Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

[Lalmohan]

the french system manages to be secular despite being a strongly christian country

[Agnimitra]

what is required is for the indian state (and by that i really mean the political parties) to stick to the letter of the secular law when dealing with all communities - no not playing on my half of the board, and no not being able to take my pieces. same rules for everyone. if the indian state can universally operate on that basis (and i know all the reasons that it doesnt) then there is no real need to worry about religiously motivated deviations from the law

There are two ways of doing this:
a) give importance to all religions.
b) give no importance to any religion.
Which method are you suggesting?

I would suggest the former (a) - give equal importance to all religions. (At this point India does not treat the majority traditions equally with others.) This is the most stable and advantageous policy for both internal and external reasons:

1. It would reflect the aspirations of Indian people, who are religious.

2. It would allow the public space to have a religious color, thereby creating a psychological countervailing force to Western cultural invasion and its effects.

3. It would automatically ensure that the majority Dharmic nature of India is maintained and even increased (depending on the activism and initiative of its followers). Being the majority, impartial government policy and incentives would be an advantage to the Dharmics, IF they show private initiative in upholding and propagating their values, ideologies and philosophical applications. And given the nature od Dharmic religions, the minority Western religions will not suffer or face persecution -- but will have to adjust to a new context. This will be to the advantage of all.

4. Point (3) is possible only if India is TRULY "equal" to all religions. That is currently NOt the case - it incentivizes minorities and disincentivizes majority Dharmics. This has to be stopped, in the name of our constitution.

5. In terms of India's external soft power projection, our democracy and rule of law and due process is an advantage. However, India needs to market its democratic culture as DIFFERENT from Western democracy, our "secularism" as DIFFERENT from Western secularism. If we can set an example of being a religious, traditional society along with full freedom to explore everything else, it will be a powerful statement, especially to other neighboring South East Asian nations, China, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan -- all of which struggle either with sectarian divisions or with tradition-modernity tensions. It is important that India advocate this forcefully, and emphasize our unique differences with Western "democracy" and "secularism".

JMT.

[brihaspati]

Why equality in religion hain ji? For the state how can you rule out affirmative actions? Or positive discrimination in favour of backward minority-in-religious-domination and those repressed for millenia in religion?

Since the state will be forced to do "affirmative action", it is better to have no importance to any religion at all. Laws of a country are supposed to reflect or not deviate too much from embedded values and practices anyway - and Islam and Christianity and Buddhism are supposed to have immensely enriched, contributed to and even entirely shaped [you see even the foundations of ideas of others came from outside in the form of invaders called Aryans and since then there have been no other ideological invasions] modern Indian culture and civilization [Others onlee wrote down the book of oppression called ManuSmriti , invented the word caste which the Spanish devout soldiers of the Church later copied incorrectly as casta onlee, and devised Suttee and violently worshipped violent 33 crore gods and goddesses] entirely - so their values will be preserved anyway thorugh prevailing Indian values.

[I guess corruption and all things bad in modern India are remnants of the pre-Islamic-colonialism and pre-Christian-colonialism, that also lay outside of Buddhism].

So under such a scenario - no importance to any religion at all should suit all - isnt it?

[brihaspati]

Equality is not possible when there are religions that do not recognize the right of other religions to exist while the remainder have no such stipulations. This implies that those who do not recognize the right of other religions win - out for you cannot suppress such religions for carrying out what is their religious commitment and belief. If you want to put conduitions on such clause in these religions - you are intervening and curtailing religious rights.

What should be relevant for this thread in this particular sub-discussion -should eb a comparison of attitudes towards slavery in religions. Some of them include it in direct revelation from their supreme divine authority - and even doubting or challenging such a clause is blasphemy for it challenges the supposed word of the supreme.

[brihaspati]

A key aspect of the relevance and healthiness of any ideology, theology or religion for a society - is the readiness of the imposers and flag-bearers as well as the mass of the followers to allow both internal as well as external critical analysis. This is what filters out accumulated barnacles and weeds, and poisonous fruits planted by interested clever people inside these religious setups for their own immediate or long-term material and power interests.

Blasphemy laws in any form should be the first target - and be the first sign of a mature society willing to self-explore and modify - instead of proving a society of testesterone driven adolescents intoxicated with the intimidating effect that they can have in a group rioting under the benevolent gaze of condescending elders promising no severe retaliation resulting in loss of family jewels or life or limb.

[brihaspati]

On the slavery thread I would wait for the day - when slavery as okay and halaal - given out primarily in Al Baqara of Al Quran, and also scattered in other suras - as well as quoted and elaborated with strong precedence in strong ahadith of Shai Bukhari - is declared to be haraam, and some kind of a deception passed on in the name of the Islamic supreme by some conniving jinni or agent of shaitan.

