Filtered Posts

Creation of Hindu ’madrasas’
#35


.........AFAIK, some of these schools are highly rated and teach everything from computers, science etc. There is no reason to believe that students coming out of here will not find gainful employment. Will these students be good human beings if they are taught to hate is a different matter.``
------------------------------

Sridhar

THEn Aligarh M U S L I M university is also a madrsah b/c urdu & Islamiyat is taught as credit courses .

So is JAMA mIliA which has produced no 1 actor of Bolly wood Shah rukh from Media stream & has islamiyat & Muslim ettiquette to the extent that eating place is free of modern ``english western `` furniture atleast in School .

But you know ,the RSS type schools are not secular as Aligarh M.U. & Jama Millia !

Creation of Hindu ’madrasas’ 54am PT

to pakistanis on chowk

there is 2 huge differences between VHS/RSS/BJP and Taleban/Jamaat types. The RSS/VHP/BJP are not in any way restricting the political and economic freedoms of vast majority of Hindus (at least the forward/backward castes if not SC/ST). The Taleban/Jamaat agenda followed in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, tribal belt of Pakistan severely restricts the political, economic and social freedoms of Muslim majorities they represent. It leads to economically vibrant India versus a laggard Pakistan.

The second is that BJP/RSS/VHP actions are restricted to India. Lot of Islamic types cross borders causing major international problems and inviting nasty responses like the US air strikes in Afghanistan.
-----------------------------------

Indeed DIFFERENCES do not make one right over other.To Indian MUslims & minoreties of India no less than twice the population of England or California & new york state combined !! ARE TORTURED BY RSS SHIV SENA ,BAJRANG DAL,HINDU MAHA SABHA by the proximity ,HATE MONGERING BY REWRITING ATROCEOUS FALSE STORIES ABOUT THEM& DENYING THEM SECULAR ONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WITHOUT CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION WHICH IS THERE PROMISE FROM FOUNDING FATHERS.

Creation of Hindu ’madrasas’

Oh Sorry .if you want to read the rest of the article onDEcline of Hinduism according to This insider of RSS plz go to this



http://sulekha.com/column.asp?cid=280475

Fair and Lovely >

Those brigads who are quick to bombard the board with how there is ISI infiltrationn How Indian Muslims are 5 th columnists ,just calm down Arjun Alephnull SS dhillon ,Jay Sena ,Harami ...all younhave beenQUOTING are DUBIOUS at best QUESTIONABLE .....



I have been reading a lot about the ``SHAMELESS INDIAN JOURNALISTS``. Now
here
> is a little bit about the SHAMELESS MEDIA HOUSE OWNERS.
>
> Just to let everyone know about the issue of salaries that journalists get
> ....
>
> One business magazine gives its trainees Rs.3105 as the take home pay.
That
> is a little over US$ 60. There is no separate allowance (yes, you`ve read
it
> right) for conveyance. Another business magazine gives its journalists
> salaries for about 7-8 months in a year. The journos are left to fend for
> themselves for the rest of the year. Of course, all the issues do come out
> in time !! I know of one of the reporters who was staying neard the red
> light area in Delhi, simply because he could not afford an accomodation
> anywhere else.
>
> Now lets move to newspapers. Some of the vernacular papers don`t pay any
> salary to their reporters. They get a commission from the advertisements
> that they get for their publication. I know of Gujarati journalists who
get
> Rs.1000 as salary. In Delhi, I know a reporter of one of the Hindi
newspaper
> (which, incidentally, sells even more than Times of India) who gets
Rs.3000
> (and no conveyance allowance!!!)
>
> Now the turn of television. One of the well known television companies of
> the US, which has outsourced its content from India to a local television
> company. The Indian company pays nearly 20-30 ppl between Rs.2000-5000.
That
> is US$ 40-100. One news channel offered an across the board hike of
> Rs.15,000 each (US$300) for all its employees to prevent their people from
> being poached by news channels which are about to be launched. That gives
> you an idea of what kind of salaries were people working for.
>
> Just to round it off with another shocking example... If you are a fashion
> desinger, an upcoming star or a struggling artist in Delhi and want and
good
> feature done about you, please pay Rs.60,000 (approx US1,200) and you can
> have a good story about yourself in the city supplement of one of the
> leading newspapers. Everything else be damned!!!
>
> With these examples, are you expecting honesty from the journalist? Those
> looking for honesty, must remember that it is first important for the top
> bosses to be honest.
>
> However, in the interest of journalists it is better that the stroies
> mentioned above do not become the norm. Or else, their own credibility
will
> be at stake too.
>
> Am willing to answer queries that anyone may have.
>

Creation of Hindu ’madrasas’
  HERE IS WHAT AILS HINDU OF INDIA: AN INSIDER HINDU MAHASABHA THINKER OUTLINES
The Hindu Defeat: Failure of Leadership in Past & Present

Harsh Verma ~ Dec 26, 2002






Add this Article to my Favorites





 View Reader Comments (15)



As we debate on revitalizing Hinduism, it is essential to understand the reasons members of other religions were able to vanquish Hinduism. It is only when the causes of downfall are understood that measures can be taken to counteract their influence and bring in a new dispensation. This is fundamental to any reform initiative or a call for a revival of lost glory.

