that are loaded with traditional mumbo-jumbo, centuries-old cultural conditioning and oodles and oodles of historical baloney, I am wondering if any of us will ever be able to see the same thing at the same time on the same level of being.
Rashid Mughal
#65 Posted by arjun_m on March 24, 2004 8:51:33 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#64 Posted by warpster on March 24, 2004 8:14:33 pm
#52 Romair
You have made specific claims. One pertains to the number of muslims being killed in India by the BJP (this is a political party and, as we speak, has successfully attracted prominent muslims to its fold) and the army in Kashmir. In the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat many innocent muslims were killed by mobs (inspired by local BJP leaders); this is a mob reaction and comparable to the Sikh pogrom in Delhi in 1984 following Indira Gandhi`s assasination which was abetted by Congress leaders (including a comment from Rajiv Gandhi that when a tree falls, the earth will shake); Khalistanis then could claim that Sikhs were being systematically eliminated but were they wrong in misinterpreting a one-off extraordinary incident ? Point out where in India is there a systematic elimination of innocent muslims by the BJP. I will let someone more knowledgeable address these points.
what I will address is the following
I don`t have statistics on East Pakistan. But the population ratios, by themselves, make it hard to believe than more East Pakistani Hindus were killed than East Pakistani Muslims, by West Pakistan. Do you have any credible sources to back your theory?
This is what I thought as well, given the 80-20 muslim-hindu ratio in then East Pakistan. However I came across analyses that suggest that the killings did not follow this ratio. read below. Even if the numbers are not spot on, the trends seem unmistakable. Even though these are horrible events (as were the partition riots), there is no point in pretending that they did not happen. From these accounts being a bengali and a hindu was a double-whammy.
HINDU GENOCIDE IN EAST PAKISTAN
by ShriNandan Vyas
ABSTRACT
It is well known that the 1971 army repression in Bangla Desh
(former East Pakistan) resulted in influx of 10 million refugees
into India. Most world renowned relief and news agencies put the
number of dead at 3 million. However the fact that is glossed over
in these statistics is that THE ENTIRE HINDU POPULATION OF EAST
PAKISTAN WAS THE PRIMARY TARGET OF PAKISTANI ARMY DURING THE 9
MONTHS OF REPRESSION IN 1971. Using the population statistics from
Bangla Desh Government and US Government publications this article
PROVES that 80 percent of the refugees from Bangla Desh were Hindus
and that 80 percent of the 3 million killed were Hindus. THUS IT
WAS A HINDU REFUGEE PROBLEM and IT WAS A HINDU GENOCIDE THAT TOOK
PLACE IN EAST PAKISTAN IN 1971.
10 References - Encyclopedia Britannica, Bangla Desh Government -
Ministry of Planning (for statistics), Newsweek, New York Times,
Senator Edward Kennedy`s report to U.S.Senate Judiciary Committee.
INTRODUCTION
In the December 1970 general election in Pakistan, Awami League won
167 of 169 seats and over 80 % of popular votes in East Pakistan.
Numerically Awami League had absolute majority of seats in the
Pakistan e National Assembly (167 of the total 313 seats)(1).
Resource allocation, representation in the federal government were
always much lower for East Pakistan (2). The Pakistani government`s
apathy to East Pakistan after a terrible cyclone in November 1970
in which over 250,000 people died, had already alienated East
Pakistani people. The solid outcome of the 1970 elections for Awami
League created an alternative power center for an already alienated
people. The differences between East and West Pakistani politicians
snowballed into a major international crisis. On March 25, 1971
Pakistani army on President Yahya Khan`s orders initiated a
campaign of terror which was to last till its final surrender to
the Indian army on December 17, 1971. This terror campaign by Pak
army resulted in 10 million Bangla Deshi refugees crossing over to
India (per Senator Edward Kennedy`s report to U.S. Senate Judiciary
Committee (3)) and 3 million killed (4,5) based on reports from
most relief agencies. However the religious mix of both the
refugees and the dead is not mentioned. This significant
information has particularly been absent in the reports from Indian
News Media. This selective news dissemination has kept a more
sinister truth of Hindu genocide in East Pakistan hidden from the
world in general and Indians in particular.
HINDUS IN EAST PAKISTAN WERE SPECIAL TARGET OF PAK ARMY
In the summary of his report dated November 1, 1971 Senator Edward
Kennedy writes (6): `Field reports to the U.S. Government,
countless eye-witness journalistic accounts, reports of
International agencies such as World Bank and additional
information available to the subcommittee document the reign of
terror which grips East Bengal (East Pakistan). HARDEST HIT HAVE
BEEN MEMBERS OF THE HINDU COMMUNITY WHO HAVE BEEN ROBBED OF THEIR
LANDS AND SHOPS, SYSTEMATICALLY SLAUGHTERED, AND IN SOME PLACES,
PAINTED WITH YELLOW PATCHES MARKED ``H``. All of this has been
officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law
from Islamabad. ..` (emphasis added by author of this article)
Sydney Schanberg, pulitzer prize winning journalist (of `Killing
Fields`) was New York Times correspondent in Dhaka in 1971 at the
time of army repression and during the 1971 Bangla Desh war. In his
syndicate column `The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored`
Mr.Schanberg writes: ``I covered the war and witnessed first the
population`s joyous welcome of the Indian soldiers as liberators ..
Later I toured the country by road to see the Pakistani legacy
firsthand. In town after town there was an execution area where
people had been killed by bayonet, bullet and bludgeon. In some
towns, executions were held on a daily basis .
This was a month after the war`s end (i.e. January 1972), ... human
bones were still scattered along many roadsides. Blood stained
clothing and tufts of human hair clung to the brush at these
killing grounds. Children too young to understand were playing
grotesque games with skulls. OTHER REMINDERS WERE THE YELLOW ``H``s
THE PAKISTANIS HAD PAINTED ON THE HOMES OF HINDUS, PARTICULAR
TARGETS OF THE MUSLIM ARMY.`` (7).
Thus two independent observations one dated prior to November 1,
1971 and other in January 1972 confirm that Hindu houses in East
Pakistan were marked with yellow ``H``s and that Hindus were
particular targets of the Pakistani army. The situation thus bears
an uncanny resemblance to the predicament of Jews targeted by Nazis
from 1939 to 1944, with similar out come.
MOST OF THE REFUGEES FROM BANGLA DESH WERE HINDUS
Senator Edward Kennedy in his report gives following details about
the the refugees from Bangla Desh in 1971. As of October 25, 1971,
9.54 million refugees from East Pakistan had crossed over to India.
The average influx as of October 1971 was 10,645 refugees a day
(3). Hence the total refugee population at the start of Indo-Pak
war on December 3, 1971 was about 10 million (5).
Sen. Kennedy further mentions that Government of India had set up
separate refugee camps for Hindus and Muslims where possible, i.e.
refugee camps of Hindus were located in Hindu majority areas and
similarly Muslim camps were located in Muslim majority areas. THE
COMMUNAL REPRESENTATION OF REFUGEES WAS 80 PERCENT HINDU, 15
PERCENT MUSLIM AND 5 PERCENT CHRISTIAN AND OTHER (8).
This means that 8 MILLION OF THE 10 MILLION REFUGEES WERE HINDUS
(8). Other fact that corroborates this is that when Sen.Kennedy
asked several Chief Relief officers in charge of refugee camps what
was needed most urgently, their reply was ``crematoriums``.
THE MISSING 2 .5 MILLION HINDUS
Several agencies indicate that the brutal Pakistani army repression
killed 3 million Bengalis. This estimate is even given by the
Government of Bangla Desh (5). However no religious mix of the dead
is easily available.
Let us therefore look at the population demographics for Bangla
Desh.
TABLE I
Source : Based on Information from Bangladesh Ministry of planning,
Bureau of Statistics (9)
Year Total Population Hindu Population Hindu Population
millions as % of total millions
1941 42.00 28.0 11.76
1961 50.84 18.5 9.41
1974 71.48 13.5 * 9.65
1981 87.13 12.2 10.63
* Encyclopedia Britannica (10) gives 13.5 % figure for 1974, where
as Government of Bangla Desh gives 13.5 % figure for 1971 & total
population of 71.48 million for 1974 (9).
Since Hindus and Muslims in Bangladesh have similar socio- economic
and educational backgrounds, the birth and death rates for these
two groups must be very similar. This means that the Hindu
population must grow at the same pace as the total population
growth rate. Hence any unusual drop must be accounted for by influx
of Hindu refugees and mortality rate from non natural causes.