Until that happens - slavery, enslavement, taking and enjoying enslaved-right-hand-possessions are instructions of the Islamic supreme. Until the book can be edited - it remains divine law. No matter how many sweet promises are made otherwise. Those who talk of itjehad [struggle with reason] - that "A was written as A but not meant as A" - a kind of brilliant anticipation of the Hegelian-Marxist dialectic - "A is A but also not A", and that things were not meant to be literally taken etc, can still tweedle their thumbs onlee. Ina ctual debates they can neither challenge not delegitimize the halaalness of this slavery clause.

[Agnimitra]

^^^ Brihaspati ji, the "equal" or "impartiality" of the government towards all religions should be calibrated such that:

1. It encourages (or does not allow impediments to) free debate and critique amongst different schools, and creeds.
2. It does not cross the line into affirmative action, but merely affords some level of preference for faith-based initiatives irrespective of sectarian preferences.
3. Its only requirement being a stated allegiance to the broad civil guidelines of the constitution, which is the bestower of these rights and privileges.

As I indicated, this would automatically push the Western Abrahamic creeds to adjust to a new Dharmic context, without the government putting any explicit pressure on the contents of their scriptural laws -- though those contents are certainly fair game in inter-sectarian civil debate and critique.

In order to reach this optimum, the present dispensation needs to get rid of its affirmative action type deals, and the judiciary needs to put its foot down and give permission when it comes to civil inter-sectarian critiques (as long as fair rules of debate can be formulated and hit-and-run polemics is totally disallowed). Religious foundations of all creeds, including majority creeds, should be given equal encouragement and no special subsidies for one over the other.

[johneeG]

the french system manages to be secular despite being a strongly christian country

I am not aware of France, so correct me where I am wrong.
It seems to me that development of secularism and its definition are different in France as compared to India, owing to history. The Church played a great role in the politics of France. People had struggled hard to stop the Church from dictating dos and donts. The fact that Church was opposed to science, also played a vital role. So, the French created secularism to separate the Church from state. State tried to cut Church to its size. People also did criticize certain policies of Church. So far so good.
Enter the new religious demography, so what does the state do? It bans the burqas, in the name of women's rights. Is this secularism? If woman covers her face willingly, how is that a voilation of women's rights? I think the secularism of the French changed the moment a new religion entered the scene. Because now a battle of ideologies and demographics has started. This will intensify in coming days and the secularism will have to react to it.

Anyway, in a system with two conflicting ideologies, what does being neutral mean? What are the red lines? If these creeds are missionary, then they are trying to annihilate the other and take them over. So, what will the state do? Ignore? Then the creed at the receiving end would feel betrayed. If the state reacts, the aggressive religion would feel betrayed. Either way it leads to riots in short term and civil war in the long term.

[Agnimitra]

Anyway, in a system with two conflicting ideologies, what does being neutral mean? What are the red lines? If these creeds are missionary, then they are trying to annihilate the other and take them over. So, what will the state do? Ignore? Then the creed at the receiving end would feel betrayed. If the state reacts, the aggressive religion would feel betrayed. Either way it leads to riots in short term and civil war in the long term.

No, the state can react by creating a framework for conflict and competition that contains violence. Such as to encourage and ensure that the competition is in the form of public debate, complete critique (not hit and run polemics) and free and fair disclosure of means and methods of outreach. This role of state in setting the guidelines for public discourse is the healthy way, and better things may come out of it. Of course it would mean that the religion under missionary assault may carp and complain about having to get off their butts, dust off their philosophical tools and clean up their act socially, but that's a positive thing.

[brihaspati]

Burqa is the symbol. Symbols are always attacked because they are correctly recognized as declarations of identities - "we are we, and you are you - you and we - are different". Burqa wouldn't have become a problem if it was not so explicitly made into an inalienable and compulsory aspect of faith affiliation. True that the Quran does not make it explicit by name - but insists on "covering" up, which is explained further by the unchallengeable "true/shahi" ahadith - as meaning that the "hair" must be covered, moreover with a definite sexual implication - because the covering is made compulsory in the presence of haram men.

In the competing or coexisting strands from the same Judaic roots - as they exist in France, for example, this covering does not have such a compulsory faith specific aspect. Women who do not belong to dedicated religious orders serving special theological roles - are not required to follow such modesty dress-codes. Thus it becomes non-faith specific.

A country like France which was torn apart by theology and theologian inspired sadism and perverted violence in its history, has every right to suspect organized religions' hallmarks and the first subtle politically astute tentative steps towards eventual expansion - formal, visual declarations of religious identities - especially those claim the right to be violent to defend any perception - imagined or real - of supposed insults to their faith.

Enfant terrible Sarkozy - in this case has my full support.