A lack of introspection on the other hand ensures that such factors continue to plague society and undermine it from inside. This is the first of a mini series of articles which will focus on three major factors which in my opinion led to the defeat of Hindus and whose effect is still influencing us today: Failure of Leadership, Intellectual backwardness and Caste system. This series of essays will also take into account the collapse of the Majpahit empire in Java and the consequent Islamisation of the Indonesian archipelago along with the current status of Indonesian Hindus.

The lack of effective leadership was a major factor in the Hindu defeat. Unfortunately the same factors continue to plague the current socio-political Hindu leadership of the RSS. This is not a comprehensive article on the RSS since that will come later. This essay merely looks at the leadership failures in the past and shows how they continue in the current leadership as well.

1. Inferior military leadership and the inability to adapt to new methods of warfare

Militarily, the Hindu leadership was weaker[1]. While the Turks came from a region where expert military leaders used to develop new strategies and new weapons of war, the Rajputs had stuck to their age old methods of warfare. Thus the Rajputs depended on their infantry which was no match for the mobility and maneuverability of the Turkish cavalry[2]. Further, the Rajputs used outmoded tactics and relied on elephants whose role was dubious since they often trampled their own men. In contrast, when the Turks used elephants they handled them with greater care and used them only to meet other elephants or to break open gates[3].

As military leaders, the Turks came to understand that the Rajputs excelled in hand to hand fighting. They understood the strong and weak points of their enemies and avoided close combat as far as possible[4]. They excelled in archery and pushed this advantage in every battle. In contrast, the Hindu leadership made no attempt to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their adversaries and continued to fight stubbornly in their age-old fashion, even when it did not give them results. The Turks were masters of innovation, while the Rajputs were masters of habit. Not surprisingly they lost.

Even in military strategy, the Turks were superior. The Turkish generals functioned as true leaders directing the movements of their troops and resorted to personal heroism only at critical moments of their battle. On the other hand, the Hindu military leader paid more attention to exhibition of personal valour than directing troops[5].

Further, while the Turkish generals saw to it that they remained away from the scrutiny of the enemy, the Rajput leaders distinguished their elephants or horses with such decorations that they could be spotted from afar. This helped the Turks wound or kill them in full sight of the soldiers so that they became demoralized and often fled the battlefield[6].

While the Turks kept reserves which were pressed into battle at critical moments, the Rajputs committed all troops at one go so that reserve Turkish troops were able to defeat a tired army with relative ease[7]. Neither did the Rajputs ever use any cunning strategies such as clever maneuvering, feigned retreats, attacking from the rear or using spies or bribes[8]. The Rajputs always fought a defensive battle while the Turks fought an offensive one. The Turks fought to win while the Rajputs fought to build a reputation for bravery.

Much is made of the fact that the Rajputs did not hurt common people and did not engage in terror tactics like the Turks. What is not highlighted is the fact that Rajput commanders were extremely careless of the lives of their soldiers and sacrificed them for a false sense of personal prestige. In the event of a defeat, they never thought of disengaging from the battlefield and leading the largest number of soldiers to safety. Therefore casualties were extremely high on the side of the Rajputs, which severely limited future military resources[9].

Finally, the Turks had superior technology in the form of new machines like majniqs, arradas for making breaches in forts. Shihabuddin captured Bhatinda with ease while Prithviraj Chauhan took 13 months to do it even when he was extremely familiar with it. In 1196-97, the Chauhans and Solankis were victorious in battle. However, they could not capture Aibak who had withdrawn to the fort of Ajmer and despite their best efforts they failed to breach the fort[10].

2. Individual vs. Ideology

The Turks fought with a missionary zeal, which received its expression in the form of glorifying Islam as well as winning precious booty. In contrast, the Rajput armies had no such incentive. They fought for the glory of a particular king and had no chance of winning wealth or social position through their military prowess. Further, while the Turkish soldiers were trained professionals who were well versed in the art of warfare, the Rajput armies comprised feudal levies, who fought for their local leader, not even the king. And they fought only so long as their leader fought in the battle. With his death or defection, they too disappeared[11].

For this state of affairs, the Hindu kings were equally responsible. Instead of inspiring their subjects and more importantly their armies to fight for the state, they sought to direct all energies to themselves. The entire army then became a bodyguard for the king. In such a case, it was easy for the Turks and Afghans to aim directly for the king, secure in the knowledge that the fall of the king would end the war.

There was no second line of defence. This is what happened in the battle of Sindh. Once Dahir fell, the resistance just collapsed like ninepins. And the same pattern was repeated ad infinitum. The Hindu leadership just refused to learn from its mistakes. The battle of Sind was fought in 712 AD. Mahmud Ghazni came in 1000 AD, Muhammad Ghori in 1192 AD and the Mughals in 1526 and 1556 AD. Each time the same pattern was repeated. Hemu was actually winning the war with Akbar till he got an arrow in his eye. The moment he fell down the entire army fled. The lessons of Sind had not been learned even after 800 years. The leadership was just not willing to engage in self-introspection and reform.