Thus if 1947 partition had not resulted the Hindu population of
East Pakistan area should have increased proportionally from 11.76
millions to 14.24 millions (11.76 * 50.84 / 42 = 14.24). However
the Indian Government records indicate that between 1947 and 1958,
4.12 million (Hindu) refugees crossed into India from East
Bengal(3). This means the Hindu population in East Pakistan in 1961
should have been 10.12 million (14.24 - 4.12) compared to the
actual 9.41 million. The missing 0.7 million Hindu population can
be accounted by several hundred thousands killed in the riots in
1947 on the Bengal border, plus the refugee influx from 1958 to
1961.
Table II -
Year Hindu Population Expected Hindu Regugees from Hindus
Of East Pak/ BD Population in E.Pakistan to missing
Actual (9) Absence of India (8)
Strife
(millions) (millions) (millions) (millions)
1941 11.76
1961 9.41 14.24 4.12 (1947-58) 0.71
1974 9.65 13.23 1.11 (1964-70) 2.47
Source - Info from Table I
Let us now look at Hindu population in East pakistan from 1961 to
1974. With a similar calculation, the expected Hindu population of
Bangla Desh in 1974 should have been 13.23 million ( 9.41 * 71.48 /
50.84 = 13.23 ). However the actual Hindu population as per Bangla
Desh Census data for 1974 was 9.65 million. The Government of
India`s record indicate that 1.11 million (Hindu) refugees crossed
into India between 1964 and 1970 (3) PRIOR to the 1971 crisis.
THUS 2.47 MILLION (13.23 - 9.65 - 1.11 = 2.47) HINDUS FROM EAST
PAKISTAN ARE UNACCOUNTED FOR FROM THE 1971 PAK ARMY REPRESSION.
OTHER PROOF FOR 2.4 MILLION HINDUS KILLED IN EAST PAKISTAN
Since the 80 percent of the refugees in 1971 were Hindus,a similar
proportion of the dead are likely to be Hindus also. The official
Bangla Desh government estimate puts the number of Bengalis killed
at 3 million. 80 percent of 3 million put THE NUMBER OF HINDUS
KILLED AT 2.4 MILLION which is close to the number of Hindus
missing calculated comes above.
SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
1. Independent accounts indicate that Hindus from East Pakistan were
special target during the 1971 army repression. HINDU HOUSES WERE
PAINTED WITH YELLOW ``H``s, THEY WERE ROBBED OF THEIR LANDS AND SHOPS,
AND THEY WERE SYSTEMATICALLY SLAUGHTERED.
2. 80 percent of the refugees to India in 1971 were Hindus, THUS IT WAS
A HINDU REFUGEE PROBLEM.
3. NEARLY 2.5 MILLION HINDUS WERE KILLED DURING THE 9 MONTHS OF
PAKISTANI ARMY REPRESSION OF EAST PAKISTAN IN 1971. THUS IT WAS A
HINDU SLAUGHTER IN 1971.
4. ALL THE ABOVE BEAR AN UNCANNY RESEMBLANCE TO THE PERSECUTION &
HOLOCAUST OF JEWS BY THE NAZIS.
5. GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA DELIBERATELY HID THE SINISTER
TRUTH OF HINDU GENOCIDE IN EAST PAKISTAN.
6. In any internal political problem of an Islamic country, Hindus
(or minorities of other religions) become the scapegoats and will be
liquidated at the first chance the Islamic Government gets.
COMMENTS & FUTURE WORK
This is just the tip of the iceberg. The ethnic cleansing of Hindus
in Bangla Desh did not end in 1971. Since 1974 to 1981 the Hindu
population as a percent of total Bangla Deshi population decreased
from 13.5 % to 12.2 %. This slide has continued over the last
decade. Same is true about Hindus in Pakistan and in Kashmir
valley.
This topic is extensively dealt in a book `Genocide in East
Pakistan/ Bangla Desh` by S.K.Bhattacharya. However the present
author has verified the findings of S.K. Bhattacharya based on
completely independent sources. For detailed descriptions and news
reports of 1971, reader should refer to the original book.
However there is a need for systematic record keeping of this
recent history, so that we don`t repeat again (and again and
again..) Also there is a need to build a memorial of this Hindu
holocaust similar to the Jewish Holocaust memorial in Washington
DC.
REFREENCES
1. Bangladesh: The Birth Of A Nation, A hand book of Background
information and Documentary Sources Compiled by Univ.of Chicago
Group of Scholars, by M.Nicholas, P.Oldensburg, Ed.W.Morehouse,
M.Seshachalam & Co., India, 1972, p.7
2. Same as reference 1, p.73
3. Crisis in South Asia - A report by Senator Edward Kennedy to
the Subcommittee investigating the Problem of Refugees and
Their Settlement, Submitted to U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee,
November 1, 1971, U.S. Govt. Press, pp.6-7.
4. Newsweek, August 1, 1994, p.37
5. Same as reference 1, pp.44-45
6. Same as reference 3, p.66
7. The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored , Syndicated Column by
Sydney Schanberg, New York Times, May 3, 1994.
8. Same as reference 3, p. 19
9. Bangladesh A Country Study, Ed. J.Heitzman & R.L.Worden, 2nd Ed,
Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Publisher U.S. Army,
1989, pp.250,255
10. Encyclopedia Britannica, 1982 Book of the Year, Section on Bangla
Desh.
You have made specific claims. One pertains to the number of muslims being killed in India by the BJP (this is a political party and, as we speak, has successfully attracted prominent muslims to its fold) and the army in Kashmir. In the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat many innocent muslims were killed by mobs (inspired by local BJP leaders); this is a mob reaction and comparable to the Sikh pogrom in Delhi in 1984 following Indira Gandhi`s assasination which was abetted by Congress leaders (including a comment from Rajiv Gandhi that when a tree falls, the earth will shake); Khalistanis then could claim that Sikhs were being systematically eliminated but were they wrong in misinterpreting a one-off extraordinary incident ? Point out where in India is there a systematic elimination of innocent muslims by the BJP. I will let someone more knowledgeable address these points.
what I will address is the following
I don`t have statistics on East Pakistan. But the population ratios, by themselves, make it hard to believe than more East Pakistani Hindus were killed than East Pakistani Muslims, by West Pakistan. Do you have any credible sources to back your theory?
This is what I thought as well, given the 80-20 muslim-hindu ratio in then East Pakistan. However I came across analyses that suggest that the killings did not follow this ratio. read below. Even if the numbers are not spot on, the trends seem unmistakable. Even though these are horrible events (as were the partition riots), there is no point in pretending that they did not happen. From these accounts being a bengali and a hindu was a double-whammy.
HINDU GENOCIDE IN EAST PAKISTAN
by ShriNandan Vyas
ABSTRACT
It is well known that the 1971 army repression in Bangla Desh
(former East Pakistan) resulted in influx of 10 million refugees
into India. Most world renowned relief and news agencies put the
number of dead at 3 million. However the fact that is glossed over
in these statistics is that THE ENTIRE HINDU POPULATION OF EAST
PAKISTAN WAS THE PRIMARY TARGET OF PAKISTANI ARMY DURING THE 9
MONTHS OF REPRESSION IN 1971. Using the population statistics from
Bangla Desh Government and US Government publications this article
PROVES that 80 percent of the refugees from Bangla Desh were Hindus
and that 80 percent of the 3 million killed were Hindus. THUS IT
WAS A HINDU REFUGEE PROBLEM and IT WAS A HINDU GENOCIDE THAT TOOK
PLACE IN EAST PAKISTAN IN 1971.
10 References - Encyclopedia Britannica, Bangla Desh Government -
Ministry of Planning (for statistics), Newsweek, New York Times,
Senator Edward Kennedy`s report to U.S.Senate Judiciary Committee.
INTRODUCTION
In the December 1970 general election in Pakistan, Awami League won
167 of 169 seats and over 80 % of popular votes in East Pakistan.
Numerically Awami League had absolute majority of seats in the
Pakistan e National Assembly (167 of the total 313 seats)(1).