Due to the conflicting priorities of individual vs. ideology, Hindu ranks were replete with traitors. The novel `Somnath` by the Hindi language author Acharya Chatursen, throws light on the situation at Somnath at the time of the invasion of Mahmud of Ghazni. Acharya Chatursen reveals that there was a political struggle between two priests of the Somnath temple. In order to gain precedence over the other, one of the priests named Rudradeva actually helped Mahmud to gain access to the city so that the other priest would be vanquished. What he did not bargain for was that Mahmud would kill him and destroy the temple and loot all the wealth that had been promised as a bribe. Muhammad Ghori received similar assistance from Govindraja, the son of Prithviraj Chauhan in Ajmer and Ajaypala, a relative of Chandrasena of Baran. And this continued throughout the Turkish reign.

Consider the fact that the army of Mahmud of Ghazni had Hindus as well. He even had a Hindu general named Tilak. How could Hindus have agreed to become soldiers in the army of a known iconoclast? The answer is that the concept of belonging to a larger religious identity just did not exist. Hindus in Gujarat or the Gangetic belt were foreigners for the likes of Tilak who were Hindus possibly of Afghanistan or the North West frontiers. Possibly it made no difference to them that Mahmud was destroying temples. These were not their temples and the Hindus of Gujarat or Mathura or Varanasi were not their people. So long as their private coffers were being filled, nothing else mattered.

3. Personal ambition and disunity

Hindu rulers never presented a united front to the Turks. They were intensely individualistic or clannish. That Jaichand refused to help Prithviraj against Shihabuddin is well known. What is often ignored is that they never acted in tandem. There were numerous revolts against the Turkish occupation in the initial years but they were all crushed because they were never co-ordinated. Had simultaneous revolts occurred with the various Hindu chiefs acting in tandem with each other, they would have succeeded in driving the Turks out. But uprisings were never co-ordinated because each chieftain was fighting for his own petty kingdom.

If this was not enough, there was the overarching personal enmity with each other, which was not even extinguished in the face of the Muslim onslaught. Not even the destruction of temples in their own kingdoms would motivate them to cast aside hereditary or political enmity and unite to face the Muslim invasion.

What else can explain the fact that Ramchandra Deo of Devagiri helped Malik Kafur to invade the south? Malik Kafur`s army had destroyed temples at Devagiri and continued its iconoclastic campaign in its further invasions. Yet Ramchandra did not even protest. The four kingdoms of the south were enemies of each other. That the northwest of the country had fallen into Turkish hands and that the Turks had come to occupy the whole of northern India made no difference to them. When Allauddin had attacked Deogiri in 1296, his victory had been due to the fact that Ramchandra Deo`s son Shankar Deo had taken the major part of the army to fight a battle with the Hoysalas. Thus fellow Hindus were to be attacked but not the Turkish kingdom of Delhi. When Kafur attacked the Hoysala kingdom, its ruler had gone to fight the Pandya kingdom. And when Kafur attacked the Pandya kingdom, the estranged brother of Vira Pandeya as well as the Hoysala king Vira Ballala out of his personal enmity for the Pandyas helped Kafur to do so[12].

Shah Jahan demolished the great temples of Orcha in front of the eyes of the captains of the Sisodiyas, Rathors, Kachhwahas and Hadas who stood docilely[13]. When Aurangzeb was destroying temples none of his Hindu nobles protested for fear of destroying their career prospects at court. The famed Rathor chiefs who prided themselves on their so called descent from Suryavanshis and Chandravanshis of myth looked the other way when Aurangzeb destroyed the temples of Mathura and Varanasi. Even after this destruction, the Rajput chiefs continued serving Aurangzeb and rose in revolt only when Aurangzeb coveted the throne of Marwar.

The situation was no different in Indonesia. Raden Vijaya had founded the Majpahit empire in Java in a stroke of genius. He took advantage of Kublai Khan`s attack on the then Singosari kingdom. When the Mongol troops were exhausted after defeating the native troops, Raden Vijaya made a surprise attack on the Mongols and defeated them. Thus was founded the great Majpahit empire in 1292 AD. If only Rana Sanga had taken the same action.

But Raden Vijaya`s progeny soon forgot his lessons. When the Islamic kingdoms were engaged in attacks on the Majpahit empire, its Hindu nobles used the opportunity to set up their own kingdoms and war with each other. While the Islamic kingdoms acted in concert with each other, they could count on the fact that the new Hindu kings would engage in warfare rather than co-operate with each other. And by the time the Hindu remnants of Majpahit realized the threat, it was too late.