Resource allocation, representation in the federal government were
always much lower for East Pakistan (2). The Pakistani government`s
apathy to East Pakistan after a terrible cyclone in November 1970
in which over 250,000 people died, had already alienated East
Pakistani people. The solid outcome of the 1970 elections for Awami
League created an alternative power center for an already alienated
people. The differences between East and West Pakistani politicians
snowballed into a major international crisis. On March 25, 1971
Pakistani army on President Yahya Khan`s orders initiated a
campaign of terror which was to last till its final surrender to
the Indian army on December 17, 1971. This terror campaign by Pak
army resulted in 10 million Bangla Deshi refugees crossing over to
India (per Senator Edward Kennedy`s report to U.S. Senate Judiciary
Committee (3)) and 3 million killed (4,5) based on reports from
most relief agencies. However the religious mix of both the
refugees and the dead is not mentioned. This significant
information has particularly been absent in the reports from Indian
News Media. This selective news dissemination has kept a more
sinister truth of Hindu genocide in East Pakistan hidden from the
world in general and Indians in particular.
HINDUS IN EAST PAKISTAN WERE SPECIAL TARGET OF PAK ARMY
In the summary of his report dated November 1, 1971 Senator Edward
Kennedy writes (6): `Field reports to the U.S. Government,
countless eye-witness journalistic accounts, reports of
International agencies such as World Bank and additional
information available to the subcommittee document the reign of
terror which grips East Bengal (East Pakistan). HARDEST HIT HAVE
BEEN MEMBERS OF THE HINDU COMMUNITY WHO HAVE BEEN ROBBED OF THEIR
LANDS AND SHOPS, SYSTEMATICALLY SLAUGHTERED, AND IN SOME PLACES,
PAINTED WITH YELLOW PATCHES MARKED ``H``. All of this has been
officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law
from Islamabad. ..` (emphasis added by author of this article)
Sydney Schanberg, pulitzer prize winning journalist (of `Killing
Fields`) was New York Times correspondent in Dhaka in 1971 at the
time of army repression and during the 1971 Bangla Desh war. In his
syndicate column `The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored`
Mr.Schanberg writes: ``I covered the war and witnessed first the
population`s joyous welcome of the Indian soldiers as liberators ..
Later I toured the country by road to see the Pakistani legacy
firsthand. In town after town there was an execution area where
people had been killed by bayonet, bullet and bludgeon. In some
towns, executions were held on a daily basis .
This was a month after the war`s end (i.e. January 1972), ... human
bones were still scattered along many roadsides. Blood stained
clothing and tufts of human hair clung to the brush at these
killing grounds. Children too young to understand were playing
grotesque games with skulls. OTHER REMINDERS WERE THE YELLOW ``H``s
THE PAKISTANIS HAD PAINTED ON THE HOMES OF HINDUS, PARTICULAR
TARGETS OF THE MUSLIM ARMY.`` (7).
Thus two independent observations one dated prior to November 1,
1971 and other in January 1972 confirm that Hindu houses in East
Pakistan were marked with yellow ``H``s and that Hindus were
particular targets of the Pakistani army. The situation thus bears
an uncanny resemblance to the predicament of Jews targeted by Nazis
from 1939 to 1944, with similar out come.
MOST OF THE REFUGEES FROM BANGLA DESH WERE HINDUS
Senator Edward Kennedy in his report gives following details about
the the refugees from Bangla Desh in 1971. As of October 25, 1971,
9.54 million refugees from East Pakistan had crossed over to India.
The average influx as of October 1971 was 10,645 refugees a day
(3). Hence the total refugee population at the start of Indo-Pak
war on December 3, 1971 was about 10 million (5).
Sen. Kennedy further mentions that Government of India had set up
separate refugee camps for Hindus and Muslims where possible, i.e.
refugee camps of Hindus were located in Hindu majority areas and
similarly Muslim camps were located in Muslim majority areas. THE
COMMUNAL REPRESENTATION OF REFUGEES WAS 80 PERCENT HINDU, 15
PERCENT MUSLIM AND 5 PERCENT CHRISTIAN AND OTHER (8).
This means that 8 MILLION OF THE 10 MILLION REFUGEES WERE HINDUS
(8). Other fact that corroborates this is that when Sen.Kennedy
asked several Chief Relief officers in charge of refugee camps what
was needed most urgently, their reply was ``crematoriums``.
THE MISSING 2 .5 MILLION HINDUS
Several agencies indicate that the brutal Pakistani army repression
killed 3 million Bengalis. This estimate is even given by the
Government of Bangla Desh (5). However no religious mix of the dead
is easily available.
Let us therefore look at the population demographics for Bangla
Desh.
TABLE I
Source : Based on Information from Bangladesh Ministry of planning,
Bureau of Statistics (9)
Year Total Population Hindu Population Hindu Population
millions as % of total millions
1941 42.00 28.0 11.76
1961 50.84 18.5 9.41
1974 71.48 13.5 * 9.65
1981 87.13 12.2 10.63
* Encyclopedia Britannica (10) gives 13.5 % figure for 1974, where
as Government of Bangla Desh gives 13.5 % figure for 1971 & total
population of 71.48 million for 1974 (9).
Since Hindus and Muslims in Bangladesh have similar socio- economic
and educational backgrounds, the birth and death rates for these
two groups must be very similar. This means that the Hindu
population must grow at the same pace as the total population
growth rate. Hence any unusual drop must be accounted for by influx
of Hindu refugees and mortality rate from non natural causes.
Thus if 1947 partition had not resulted the Hindu population of
East Pakistan area should have increased proportionally from 11.76
millions to 14.24 millions (11.76 * 50.84 / 42 = 14.24). However
the Indian Government records indicate that between 1947 and 1958,
4.12 million (Hindu) refugees crossed into India from East
Bengal(3). This means the Hindu population in East Pakistan in 1961
should have been 10.12 million (14.24 - 4.12) compared to the
actual 9.41 million. The missing 0.7 million Hindu population can
be accounted by several hundred thousands killed in the riots in
1947 on the Bengal border, plus the refugee influx from 1958 to
1961.
Table II -
Year Hindu Population Expected Hindu Regugees from Hindus
Of East Pak/ BD Population in E.Pakistan to missing
Actual (9) Absence of India (8)
Strife
(millions) (millions) (millions) (millions)
1941 11.76
1961 9.41 14.24 4.12 (1947-58) 0.71
1974 9.65 13.23 1.11 (1964-70) 2.47
Source - Info from Table I
Let us now look at Hindu population in East pakistan from 1961 to
1974. With a similar calculation, the expected Hindu population of
Bangla Desh in 1974 should have been 13.23 million ( 9.41 * 71.48 /
50.84 = 13.23 ). However the actual Hindu population as per Bangla
Desh Census data for 1974 was 9.65 million. The Government of
India`s record indicate that 1.11 million (Hindu) refugees crossed
into India between 1964 and 1970 (3) PRIOR to the 1971 crisis.
THUS 2.47 MILLION (13.23 - 9.65 - 1.11 = 2.47) HINDUS FROM EAST
PAKISTAN ARE UNACCOUNTED FOR FROM THE 1971 PAK ARMY REPRESSION.
OTHER PROOF FOR 2.4 MILLION HINDUS KILLED IN EAST PAKISTAN
Since the 80 percent of the refugees in 1971 were Hindus,a similar
proportion of the dead are likely to be Hindus also. The official
Bangla Desh government estimate puts the number of Bengalis killed
at 3 million. 80 percent of 3 million put THE NUMBER OF HINDUS
KILLED AT 2.4 MILLION which is close to the number of Hindus
missing calculated comes above.
SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
1. Independent accounts indicate that Hindus from East Pakistan were
special target during the 1971 army repression. HINDU HOUSES WERE
PAINTED WITH YELLOW ``H``s, THEY WERE ROBBED OF THEIR LANDS AND SHOPS,
AND THEY WERE SYSTEMATICALLY SLAUGHTERED.
2. 80 percent of the refugees to India in 1971 were Hindus, THUS IT WAS
A HINDU REFUGEE PROBLEM.
3. NEARLY 2.5 MILLION HINDUS WERE KILLED DURING THE 9 MONTHS OF
PAKISTANI ARMY REPRESSION OF EAST PAKISTAN IN 1971. THUS IT WAS A
HINDU SLAUGHTER IN 1971.
4. ALL THE ABOVE BEAR AN UNCANNY RESEMBLANCE TO THE PERSECUTION &
HOLOCAUST OF JEWS BY THE NAZIS.
5. GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED MEDIA DELIBERATELY HID THE SINISTER
TRUTH OF HINDU GENOCIDE IN EAST PAKISTAN.
6. In any internal political problem of an Islamic country, Hindus
(or minorities of other religions) become the scapegoats and will be
liquidated at the first chance the Islamic Government gets.