4. Inward Orientation and the refusal to look outside Indian boundaries for threats

The Gurjara Pratiharas made no attempt to dislodge the Arabs from Sind and believed that they would remain ensconced in those domains. That the Arabs were expanding their influence throughout the known world made no difference to them. Only the Shahiya dynasty put up any fight. It was the Shahiya king Jayapala who attacked Subuktgin in his capital.[14] But they received little help from any of the other Hindus. The fact that India escaped attacks in the 8th and 9th century from the passes of Afghanistan owes to the might of the Shahiyas who kept a constant watch over the Indian borders. With their downfall the borders were open for any marauder to come for rich pluckings.

When Muhammad Ghori was consolidating his empire, Prithviraj Chauhan did nothing. He did not even gaze towards the west and preferred to fight battles with the rest of India. Had Muhammad Ghori been attacked while his power was in its infancy the course of Indian history would have been changed. In fact what is not known is that Muhammad Ghori turned towards Punjab only because it was being ruled by the weak successors of the Ghaznavids. The Chauhans could have dislodged them easily but their main target remained fellow Hindu kings not the enemy from the northwest[15].

As late as the 16th century, the Rajput kings had failed to learn their lessons. Rana Sanga invited Babur to invade India and then kept away. Sanga had the golden opportunity of attacking Babur while he was recovering from his fight with Ibrahim Lodi. But Sanga had fantasies that Babur would disappear after his fight. Three centuries of Turko-Afghan rule had not taught any lessons to the Rajput kings. Their foolish pride saw their subjugation and India`s domination.

The Hindu rulers refused to help each other against attacks by the Turks etc. Thus both Vijaynagar and Orissa were at constant warfare with each other over territory. It never occurred to them that they could or should undertake a joint front against the Deccani states or even the Delhi Sultans who were unpopular and weak. In fact Krishnadeva Raya could have very well emulated Rajaraja Chola and invaded the north.

In his memoirs, Babur feared the intervention of this king in the state of affairs in northern India. But the south looked to the south or at the most to its northern borders and even able rulers were bound by their own limited paradigms. So internecine was the warfare between the Hindu kings that after the fall of Vijaynagar the last king of its successor state ran to secure the aid of the Adil Shahis who were the cause of the destruction of Vijaynagar. This was because his own Hindu feudatories were trying to rob him. It was when the Adil Shahis targeted him that he took refuge in Mysore.

5. Lack of Character

The Rajput kings lacked the qualities of head and heart, which are so celebrated in Rajput ballads. Rank cowardice was the rule of the hour especially when Mahmud engaged in his expeditions[16]. Mathura and Varanasi did not even put up a fight and its rulers just vacated the city. There was no attempt to harass Mahmud while he was deep inside the Gangetic heartland. Had they even created problems of commissariat and hampered Mahmud`s supplies, he would have been compelled to withdraw. A myth of victory had been created around Mahmud and the Rajput kings were whole hearted believers in this myth. In fact Mahmud only had to announce his targets and he could be certain that the way would be open.

Vidyadhar, the Chandel king of Bundelkhand had formed a makeshift confederacy to punish Rajyapala of Kanauj who had failed to provide any protection to Mathura and Varanasi. Rajyapala was killed. Mahmud took it as a challenge and decided to punish Vidyadhar. He met Vidyadhar in 1020-21. Vidyadhar had come with a huge army but he lost his composure and ran away in the night. In the morning Mahmud found the field to be empty and had a free hand in destroying the wealth of the Chandela kingdom. Similarly, the Somnath raid had been announced a year in advance. Yet there were no military preparations to meet Mahmud. Rather there was an increase in pilgrim traffic as distraught devotees rushed to have a last darshan before Mahmud destroyed the temple. The only defence came from devotees, not battle hardened soldiers. In fact when Mahmud came, its ruler retreated without even offering battle[17].

6. Lack of Vision

Hindu kings had come to completely lack any initiative and vision. For the past thouand years or more our leaders have had their sights on their petty turfs. Never did they think of venturing out or setting up a new dispensation. Our religion and polity have actually seen no change from those days. The only change was brought by the Turks and Mughals. While Babur had the vision of creating a pan-Indian empire, none of the Rajput chiefs of the time even thought of creating a pan Indian empire or establishing a sound administrative system or bringing in much needed reforms.

The lack of vision is also the greatest failure of the Marathas. They had the desire to fly the saffron flag from Attock to Kanyakumari but they behaved like little more than brigands. Instead of building an empire and spreading order, they were responsible for far greater mayhem. Like parasites they demanded Chauth and Sardeshmukhi which led to massive exploitation of the peasantry, but did nothing to improve the land and increase its productivity. They became such a menace that other Hindu rulers looked to their downfall. In the decisive battle of Panipat in 1761, most of the Rajput rulers stayed away hoping that the Afghans would defeat the Marathas as they did. Incidentally the same factors which secured the victory of Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad Ghori continued to play here. Bhao sahib was outmanoevered by Abdali and brought to decisive battle at Panipat in unfavourable conditions[18].The lessons of war had not been learned even after seven centuries.

Even after the defeat at Panipat, the Marathas refused to learn their lesson. They made frequent raids on the Rajput kingdoms and left behind a trail of famine and destruction. In 1806, the Maharana of Mewar was so harried by the Marathas on the one hand and his feudatories, the Rajput chiefs of Jodhpur & Jaipur on the other that he consented to the murder of his daughter Krishna Kumari as the only way of preserving Rajput independence. Yet the Marathas did not care. Between 1806 and 1817, Mewar was ravaged so badly by the Marathas that it was reduced to a state of abject desolation. It was this selfishness and cruelty of the Marathas towards their fellow Hindu brethren, which pushed the Rajput chiefs to seek British protection which was accorded to them in 1817[19].

Fall of Hinduism in South East Asia

The failure of leadership is strikingly seen in the fall of Hinduism in South East Asia. Let us examine the conversion of the Malay and Indonesian archipelago to Islam. The following account has been gleaned from the Indonesian time line[20] and an analysis of the defeat is offered. In the 1300s, Indonesia and Malaysia were being ruled by the powerful Hindu-Buddhist Majapahit empire but its influence was declining towards the end of the 14th century.

In 1401 a war of succession began in Majapahit, lasting four years and the power of Majapahit begins to lessen. At this time, Paramesvara, a prince of Palembang ( a port in Sumatra ) was driven from Palembang to Tumasik (today`s Singapore) where he founded the kingdom of Melaka. In 1414, Paramesvara converted to Islam. The archipelago depended on trade and Arab merchants with Islamic proselytizing zeal had been persuading local kings to convert in order to benefit from increased commercial ties with West Asia. A thousand years earlier, trade with India had brought Hinduism. Now with the ascendancy of the Arabs, Islam was to be favoured. But the conversion process was complex and protracted and took over two centuries to complete.

Under the rule of Parameswara (who now called himself Iskander Shah) and that of his successors, Melaka`s trading fleets brought Islam to coastal areas of the archipelago. But resistance to Islam was strong. In 1447 Kertawijaya, became King of Majapahit. He converted to Islam on the advice of his wife, Darawati, a princess of Champa (in what is now Vietnam) and began to spread Islam around the Javanese city of Surabaya. In 1451 he was murdered and replaced by Rajasawardhana, who hindered the spread of Islam in Majapahit.

But Islamisation was occurring elsewhere with alarming speed. In 1456 Palembang in Sumatra turned to Islam while the Islamic kingdom of Melaka conquered some regions on the Malay peninsula and converted them to Islam. The nobility of the Majapahit empire remained unconcerned about these developments and remained engrossed in private power struggles. There were further disturbances in 1468 and many hindus left Java for Bali.

In 1478, the Islamic kingdom of Demak was founded which began to make attacks on the Hindu kingdoms. The Majapahit empire was now collapsing. The decisive moment came in 1512, when King Udara, ruler of the kingdom of Pajajaran, a remnant of Majpahit attacked Demak with the help of the King of Bali. Majapahit forces were driven back and many more supporters of Majapahit fled to Bali.

The process of Islamisation now strengthened in East and Central Java. Demak`s rulers engaged in covert and overt missionary work in West Java to weaken the kingdom of Pajajaran and its alliance with the Portuguese. As a result, the local ruler of Banten, formerly dependent on Pajajaran, converted to Islam and joined Demak`s side. About this time much of Java began to convert to Islam, including Banten, Mataram and Central Java, and Surabaya. In 1527, Demak finally conquered Kediri, another Hindu remnant of Majapahit state. Demak, with help from Banten, defeated Pajajaran and Pajajaran kingdom was pushed away from the sea. It was the only Hindu kingdom left on Java.

However the rest of the archipelago had still not converted. Kalimantan, much of Sumatra and Celebes remained under the rule of Hindu kings. In fact the kingdom of Gowa in Celebes was aggressively expanding under its Hindu kings. But such a state of affairs was not to last for long. In 1565, Kalimantan converted to Islam while in 1579, the kingdom of Banten took the remaining part of Pajajaran in Java and converted it to Islam. The kings of the archipelago seemed to have recognized the state of affairs. In 1600 the Raja of Minangkabau area in Sumatra who had so far resisted converted to Islam. In 1605 the King of Gowa in Celebes converted to Islam and invited other kings to do the same. On their refusal to do so, Gowa attacked them and converted them to Islam.

The turn of the century saw the revolt of the Hindus and the kingdom of Balambangan was founded in East Java. In 1633, the sultan of Mataram raided east Java. The kingdom asked the Dutch for help but was refused. Balambangan then asked the King of Gelgel in Bali for help. Initially the sultan was defeated but he managed to conquer it. Balinese forces retook the area in 1647, but their power was weakened in 1660 when the Balinese kingdom split into nine states. And their influence on Java ended. This pulled down the curtain on Hinduism in Indonesia. Hindus would now be confined to Bali and a portion of Lombok island.