COMMENTS & FUTURE WORK
This is just the tip of the iceberg. The ethnic cleansing of Hindus
in Bangla Desh did not end in 1971. Since 1974 to 1981 the Hindu
population as a percent of total Bangla Deshi population decreased
from 13.5 % to 12.2 %. This slide has continued over the last
decade. Same is true about Hindus in Pakistan and in Kashmir
valley.
This topic is extensively dealt in a book `Genocide in East
Pakistan/ Bangla Desh` by S.K.Bhattacharya. However the present
author has verified the findings of S.K. Bhattacharya based on
completely independent sources. For detailed descriptions and news
reports of 1971, reader should refer to the original book.
However there is a need for systematic record keeping of this
recent history, so that we don`t repeat again (and again and
again..) Also there is a need to build a memorial of this Hindu
holocaust similar to the Jewish Holocaust memorial in Washington
DC.
REFREENCES
1. Bangladesh: The Birth Of A Nation, A hand book of Background
information and Documentary Sources Compiled by Univ.of Chicago
Group of Scholars, by M.Nicholas, P.Oldensburg, Ed.W.Morehouse,
M.Seshachalam & Co., India, 1972, p.7
2. Same as reference 1, p.73
3. Crisis in South Asia - A report by Senator Edward Kennedy to
the Subcommittee investigating the Problem of Refugees and
Their Settlement, Submitted to U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee,
November 1, 1971, U.S. Govt. Press, pp.6-7.
4. Newsweek, August 1, 1994, p.37
5. Same as reference 1, pp.44-45
6. Same as reference 3, p.66
7. The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored , Syndicated Column by
Sydney Schanberg, New York Times, May 3, 1994.
8. Same as reference 3, p. 19
9. Bangladesh A Country Study, Ed. J.Heitzman & R.L.Worden, 2nd Ed,
Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Publisher U.S. Army,
1989, pp.250,255
10. Encyclopedia Britannica, 1982 Book of the Year, Section on Bangla
Desh.
#63 Posted by sagittarius on March 24, 2004 8:14:33 pm
Harimau is getting all worked up without looking at the full picture. It is really six of one and half dozen of the other; since a Brahmin wouldn`t be a Brahmin if he wasn`t full of it, just as a Muslim wouldn`t be good enough without his so-called Muslimness (whatever you want it to mean) I wrote, ``For a Brahmin, I felt, Naipaul was above religion...``
To the best of my knowledge ``... the burning of the train full of Hindu pilgrims at Godhra, Gujarat`` came about after some Muslim women were gang-raped by some Hindus on that train, and so began what I referred to as ``the Gujarat Burnings`` about which you`ve got so het up.
I used the term ``Gujarat Burnings`` to encompass your prophet Newton`s theory to show that the burnings took place this side of action and that side of reaction.
As for your venomous ``By the way, after the Gujarathi [sic] Islamic Thugs were taught there is no fury like a Hindu scorned in today`s India, have you noticed how quite [sic] as a mouse they have become?`` let me just say that it is precisely because there are people like you and me around that the world is full of it.
Where is the wisdom of the Vedas, you Hindu? says the Muslim; and where is your compassion, O Muslim? says the Hindu.
Finally, no comment about the verbal diarrhea that follows, and I quote: ``All of you hand-wringing Hindus who feel bad that the Best Bakery accused were acquitted for lack of evidence (and lack of zeal in pursuing the case by the prosecution, according to the Supreme Court), have you noticed how the We-are-born-to-rule-over-the-Hindus and We-shall-establish-the-1000-year-long-Mughal-Empire-in-Delhi-again crowd has been slinking around with its tail between its legs?``
I thought we lived in civilized times but now I am wondering: What is the relationship (or significance) of History to Faith?
Rashid Mughal
To the best of my knowledge ``... the burning of the train full of Hindu pilgrims at Godhra, Gujarat`` came about after some Muslim women were gang-raped by some Hindus on that train, and so began what I referred to as ``the Gujarat Burnings`` about which you`ve got so het up.
I used the term ``Gujarat Burnings`` to encompass your prophet Newton`s theory to show that the burnings took place this side of action and that side of reaction.
As for your venomous ``By the way, after the Gujarathi [sic] Islamic Thugs were taught there is no fury like a Hindu scorned in today`s India, have you noticed how quite [sic] as a mouse they have become?`` let me just say that it is precisely because there are people like you and me around that the world is full of it.
Where is the wisdom of the Vedas, you Hindu? says the Muslim; and where is your compassion, O Muslim? says the Hindu.
Finally, no comment about the verbal diarrhea that follows, and I quote: ``All of you hand-wringing Hindus who feel bad that the Best Bakery accused were acquitted for lack of evidence (and lack of zeal in pursuing the case by the prosecution, according to the Supreme Court), have you noticed how the We-are-born-to-rule-over-the-Hindus and We-shall-establish-the-1000-year-long-Mughal-Empire-in-Delhi-again crowd has been slinking around with its tail between its legs?``
I thought we lived in civilized times but now I am wondering: What is the relationship (or significance) of History to Faith?
Rashid Mughal
#62 Posted by dost_mittar on March 24, 2004 7:28:48 pm
Romair:
I had thought that you were quite knowledgeable about your religion. Now, I am not that sure. The only Quran is in Arabic, the others are mere translations, someone like urstruly or Naqshbandi would support me on that.
Our basic disagreement is about the use of last name. You claim that it was a sign that the converts retained their hindu identity; my claim is that they retained their caste identity while rejecting their hindu identity. Among hindus, the last name in most -not all- cases denoted one`s caste.
arjun-m#44
You may be right that you haven`t met any hindu named raja. Here is my educated guess, why? The Panjabi rajputs who fought and were defeated by the muslim invaders followed the principle of ``if you cant lick them, join them`` and embraced islam en masse to partake of the benefits that accrue from associating with the victor. This is why you find a number of castes in Pakistan - Raja, Arrian, Ghakar, etc. that you do not find among Hindus. In fact, there are very few Hindu rajputs among Panjabis - there are a few with names like Rajput and Chauhan. Instead, you encounter a lot of Khatris who also claim to be Kshatriyas - a claim disputed by some.
Soyasauce:
What I said about muslim converts also applies to Hare Krishnas who change their names - they too are rejecting their past identities. If religion is nothing more than a matter of faith, they should keep their original names.
I had thought that you were quite knowledgeable about your religion. Now, I am not that sure. The only Quran is in Arabic, the others are mere translations, someone like urstruly or Naqshbandi would support me on that.
Our basic disagreement is about the use of last name. You claim that it was a sign that the converts retained their hindu identity; my claim is that they retained their caste identity while rejecting their hindu identity. Among hindus, the last name in most -not all- cases denoted one`s caste.
arjun-m#44
You may be right that you haven`t met any hindu named raja. Here is my educated guess, why? The Panjabi rajputs who fought and were defeated by the muslim invaders followed the principle of ``if you cant lick them, join them`` and embraced islam en masse to partake of the benefits that accrue from associating with the victor. This is why you find a number of castes in Pakistan - Raja, Arrian, Ghakar, etc. that you do not find among Hindus. In fact, there are very few Hindu rajputs among Panjabis - there are a few with names like Rajput and Chauhan. Instead, you encounter a lot of Khatris who also claim to be Kshatriyas - a claim disputed by some.
Soyasauce:
What I said about muslim converts also applies to Hare Krishnas who change their names - they too are rejecting their past identities. If religion is nothing more than a matter of faith, they should keep their original names.
#61 Posted by Romair on March 24, 2004 6:49:23 pm
Warpster/Dost-mittar #various: After interacting with various Indians, over time, I have come to the following conclusions, regarding their views on Islam. Please correct me if I am wrong:
1) I think Indians tend to see Islam, only in light of the Muslims in present-day and in historical India. They extrapolate from there, and assume Muslims are the same everywhere. In addtion, their knowledge of Muslims, outside India, is heavily influenced (as is the case for most non-Muslims) by what the ubiquos US media says. In fact I have now exchanged views with so many Indians, who have such strong views, about Islam, yet when questioned, admit they have never opened the Quran.
This is probably why their arguments are specifically tied to Islam in India. As in the case of names, i.e. not looking at Persian and Pagan Arab names, but only looking at Hindu names.
2) I think Hindus still carry a lot of baggage and scars from the various Muslim invasions of India. The history associated with all these invasions, and the damage they did to India, tends to overshadow, or at least influence greatly, their views about Islam.