Unlike India where Islam was imposed by foreign conquerors, local princes converted to Islam especially in the coastal areas to gain wealth and power and then used Islam as a vehicle for their political aspirations. Why were the Hindus defeated? The answers are not hard to glean from the available evidence. As in India, Hindu kings refused to put up a united front against Islamic kings and remained ensconced in personal intrigues. While Islamic influence was growing in the coast, the Hindu nobility in Java was engaged in power struggles so that they failed to realize the seriousness of the threat till it was too late.

Even when they acted it was largely in isolation, not in unison. The ruler of Balambangan took the help of Bali only after the Dutch refused to help. And the ruler of Pajajaran was abandoned after a joint campaign with Demak failed. Pajajaran existed till 1579 but received no more help from Bali. It was clear that Islamic kings were uprooting Hinduism but Hindu kings failed to raise a common front against the threat.

By 1530, Java had largely succumbed to the Islamic states but there were powerful Hindu kings elsewhere whose support could have been utilized. No initiative was taken by the Balinese king to combine forces with the king of Gowa or Kalimantan or Sumatra. Nor did the Balinese take any initiative to move against the Javanese states in the 1600s when the entire island was racked by warfare by competing Islamic kings. The Balinese saw themselves as the heirs of Majapahit and saw no commonalities with other Hindu kings.

It was the narrowness of the worldview of the Balinese which allowed precious opportunities to slip by. The final straw on the camel`s back was the propensity of Hindus to retreat rather than fight. In 1468, 1512 and 1527, large numbers of Javanese Hindus fled to Bali to escape disturbances and persecution. This flight rather than fight response was a primary cause of the fall of Hinduism and its confinement to Bali.

But this is not all. Islamic rule in Indonesia was followed by rapid Islamic missionary activity in which entire populations were converted often forcibly to Islam. But nothing mattered to the Balinese princes. It was the famed Hindu priest Nirath who had once been an outcaste for marrying a Shudra girl who came to the rescue. Nirath went on reconversion efforts to other parts of the archipelago and helped many of those who had been forcibly converted to return to Hinduism. But his was a solitary effort and he received no help. And when he became the target of assassination attempts, none of the Balinese princes moved to help him. Later when those who were reconverted by Nirath were again converted to Islam, the Balinese princes turned a deaf ear to their cries.

How are the factors that defeated Hindus centuries ago operating today? Let us look at factors which have been identified as the cause of the Hindu defeat and examine their relevance for our times.

1. Lack of Vision

The lack of vision is still apparent in the Hindu leadership of today. The 60s and 70s saw great interest among westerners in the Hindu religion. Yet the Hindu leadership never made any effort to invite them to be Hindus. In fact in many temples restrictions on non-Indian Hindus are still prevalent. And the Hindu leadership has done nothing to make life hospitable for anyone wanting to be a Hindu. The leadership will warn about the increase in Islamic population but will do nothing either to create conditions which would encourage Hindus remain within the fold or create a supportive environment for the integration of others who are interested in the Hindu religion. The Hindu Reform group has several Caribbean members, and several have complained that the RSS brand of Hinduism with its India-centric focus is not suitable for them. However the same blind policies continue.

Suggestion: The RSS needs to develop a platform for Hinduism that is not solely related to India and reach out to non Indians as well as the Indian Diaspora in their own milleu. Many westerners would be interested in Hinduism but there is a real need to reach out to them and create a supportive atmosphere so that they feel welcome in the Hindu fold. There is the need to fashion a global Hindu identity than merely an India based one.

2. Inability to adapt to new methods

The Hindu leadership has failed to adapt to professional skills needed in the world today. There is indeed a media bias against Hindu causes but the solution lies not in blaming the media but creating an atmosphere conducive to building relationships with the media. There is a complete lack of professionalism and public relations skill in dealing with media.

The RSS consistently gives out press statements to the media which are absolutely terrible. Those who release the statements do not even know how to write and present facts in a cogent manner. Further, RSS members regularly write letters to the media which are filled with abuse and hate mail. Frustration and anger ooze from every sentence which only leads to further hiatus with the media as well as others.

In the Hindu Reform group, I have tried in vain to request RSS members to examine the format and content of their letters. Some of us who work in the media have even offered to edit letters to be sent to the media by the RSS. But even the offers to aid have not been heeded. Worse RSS members regularly demonise Indian newspapers and then expect to be treated well by the media. Surely this is not possible. Time and again RSS members have been cautioned at my group about the need to present their arguments logically and create an image that was positive about themselves but no one has ever bothered to consider these words. Instead, it has been easy to target the media.

Now I agree that there is a bias against the RSS and there is indeed a refusal on the part of the Indian media to cover events where Hindus have been at the receiving end. This was driven home to me when I was trying to raise attention on the tragedy in Bangladesh. Some of us wrote to Indian newspapers requesting that they take up the tragedy. One of our members who had contacts with the Birla family even got the owner of HT to request the editorial board to take up the matter. But the editorial seemed to have rejected the request since no such coverage was made. From other contacts I found out that it was politically incorrect to cover events where Hindus were victims and therefore the terrible tragedy would not receive the coverage it needed. And that turned out to be true.