I don`t blame them. I think Muslim invaders did a lot of damage to India (not because they were Muslim, but becasue they were invaders). Most of all, a lot of people converted, or were converted, from Hinduism, to Islam. This seems to have created a huge debate about Indian-ness and Arabic-ness, amongt present-day Indians. This debate does not exist outside India. For example, Pakistani Punjabis rarely debate the fact whether someone is more Punjabi than Arabic.
As another example, I have never twice thought about my name. It is just a name given to me, by my parents. I have never used it as a benchmark for my Hindu-ness, Pakistani-ness, Arab-ness, South Asian-ness, Muslim-ness, etc. To me, it is not a political statement about my heritage. I would be just as satisfied, had I been named John Bon Jovi (provided kids did not make fun of it in school). Nor have ever done things, because they were Arabic or Indian. I just did things I liked. Yet, all the above, seem to be analyzed greatly by Indians. They seem to use it as a criteria to judge a battle between Arabism and Indianism. A battle, which I think is mostly in the minds of Indians and not in the minds of Pakistanis.
Would I be clinging less to my Hindu heritage, if I was Umair Hussain? In my mind, No. But, perhaps in the mind of many Indian Hindus, Yes. Because, due to the history of India, they would see things into it, that did not exist.
I think there may have been a historic fear, for hundreds of years, amongst Hindus, that the ruling Muslims would convert every Hindu and destroy Hinduism, all together. This may have ignited this debate, and magnified it. From what I have read, there is a similar fear amongst Indian Muslims, now, that their religion may get dominated by a Hindu majority. This has resulted in the introversion of Indian Muslims, more towards their religion.
People like Naipual furthur feed the above.
However, if one really wants to understand Islam the religion, and even the political affects of Muslim leaders (which may or may not have been in line with Islam), one cannot limit one`s self to India and its history. One has to look at it globally and to the text which forms its basis. And, as hard as it may be, one has to analyze it without any historical baggage.
1) I think Indians tend to see Islam, only in light of the Muslims in present-day and in historical India. They extrapolate from there, and assume Muslims are the same everywhere. In addtion, their knowledge of Muslims, outside India, is heavily influenced (as is the case for most non-Muslims) by what the ubiquos US media says. In fact I have now exchanged views with so many Indians, who have such strong views, about Islam, yet when questioned, admit they have never opened the Quran.
This is probably why their arguments are specifically tied to Islam in India. As in the case of names, i.e. not looking at Persian and Pagan Arab names, but only looking at Hindu names.
2) I think Hindus still carry a lot of baggage and scars from the various Muslim invasions of India. The history associated with all these invasions, and the damage they did to India, tends to overshadow, or at least influence greatly, their views about Islam.
I don`t blame them. I think Muslim invaders did a lot of damage to India (not because they were Muslim, but becasue they were invaders). Most of all, a lot of people converted, or were converted, from Hinduism, to Islam. This seems to have created a huge debate about Indian-ness and Arabic-ness, amongt present-day Indians. This debate does not exist outside India. For example, Pakistani Punjabis rarely debate the fact whether someone is more Punjabi than Arabic.
As another example, I have never twice thought about my name. It is just a name given to me, by my parents. I have never used it as a benchmark for my Hindu-ness, Pakistani-ness, Arab-ness, South Asian-ness, Muslim-ness, etc. To me, it is not a political statement about my heritage. I would be just as satisfied, had I been named John Bon Jovi (provided kids did not make fun of it in school). Nor have ever done things, because they were Arabic or Indian. I just did things I liked. Yet, all the above, seem to be analyzed greatly by Indians. They seem to use it as a criteria to judge a battle between Arabism and Indianism. A battle, which I think is mostly in the minds of Indians and not in the minds of Pakistanis.
Would I be clinging less to my Hindu heritage, if I was Umair Hussain? In my mind, No. But, perhaps in the mind of many Indian Hindus, Yes. Because, due to the history of India, they would see things into it, that did not exist.
I think there may have been a historic fear, for hundreds of years, amongst Hindus, that the ruling Muslims would convert every Hindu and destroy Hinduism, all together. This may have ignited this debate, and magnified it. From what I have read, there is a similar fear amongst Indian Muslims, now, that their religion may get dominated by a Hindu majority. This has resulted in the introversion of Indian Muslims, more towards their religion.
People like Naipual furthur feed the above.
However, if one really wants to understand Islam the religion, and even the political affects of Muslim leaders (which may or may not have been in line with Islam), one cannot limit one`s self to India and its history. One has to look at it globally and to the text which forms its basis. And, as hard as it may be, one has to analyze it without any historical baggage.
#60 Posted by harimau on March 24, 2004 6:33:20 pm
Ref sagittarius #10
[For a Brahmin, I felt, Naipaul was above religion... until his idea of Islam`s encroachment of Hindu lands and peoples infected the heads of the BJP who have given us rare insights into human animalism involving the Babri Mosque and the Gujarat Burnings.]
Now, why do I get the feeling that you do NOT mean the burning of the train full of Hindu pilgrims at Godhra, Gujarat when you talk about the ``Gujarat Burnings``?
Why is it that despite our knowledge since Newton`s time that every action has an opposite reaction, you and the sympathizers with Islamic Thugs always quote the reaction while ignoring the original action?
By the way, after the Gujarathi Islamic Thugs were taught there is no fury like a Hindu scorned in today`s India, have you noticed how quite as a mouse they have become?
All of you hand-wringing Hindus who feel bad that the Best Bakery accused were acquitted for lack of evidence (and lack of zeal in pursuing the case by the prosecution, according to the Supreme Court), have you noticed how the We-are-born-to-rule-over-the-Hindus and We-shall-establish-the-1000-year-long-Mughal-Empire-in-Delhi-again crowd has been slinking around with its tail between its legs?
[For a Brahmin, I felt, Naipaul was above religion... until his idea of Islam`s encroachment of Hindu lands and peoples infected the heads of the BJP who have given us rare insights into human animalism involving the Babri Mosque and the Gujarat Burnings.]
Now, why do I get the feeling that you do NOT mean the burning of the train full of Hindu pilgrims at Godhra, Gujarat when you talk about the ``Gujarat Burnings``?
Why is it that despite our knowledge since Newton`s time that every action has an opposite reaction, you and the sympathizers with Islamic Thugs always quote the reaction while ignoring the original action?
By the way, after the Gujarathi Islamic Thugs were taught there is no fury like a Hindu scorned in today`s India, have you noticed how quite as a mouse they have become?
All of you hand-wringing Hindus who feel bad that the Best Bakery accused were acquitted for lack of evidence (and lack of zeal in pursuing the case by the prosecution, according to the Supreme Court), have you noticed how the We-are-born-to-rule-over-the-Hindus and We-shall-establish-the-1000-year-long-Mughal-Empire-in-Delhi-again crowd has been slinking around with its tail between its legs?
#59 Posted by harimau on March 24, 2004 6:33:20 pm
Ref taqat-e-parvaaz #6
[A.R Rahman isnt a hindu with a muslim name romair?!! what`re you talking about? he`s a devout muslim. he`s a hindu convert yes, but once someone brings the faith to islam, their bond with their old religion is finished forever.]
Till some 3 years back, AR Rehman claimed that he had only adopted a Muslim name to honor some Muslim preacher who had healed him of his ailment. Only in the last 3 years he has acknowledged that he is a full-fledged convert to Islam.
Maybe it is time for a fatwa on AR Rehman for not admitting to becoming a Muslim. Any takers......Urstruly, Mullah321, Naqshbandi...?
[A.R Rahman isnt a hindu with a muslim name romair?!! what`re you talking about? he`s a devout muslim. he`s a hindu convert yes, but once someone brings the faith to islam, their bond with their old religion is finished forever.]
Till some 3 years back, AR Rehman claimed that he had only adopted a Muslim name to honor some Muslim preacher who had healed him of his ailment. Only in the last 3 years he has acknowledged that he is a full-fledged convert to Islam.
Maybe it is time for a fatwa on AR Rehman for not admitting to becoming a Muslim. Any takers......Urstruly, Mullah321, Naqshbandi...?
#58 Posted by soysauce on March 24, 2004 6:33:20 pm
#51 dost-mittar
I think this name issue is quite silly. Haven`t you heard of names like Ram Das and Ananda & so on & so forth that folks choose when they convert to hinduism? I think it`s supposed to be more of a religious identity than a cultural one.
Women wearing shuttlecock burkha in the hot, humid climate of south india because it`s a ``muslim attire``, now that`s something else. They must be trying to show they`d rather be in arabia.
I think this name issue is quite silly. Haven`t you heard of names like Ram Das and Ananda & so on & so forth that folks choose when they convert to hinduism? I think it`s supposed to be more of a religious identity than a cultural one.
Women wearing shuttlecock burkha in the hot, humid climate of south india because it`s a ``muslim attire``, now that`s something else. They must be trying to show they`d rather be in arabia.
#57 Posted by harimau on March 24, 2004 6:33:19 pm
Ref 12-Head #7
[By 16 c, Hindu and Muslim states lived in creative harmony, Hindu kings wearing Islamic-inspired costumes, Bijapur`s Ibrahim Adil Shahi II in rudraksha rosary.]
So, as Sid Hearth tirelessly points out at Dalitstan.org and other sites, finally a Hindu king started wearing clothes ``stitched together with thread and needle`` as opposed to untailored dhotis. Is that using Islamic clothing or as Sid Hearth claims clothing from an earlier era, the Sakha period?
[...Similarly, just as the cuisine of North India combined the vegetarian dal and rice of peninsular India with the kebab and roti of Central Asia, so in music the long-necked Persian lute was combined with the classical Indian veena to form the sitar, now the Indian instrument most widely known in the West.]
And I suppose the Persians then imported the sitar back into their country! Ever heard of the setar?
This is NOT history. This is HIS STORY!
[Thanks partly to the influence of the earlier textbooks on generations of students, there is still a widespread awareness in India of the positive aspects of medieval Islam—aspects noticeable by their absence in Naipaul`s oeuvre. It is widely known, for example, that Islam in India was spread much less by the sword than by the Sufis. After all Sufism with its holy men, visions and miracles, and its emphasis on the individual`s search for union with god, has always borne remarkable similarities to the mystical side of Hinduism. Under Sufi influence it was particularly at the level of village folk worship that the two religions fused into one, with many ordinary Hindus visiting the graves of Sufi pirs—some of whom are still considered to be incarnations of Hindu deities—while Muslim villagers would leave offerings at temples to ensure the birth of children and good harvests. To this day, Sufi dargahs still attract as many Hindu, Sikh and Christian pilgrims as they do Muslims.]
Oh yeah! The jizya on kaffirs, the expropriation of land and property, the forcible concersions, the repeated raids resulting rape, pillage and killings, they never took place. Islam is so peaceful that all the Dalits who were oppressed by the Brahmins VOLUNTARILY converted to Islam and automatically became Syeds, direct descendants of Prophet Mohammad!
Is that why India never converted to Christianity, though Christianity had appeared on the scene by 52 AD? That Christianity could not declare converts to be descendants of Mary, Jesus, or Joseph?
[....Such views were far from exceptional and most of the great Mughal writers show similar syncretic tendencies: Ghalib, for example, wrote praising Benares as the Mecca of India, saying that he sometimes wished that he could ``renounce the faith, take the Hindu rosary in hand, and tie a sacred thread round my waist``.]
If I had a mullah waking me up at 5 every morning demanding that I show up at the mosque to pray, I too would wish the same thing! Except that Ghalib would have been beheaded as an apostate. Once a Muslim, always a Muslim!
[That destruction of Hindu monuments did take place is undeniable; but in what circumstances it took place, and on what scale, is now a matter of intense scholarly debate. Perhaps the single most important essay in Beyond Turk and Hindu is Richard Eaton`s fascinating article on temple destruction. It is of course a central nostrum of the rss and the Sangh parivar, bolstered by intellectual fellow-travellers such as Naipaul, that between the 13th and 18th century Indo-Muslim states, driven by a combination of greed, intolerance and a fanatical iconoclasm, desecrated as many as 60,000 Hindu temples. This claim is examined in detail by Eaton who concludes that ``such a picture (simply) cannot be sustained by evidence from original sources``.
Rather than the 60,000 looted temples of rss myth, Eaton writes that he can find evidence for around 80 desecrations ``whose historicity appears reasonable certain``, and that these demolitions tended to take place in very particular circumstances: that is, in the context of outright military defeats of Hindu rulers by one of the Indian sultanates, or when ``Hindu patrons of prominent temples committed acts of disloyalty to the Indo-Muslim states they served. Otherwise, temples lying within Indo-Muslim sovereign domains, viewed as protected state property, were left unmolested``.]
So what happened to the rest of the temples in North India? They all got cancer of the granite and marble and crumbled to dust?
[Indeed Indo-Islamic states involved themselves directly in the running of their Hindu temples, so that for example ``between 1590 and 1735, Mughal officials oversaw the renewal of Orissa`s state cult, that of Jagannath in Puri. By sitting on a canopied chariot while accompanying the cult`s annual festival, Shah Jehan`s officials ritually demonstrated that it was the Mughal emperor who was the temple`s—and hence the God`s—ultimate protector.``]
How nice! Hindu Gods needed protection from Islamic Sultans! Did the same Sultan claim that he was protecting Allah?
[Eaton sees the attacks on temples not so much as the introduction to India of a new spirit of iconoclasm, so much as the continuation of the existing pre-Islamic practice of destroying or abducting the protecting state deity whose power was politically linked to the sovereignty of the defeated ruler: ``Early medieval Indian history (of the pre-Muslim period) abounds in instances of temple desecration that occurred amidst interdynastic conflicts,`` he writes. ``In AD 642...the Pallava king, Narasimhavarman I, looted the image of Ganesha from the Chalukyan capital of Vatapi. Fifty years later, armies from those same Chalukyas invaded North India and brought back to the Deccan...images of Ganga and Yamuna, looted from defeated powers there. In the eighth century, Bengali troops sought revenge on King Lalitaditya`s kingdom of Kashmir by destroying the image of Vishnu Vaikuntha, the state deity.``
And so on. Paradoxically, by destroying royal temples intimately linked with the protection of Hindu kings, and by abducting the tutelary state deities, Muslim rulers were in fact acting in accordance with Indian tradition, just as they were when they claimed descent from the Pandava heroes of the Mahabharata—as did the Muslim ruler of Kashmir—or portrayed themselves as supporters of the Ramrajya, as was the claim of the Mughals.]
So, the Pallava kings of the South brought back the idol of Ganesh from Vatapi and installed it in a temple in the South. Did Mohammad Ghaznavi install the lingam from Somnath Temple for worship at some mosque in Afghanistan? No; he broke it into pieces and put the fragments on the threshold of the mosque and Kandahar so that The Faithful could step over it on their way to namaz.
Maybe Eaton doesn`t think there isn`t a difference. If so, I suggest that we break down the Grand Mosques at Mecca and Medina, drag out the rotting bones of Mohammad and his family from the graves and bury them in a pit full of pig excrement. Eaton would probably approve. And 12-Head, Naqshbandi, Mullah321, Urstruly and the whole host of Islam-can-do-no-wrong crowd (this includes the hand-wringing apolegetic, sorry-we-don`t-have enough-mothers-wives-and-sisters-for-Islami-thugs-to-rape Hindus) will also approve!
[In the current climate, after the pogroms of Gujarat and the continued malevolent and inaccurate rewriting of textbooks, Sir Vidia`s absurdly one-sided and misleading take on medieval Indian history simply must not be allowed to go uncorrected. To quote Professor Neeladri Bhattacharya of JNU, writing recently about the NCERT textbooks: ``When history is mobilised for specific political projects and sectarian conflicts; when political and community sentiments of the present begin to define how the past has to be represented; when history is fabricated to constitute a communal sensibility, and a politics of hatred and violence, then we (historians) need to sit up and protest. If we do not then the long night of Gujarat will never end. Its history will reappear again and again, not just as nightmare but as relived experience, re-enacted in endless cycles of retribution and revenge, in gory spectacles of blood and death.``]
On the other hand, history could be mobilized by the Marxist pseudo-intellectuals of JNU for THEIR political projects. There is nothing wrong with THAT!
Let me remind Professor Neeladri Bhattacharya that the ``long night of Gujarat`` started with the killing of HINDU PILGRIMS. So long as he and Romila Thapar and other frauds who are touted as historians ignore that, there is no need to discuss the matter.
Neeladri Bhattacharya and Romila Thapar would be among the first ones dragged off for conversion to Islam should Delhi fall to Islamic thugs as it did some 1000 years ago. Perhaps, we could deport Neeladri Bhattacharya to Bangladesh and Romila Thapar to West Punjab and see what their plight is after 10 years.