Having conceded the reality of a bias, let me now elucidate the failure of the RSS leadership. Every organization faces challenges and overcoming the challenges is a test of the organization`s character. Instead of meeting this challenge, the RSS has not even evolved a strategy to deal with the situation. The RSS has been in existence for 75 years. This should have been enough time to allow it to train new graduates and get them to join the press.

Instead a policy of opposing English was espoused which only resulted in anti-RSS people coming to the fore in the media. Further, the RSS/VHP do need to learn to adjust to modern realities and make use of modern tools. This is an age old Hindu weakness. The rajas who fought Ghazni and Ghori suffered from the same disdain for contemporary realities and refused to adjust to changes happening elsewhere.

In contrast Christian missionaries get far more sympathetic coverage because they inculcate good PR skills and take pains to cultivate a positive image with the press. Even their disagreements with the media are never accompanied by slogan shouting, threats and abuses that characterize the RSS`s interactions with the media.

The refusal to look at methods has taken its toll in other spheres too. We are all agreed on the idea that the leftist orientalist

Musings Of A Suspected Terrorist #104Arjun

Youdont even know to intrepret simple GrAPH?


Without knowing number of illegal immigrants fromEach countries to begin with Means only that all along you have been WRONG in your all opinions based on erroneoyus CONLUSIONS derived on flawed method.

It means Saudie are the least likely to come to America b/c they have better ecomomy than USA .

EGyptians are LESS as desperate as Pakistanis & Indians to risk coming as illegals .



Pakistanis particularly are most choked by Partition with there breathing space being larger india prior to 1947 Independence is like Squeezing them to out side like tooth paste (same goes for Bangladesh .if they are checked they will be deported in same % )

Fair and Lovely There is this Indian movie star Nandita Das.She makes a good case of NOT using fair & lovely .I mean there must be twenty other actress with fair skin & reasonable (utna kharab bhi nahi )feature but she beats them hands down.

So i think it also is case of MInd .Its all in the head.

Good thing about media is that just as it has helped to sell fair & lovely to gullible & naive bimbos

it (media )canbe used to modify the behaviour & MIND of such pliable mould.


Question who has the motivation to do that .Certainly not the fair & lovely and its bank.

AS long as feudal characterisation of darker as inferior is allowed to prevail just as all the evil of feudalism it will remain non hip to be less than fair .HOW UNFAIR !

Fair and Lovely #1

You havent gotten over your foot fetish ?

Its really in your head .

The Unmaking Of Gujrat Muslims ready to accept court verdict:
==========================


Ajmer, October 6: Convenor of the Babri Masjid Coordination Committee, Syed Shahabuddin, said Muslims will accept court verdict in Ayodhya case even if it goes against them. ?But it is doubful whether they will get permission to reconstruct a mosque at Ayodhya if the case goes in their favour,? he told reporters here.

The court judgment will be accepted by all -- Babri Masjid Coordination Committee, All India Babri Masjid Action Committee and All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Shahabuddin said after offering chadar at the dargah.

Shahabuddin referred to reported VHP leaders` utterances that they would not accept the court ruling if it went against them and said contempt of court proceedings should be launched against those making such statements.

A national seminar would be organised in Delhi on December 6, the 10th anniversary of the demolition of Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, he said. (PTI) q

Subscribe Now: MG nee

Is Dubai Artificial If Dubai is Artifical

Dubya is ..........?

The Kashmir Committee: Ram in U.S
hindu fanatics are bad news for india. islamic fundoos like yourself may lead to war.

No Arjun_m

Contrary to my Eshtyle ,i have clean record as far as Fight is concerned .I Am Against all violence war nuclear or other.

Yes i admit Osama is pirate & outlaw .He is fugitive & wanted by many govts.All terrorists who you say FUNDO are far from Muslim.I cannot say about there religion but I can say many religious & deeply islamic religious people are neither thses people nor thay want to fight.

Since when Hijackers became more muslim than me or my family .It is an insult to muslims like me who want to practice my religion as FAR AS POSSIBLE .If i want spend sunday not in club but in mosque THAT SHOULDNOT MAKE ME FUNDO or terrorist.

Yes some terrorists come to mosque but mosque is public place like a restaurant or bus station give or take few differences.

I think it is shear laziness on pat of people to club ``strict `` ``orthodox`` or ``kutter`` muslim as enemy of non muslim hence by extension terrorist.

I know what you are going to say ...Osama has x% of support.That may be part of anti american real or perceived feelings.With literacy rate of 40-50% both India & pakistan dont take there cue from West.

Moderate Muslims Mbenzenglish

That was a long post .I could get some of it ,You have identified Nonmuslims want & what muslim want correctly .

I even got the part about Sikh

But after all the solution you have to learn use your brain to invent new mouse traps...(i mean metaphorically dont think real mouse trap butcontraptions for use )

The Unmaking Of Gujrat #68

If you had read it right I never said conversion of Muslim to Hindu is wrong.PROVIDED IT IS NOT COERCIVE & voluntary willingly & full consent of the muslim.