[By 16 c, Hindu and Muslim states lived in creative harmony, Hindu kings wearing Islamic-inspired costumes, Bijapur`s Ibrahim Adil Shahi II in rudraksha rosary.]
So, as Sid Hearth tirelessly points out at Dalitstan.org and other sites, finally a Hindu king started wearing clothes ``stitched together with thread and needle`` as opposed to untailored dhotis. Is that using Islamic clothing or as Sid Hearth claims clothing from an earlier era, the Sakha period?
[...Similarly, just as the cuisine of North India combined the vegetarian dal and rice of peninsular India with the kebab and roti of Central Asia, so in music the long-necked Persian lute was combined with the classical Indian veena to form the sitar, now the Indian instrument most widely known in the West.]
And I suppose the Persians then imported the sitar back into their country! Ever heard of the setar?
This is NOT history. This is HIS STORY!
[Thanks partly to the influence of the earlier textbooks on generations of students, there is still a widespread awareness in India of the positive aspects of medieval Islam—aspects noticeable by their absence in Naipaul`s oeuvre. It is widely known, for example, that Islam in India was spread much less by the sword than by the Sufis. After all Sufism with its holy men, visions and miracles, and its emphasis on the individual`s search for union with god, has always borne remarkable similarities to the mystical side of Hinduism. Under Sufi influence it was particularly at the level of village folk worship that the two religions fused into one, with many ordinary Hindus visiting the graves of Sufi pirs—some of whom are still considered to be incarnations of Hindu deities—while Muslim villagers would leave offerings at temples to ensure the birth of children and good harvests. To this day, Sufi dargahs still attract as many Hindu, Sikh and Christian pilgrims as they do Muslims.]
Oh yeah! The jizya on kaffirs, the expropriation of land and property, the forcible concersions, the repeated raids resulting rape, pillage and killings, they never took place. Islam is so peaceful that all the Dalits who were oppressed by the Brahmins VOLUNTARILY converted to Islam and automatically became Syeds, direct descendants of Prophet Mohammad!
Is that why India never converted to Christianity, though Christianity had appeared on the scene by 52 AD? That Christianity could not declare converts to be descendants of Mary, Jesus, or Joseph?
[....Such views were far from exceptional and most of the great Mughal writers show similar syncretic tendencies: Ghalib, for example, wrote praising Benares as the Mecca of India, saying that he sometimes wished that he could ``renounce the faith, take the Hindu rosary in hand, and tie a sacred thread round my waist``.]
If I had a mullah waking me up at 5 every morning demanding that I show up at the mosque to pray, I too would wish the same thing! Except that Ghalib would have been beheaded as an apostate. Once a Muslim, always a Muslim!
[That destruction of Hindu monuments did take place is undeniable; but in what circumstances it took place, and on what scale, is now a matter of intense scholarly debate. Perhaps the single most important essay in Beyond Turk and Hindu is Richard Eaton`s fascinating article on temple destruction. It is of course a central nostrum of the rss and the Sangh parivar, bolstered by intellectual fellow-travellers such as Naipaul, that between the 13th and 18th century Indo-Muslim states, driven by a combination of greed, intolerance and a fanatical iconoclasm, desecrated as many as 60,000 Hindu temples. This claim is examined in detail by Eaton who concludes that ``such a picture (simply) cannot be sustained by evidence from original sources``.
Rather than the 60,000 looted temples of rss myth, Eaton writes that he can find evidence for around 80 desecrations ``whose historicity appears reasonable certain``, and that these demolitions tended to take place in very particular circumstances: that is, in the context of outright military defeats of Hindu rulers by one of the Indian sultanates, or when ``Hindu patrons of prominent temples committed acts of disloyalty to the Indo-Muslim states they served. Otherwise, temples lying within Indo-Muslim sovereign domains, viewed as protected state property, were left unmolested``.]
So what happened to the rest of the temples in North India? They all got cancer of the granite and marble and crumbled to dust?
[Indeed Indo-Islamic states involved themselves directly in the running of their Hindu temples, so that for example ``between 1590 and 1735, Mughal officials oversaw the renewal of Orissa`s state cult, that of Jagannath in Puri. By sitting on a canopied chariot while accompanying the cult`s annual festival, Shah Jehan`s officials ritually demonstrated that it was the Mughal emperor who was the temple`s—and hence the God`s—ultimate protector.``]
How nice! Hindu Gods needed protection from Islamic Sultans! Did the same Sultan claim that he was protecting Allah?
[Eaton sees the attacks on temples not so much as the introduction to India of a new spirit of iconoclasm, so much as the continuation of the existing pre-Islamic practice of destroying or abducting the protecting state deity whose power was politically linked to the sovereignty of the defeated ruler: ``Early medieval Indian history (of the pre-Muslim period) abounds in instances of temple desecration that occurred amidst interdynastic conflicts,`` he writes. ``In AD 642...the Pallava king, Narasimhavarman I, looted the image of Ganesha from the Chalukyan capital of Vatapi. Fifty years later, armies from those same Chalukyas invaded North India and brought back to the Deccan...images of Ganga and Yamuna, looted from defeated powers there. In the eighth century, Bengali troops sought revenge on King Lalitaditya`s kingdom of Kashmir by destroying the image of Vishnu Vaikuntha, the state deity.``
And so on. Paradoxically, by destroying royal temples intimately linked with the protection of Hindu kings, and by abducting the tutelary state deities, Muslim rulers were in fact acting in accordance with Indian tradition, just as they were when they claimed descent from the Pandava heroes of the Mahabharata—as did the Muslim ruler of Kashmir—or portrayed themselves as supporters of the Ramrajya, as was the claim of the Mughals.]
So, the Pallava kings of the South brought back the idol of Ganesh from Vatapi and installed it in a temple in the South. Did Mohammad Ghaznavi install the lingam from Somnath Temple for worship at some mosque in Afghanistan? No; he broke it into pieces and put the fragments on the threshold of the mosque and Kandahar so that The Faithful could step over it on their way to namaz.
Maybe Eaton doesn`t think there isn`t a difference. If so, I suggest that we break down the Grand Mosques at Mecca and Medina, drag out the rotting bones of Mohammad and his family from the graves and bury them in a pit full of pig excrement. Eaton would probably approve. And 12-Head, Naqshbandi, Mullah321, Urstruly and the whole host of Islam-can-do-no-wrong crowd (this includes the hand-wringing apolegetic, sorry-we-don`t-have enough-mothers-wives-and-sisters-for-Islami-thugs-to-rape Hindus) will also approve!
[In the current climate, after the pogroms of Gujarat and the continued malevolent and inaccurate rewriting of textbooks, Sir Vidia`s absurdly one-sided and misleading take on medieval Indian history simply must not be allowed to go uncorrected. To quote Professor Neeladri Bhattacharya of JNU, writing recently about the NCERT textbooks: ``When history is mobilised for specific political projects and sectarian conflicts; when political and community sentiments of the present begin to define how the past has to be represented; when history is fabricated to constitute a communal sensibility, and a politics of hatred and violence, then we (historians) need to sit up and protest. If we do not then the long night of Gujarat will never end. Its history will reappear again and again, not just as nightmare but as relived experience, re-enacted in endless cycles of retribution and revenge, in gory spectacles of blood and death.``]
On the other hand, history could be mobilized by the Marxist pseudo-intellectuals of JNU for THEIR political projects. There is nothing wrong with THAT!
Let me remind Professor Neeladri Bhattacharya that the ``long night of Gujarat`` started with the killing of HINDU PILGRIMS. So long as he and Romila Thapar and other frauds who are touted as historians ignore that, there is no need to discuss the matter.
Neeladri Bhattacharya and Romila Thapar would be among the first ones dragged off for conversion to Islam should Delhi fall to Islamic thugs as it did some 1000 years ago. Perhaps, we could deport Neeladri Bhattacharya to Bangladesh and Romila Thapar to West Punjab and see what their plight is after 10 years.
#56 Posted by harimau on March 24, 2004 6:33:19 pm
Ref Urstruly #14
[Naipaul is an anti-Muslim biggott - a characteristic that all hindus share by default. I do not expect anything better coming from a hindu.]
Muslims on the other hand want nothing but Heaven for Hindus... by conversion to Islam.
[Naipaul is an anti-Muslim biggott - a characteristic that all hindus share by default. I do not expect anything better coming from a hindu.]
Muslims on the other hand want nothing but Heaven for Hindus... by conversion to Islam.
#55 Posted by harimau on March 24, 2004 6:33:19 pm
Ref Maasanamuthu #19
[I have read A Wounded Civilization and Million Mutinies Now and several books in between.]
Come on, you really expect us to believe that? Do you read anything other than the ravings of Father Big Man, The Great Intellectual, or Doctor Artist Leader the Fund of Compassion?
[I have read A Wounded Civilization and Million Mutinies Now and several books in between.]
Come on, you really expect us to believe that? Do you read anything other than the ravings of Father Big Man, The Great Intellectual, or Doctor Artist Leader the Fund of Compassion?
#54 Posted by warpster on March 24, 2004 6:33:19 pm
#47 Farzana
--
The conflict arises out of insecurity, and that is a response to a certain situation.
--
Not being in India presently, I cannot completely imagine this insecurity (on the part of indian muslims); the situation, I take it, refers to the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat. Well, if I recall there were extensive riots in Bombay after the stock exchange blasts.
The positive spin is that we are maturing as a society. Akshardham happened and did not lead to a repeat of Godhra. The Gateway blasts happened and riots did not happen. So these non-events are of crucial importance and suggest, flawed as our political system may be, things are headed in the right direction.
Awareness of the past is important, to avoid repeating the same mistakes. A tempered neutral awareness, that is. This is possible only in a society where a significant percentage of citizens are educated to the point where they are not easy prey to demagoguery. I would like to believe that this is happening.
Indian Muslims also get perturbed when they are clubbed with their Arabic heritage, with which they have virtually no connection.
Right now the Arab world is perceived negatively, far more so than in the past. For being out of step with ``modernity``. And islam and muslims are associated with this heritage. What you speak of is a consequence of these happenings. In India, while we have a general atmosphere of ``tolerance`` and ``non-interference`` the flip-side is that we do not know about traditions and customs of those around us. There are a few occasions when sharing happens (cricket matches, food, movies, work) but it could be more frequent so that we move beyond the stereotypes, positive and negative. This type of insularity is not only true across religions but also across regions, castes and classes. When I think of the richness of indian culture, I also regret in not being able to experience more of it (rather than being only exposed to what my subculture had to offer); this type of cultural diversity is lacking in societies that converge to idealized monocultures. There is an opportunity for someone to come up with creative ways in which people can participate in and partake of others customs and traditions. I think you have put your finger on an important problem, one that requires creative solutions.
--
To them the concept of the church and the state together was alien until recently when they are watching various political events in their own backyard.
--
Although the BJP used the Ayodhya temple issue to arise in prominence, it is incorrect to conclude (as you appear to do) that the boundary between church and state is blurring in the Indian context. It is devilishly difficult to cleanly separate hindu religion from hindu culture. ``Hinduism`` is not a religion in the judeo-christian sense and is associated with a plethora of practices (pujas of all kinds, coconuts, fire, prasad what have you), gods and goddesses and what not. Various politicians have been advised by tantriks and assorted characters (recall Dhirendra Brahmachari); this is not uniquely hindu I would argue but part of indian-ness. We have all kinds of muslim babas and peers and whatnot as well (in zee tv in the usa one sees ads promising guaranteed solutions to all problems from babas and pirs!) So the islam as it is practiced in India has many hindu/indian traits. Similarly north indian culture, bollywood has been tremendously influenced by islamic culture (besides western culture thats common to all parts of india). This is precisely the reason why Pakistanis realize that they share cultural traits with Indians and why Chowk is not populated by Arabs (is there even a single Arab contributor?). More interestingly, there are few contributors from Bangladesh. Why do you think this is so? Maybe they are much more comfortable in bengali culture?
The BJP is associated with Hindutva (loosely translated as pride in Indian traditions) and, as has been explicitly stated by their leaders, is not exclusive to hindus. There is no move to introduce equivalent of hindu moral codes in the constitution (a hypothetical example: ban beef consumption on hindu religious festivals); one finds this to be the case in many islamic countries. India is very far away from theocracy. A politician may put on a tilak but still has to function within the framework of our laws.
bottomline: it is hard, if not impossible to divorce culture from religious traditions in the indian context. one should not mistake use of religious symbolism with theocracy. Gandhi used to sing bhajans (admittedly some of them inter-religious) in his gatherings. He did this as this (singing together with devotion) is part of the Indian heritage, shared across Indian religions, including Indian Islam. I recall as a student in an Indian government central school we sang some prayer (it was a Sanskrit hymn about leading one from darkness to light). Was this a violation of church-state separation? Should such practices be banned?
--
The conflict arises out of insecurity, and that is a response to a certain situation.
--
Not being in India presently, I cannot completely imagine this insecurity (on the part of indian muslims); the situation, I take it, refers to the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat. Well, if I recall there were extensive riots in Bombay after the stock exchange blasts.
The positive spin is that we are maturing as a society. Akshardham happened and did not lead to a repeat of Godhra. The Gateway blasts happened and riots did not happen. So these non-events are of crucial importance and suggest, flawed as our political system may be, things are headed in the right direction.
Awareness of the past is important, to avoid repeating the same mistakes. A tempered neutral awareness, that is. This is possible only in a society where a significant percentage of citizens are educated to the point where they are not easy prey to demagoguery. I would like to believe that this is happening.
Indian Muslims also get perturbed when they are clubbed with their Arabic heritage, with which they have virtually no connection.
Right now the Arab world is perceived negatively, far more so than in the past. For being out of step with ``modernity``. And islam and muslims are associated with this heritage. What you speak of is a consequence of these happenings. In India, while we have a general atmosphere of ``tolerance`` and ``non-interference`` the flip-side is that we do not know about traditions and customs of those around us. There are a few occasions when sharing happens (cricket matches, food, movies, work) but it could be more frequent so that we move beyond the stereotypes, positive and negative. This type of insularity is not only true across religions but also across regions, castes and classes. When I think of the richness of indian culture, I also regret in not being able to experience more of it (rather than being only exposed to what my subculture had to offer); this type of cultural diversity is lacking in societies that converge to idealized monocultures. There is an opportunity for someone to come up with creative ways in which people can participate in and partake of others customs and traditions. I think you have put your finger on an important problem, one that requires creative solutions.
--
To them the concept of the church and the state together was alien until recently when they are watching various political events in their own backyard.
--
Although the BJP used the Ayodhya temple issue to arise in prominence, it is incorrect to conclude (as you appear to do) that the boundary between church and state is blurring in the Indian context. It is devilishly difficult to cleanly separate hindu religion from hindu culture. ``Hinduism`` is not a religion in the judeo-christian sense and is associated with a plethora of practices (pujas of all kinds, coconuts, fire, prasad what have you), gods and goddesses and what not. Various politicians have been advised by tantriks and assorted characters (recall Dhirendra Brahmachari); this is not uniquely hindu I would argue but part of indian-ness. We have all kinds of muslim babas and peers and whatnot as well (in zee tv in the usa one sees ads promising guaranteed solutions to all problems from babas and pirs!) So the islam as it is practiced in India has many hindu/indian traits. Similarly north indian culture, bollywood has been tremendously influenced by islamic culture (besides western culture thats common to all parts of india). This is precisely the reason why Pakistanis realize that they share cultural traits with Indians and why Chowk is not populated by Arabs (is there even a single Arab contributor?). More interestingly, there are few contributors from Bangladesh. Why do you think this is so? Maybe they are much more comfortable in bengali culture?
The BJP is associated with Hindutva (loosely translated as pride in Indian traditions) and, as has been explicitly stated by their leaders, is not exclusive to hindus. There is no move to introduce equivalent of hindu moral codes in the constitution (a hypothetical example: ban beef consumption on hindu religious festivals); one finds this to be the case in many islamic countries. India is very far away from theocracy. A politician may put on a tilak but still has to function within the framework of our laws.
bottomline: it is hard, if not impossible to divorce culture from religious traditions in the indian context. one should not mistake use of religious symbolism with theocracy. Gandhi used to sing bhajans (admittedly some of them inter-religious) in his gatherings. He did this as this (singing together with devotion) is part of the Indian heritage, shared across Indian religions, including Indian Islam. I recall as a student in an Indian government central school we sang some prayer (it was a Sanskrit hymn about leading one from darkness to light). Was this a violation of church-state separation? Should such practices be banned?
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- KaalChakra: DM ji, we will... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 102 Do... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 102 Problem is... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 104 Quetta will... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 94 Jokingly... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- sadna: OK, thanks d_m, that... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- Cobra: Free Kashmir! I'm putting... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- KaalChakra: ok, dm ji, I... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