I also wonder why 140 million indian muslim defenitely will be receiving the benefits of BJP & majority uncomfortable pressure BUT WHY DO THEY STILL NOT CONVERT .

In Saudie & other MUSLIM countries you cite Apostasy & blashphemy laws but no such persecution will take place but on the contrary would bre rewrded.

If you dont want me to post any news tell me so .

Moderate Muslims

Jewish World Review Dec. 13, 2002 / 8 Teves, 5763



Weakening Jewry in an effort to fortify it
==========================































EXAMPLE OF JEEEHADI JEW OR MULLAH RABBI OR ISRAELI TERRORIST OR JEWISH RSS....

By Rabbi Berel Wein










http://www.jewishworldreview.com |


The Torah this week deals with the topic dearest to modern Jewish leadership in the United States --- Jewish unity.


After having given up on its previous public-relations, slogan-based, sincere-sounding but not sincere-doing, campaign on Jewish continuity begun only a few years ago, the Jewish organizational machinery in this country has now cranked up its efforts to promote the new mantra of Judaism --- unity.







When translated, this means tolerance, which in turn when translated again means pluralism, and which, when finally translated means anything goes, everything is Judaism and anybody is Jewish. All of this is happening in a Jewish world where the public representatives of those sections of the Jewish people, who are determinedly non-observant and militantly non-traditional and who see themselves to be on the cutting edge of every new social fad and cause and who call these causes and fads Judaism, are clearly destroying themselves demographically and Jewishly. And, they are not satisfied to do this only to themselves but are determined to bring down all of the traditions of Jewish life as taught and practiced over the centuries.


And all of this is done under the guise of tolerance, forcing their will and agenda on Israel, the people and the state.


The old campaign for Jewish continuity failed because it was based on a falsehood. That falsehood was that one could achieve Jewish family or community continuity without demanding sacrifice or change of life-style.


There is no need for weekly and certainly not daily synagogue worship, no need for at least minimal Sabbath observance, for intensive Jewish education, for stronger standards of social, business and sexual morality, in order to guarantee Jewish continuity. The motto of continuity will do it by itself. But that strategy somehow didn`t work. So now we are on to the next undemanding, non-binding, easy-sounding slogan that will save the Jewish community from itself - unity.


But, my dear friends, this slogan is also based on a falsehood - on an illusion, and will also find itself in the wastebasket with all of the other progressive and modern ideas that have been tried over the last century in America to guarantee Jewish survival.


This falsehood is illustrated in the reconciliation and unity between Joseph and his brothers as recorded in the Torah reading of the week. Joseph is forgiving and in a reconciling mood, but he nevertheless reminds the brothers of how they got themselves into this monumental mess. He states to them: ``I am Joseph your brother whom you sold into Egyptian slavery.`` I didn `t just happen to come to Egypt on a visit, nor am I particularly satisfied that my dreams have had to have been realized in this fashion and at such family expense.


But the L-rd ordained it so and I am able to be a savior now to my father and family. But none of this changes the fact that you and you alone sold me as a slave.


Later in the Torah, Joseph will tell his brothers again that ``you thought to do me harm, but the L-rd arranged the sale to be good and a blessing.`` Joseph does not shield his brothers from the statement that ``you thought to do me harm.`` For family unity, to be lasting, it cannot be built on the obfuscation of facts and the ignorance of past family occurrences and the consequences of that behavior.


Let us look at the record of the past that has brought the proud American Jewish community to its knees, in this the hour of its greatest material affluence and most abject Jewish spiritual poverty.


If we are honest as to what works in preserving a Jewish community -- Torah study, ritual observances, Jewish pride and self-worth -- and as to what does not work - feel-good prayers, avant-garde social issues, and sloganeering - Jewish unity may yet be preserved

Fighting The War On Terrorism, Hollywood Style

#35

Ana _Dobarah

``Sammi,
I haven`t seen Popcorn Chutney yet, but I`ve been wanting to. Years ago, I wanted to get the video, but it was too expensive to rent it from the place recommended on SAWNET, and I didn`t know how else to get it``

Ana .....

I `read you only `all the time on Gupp Shup!!!

You are married on the forum.????

Meera Saayal is Lesbian daughter of Madur Jaffery in Popcorn Chutney .

What is this with desi women if they are spinstress,dicvorced or femenazi they turn lesbian at the freindship with caucasians .????Desi womens are Americas next target of being corrupted totally like Iranians in 70s Afghanis in 80`s.Divorced,drinking ,smoking ,no children ,anti family ,male bashing .

Moderate Muslims

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


#74 by hari on December 11, 2002 3:10pm PT
Is there a mechanism in Islam, whereby, someone, say Osama having comitted a specific act can be kicked out of Islam

There is no ordained preisthood in Islam .

Osama is not even Hafiz Alim Fazil Qari or anything spl. other than a Muslim with Leadership quality like any leader good or bad .

You can declare him non muslim or Kafir what difference will it make b/c he is supported by people who are on the fringes to begin with.


You can say Robinhood was christian .Im sure the King were christians too .Yet he had many to run with him.