Actually will the same excuse - of "the woman wants it voluntarily" be acceptable for say jauhar/sati? After all the "secular" state should not intervene if the "woman wants it voluntarily"? Of course the excuse will be "they are not comparable". But it will not be explored as to why exactly they are not comparable - because nothing more than "secular state cannot intervene into a woman's voluntary choice" was mentioned! They are not explored, because its not secularism which prompts such discrimination between supposed incomparables.

There is a subconscious awareness of a value system - in which one is acceptable while the other is not. And, yes, it is rooted in a theological chain of arguments - of a particular type : a human's life is not his/her own property, its divine - given by a supreme authority, and hence she/he cannot dispose of it in any way he/she pleases. It becomes easier because the comparison is between a non-Abrahamic root and an Abrahamic root - its always easier to reject the former.

The argument that hidden theological commitments are not acting because "sacredness" of life is also a "secular" value is a false one: neither theologies nor "secular" versions accept any inherent sacredness of life - they simply claim that the possession and use rights of that life belongs to authorities - theologians, state and institutions. Its the monopoly of violence on life - right - that is claimed on behalf of authorities -religious or political. Otherwise - every hanging, execution, war, carried out by all organized religions and their leaders and all secular states would not have been happening.

So let us not bring secularism etc into this discussion. Underlying even secular values - lie solid connections to past religious values. Its simply about "my value" is "better" than "yours".

[brihaspati]

Anyway, in a system with two conflicting ideologies, what does being neutral mean? What are the red lines? If these creeds are missionary, then they are trying to annihilate the other and take them over. So, what will the state do? Ignore? Then the creed at the receiving end would feel betrayed. If the state reacts, the aggressive religion would feel betrayed. Either way it leads to riots in short term and civil war in the long term.

No, the state can react by creating a framework for conflict and competition that contains violence. Such as to encourage and ensure that the competition is in the form of public debate, complete critique (not hit and run polemics) and free and fair disclosure of means and methods of outreach. This role of state in setting the guidelines for public discourse is the healthy way, and better things may come out of it. Of course it would mean that the religion under missionary assault may carp and complain about having to get off their butts, dust off their philosophical tools and clean up their act socially, but that's a positive thing.

Very true indeed! How about a discussion on enslavement and slavery in their religious context? Especially with respect to the territory currnetly occupied by the Paki government, for this thread!

[Agnimitra]

Very true indeed! How about a discussion on enslavement and slavery in their religious context? Especially with respect to the territory currnetly occupied by the Paki government, for this thread!

Sure, I had digressed in order to make a separate point. I will focus on Islamist justification of slavery henceforth.

One thing I find in Islamist propaganda in the West today, is an interesting take on their presentation of slavery. Islamists try to show that:

1. Islam gave a lot of new "rights" to slaves and improved their lot. That's why the Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) disciples included a lot of slaves, the poor and downtrodden.

2. Islam has a program from the gradual emancipation of slaves. They point out that the sudden freedom given to slaves in N. America resulted in social breakdown for the Afro-American community. They didn't know how to use their freedom, or fend for themselves. Many returned to their former masters and begged to be allowed to continue working, etc.. According to Islamist intellectuals, Islam provides a social structure and psychological training in which the slave and the criminal can be rehabilitated. This angle seems to find acceptance among whites, and even among Afro-Americans who tend to be easy converts.

What needs to be shown are counter-examples. And explanations need to be demanded of racist policies found even today in Islamist nations, such as Saudi and several GCC states. In southern Iran, blacks can still be found, and their community and subculture is still considered somewhat low.

[shiv]

Blasphemy laws in any form should be the first target - and be the first sign of a mature society willing to self-explore and modify - instead of proving a society of testesterone driven adolescents intoxicated with the intimidating effect that they can have in a group rioting under the benevolent gaze of condescending elders promising no severe retaliation resulting in loss of family jewels or life or limb.

Another thought. No need to modify. But no killing allowed. You attack or try to kill anyone you will be punished for following the idiotic blasphemy laws of your religion. How weak does a "god" have to be to get his chaddi in a twist because someone does not like him?

[Lalmohan]

anyone advocating killing on the basis of religion immediately violates civil and criminal codes in almost all (non islamic) countries. i am not aware of any exceptions to this sensible rule...

[johneeG]

Bji,
Great fan of yours and admire your posts.

Equality is not possible when there are religions that do not recognize the right of other religions to exist

This is exactly what I had wanted to point out. Perhaps, not the right thread...

[Virendra]

Copper mine digging in Afghanistan unearths Buddhist monastery
Full article at:
http://www.psyched.be/wordpress/science ... uLfP3okGQ9

Excerpts:
A Chinese company digging an unexploited copper mine in Afghanistan has unearthed ancient statues of Buddha in a sprawling 2,600-year-old Buddhist monastery.

Archaeologists are rushing to salvage what they can from a major 7th century B.C. religious site along the famed Silk Road connecting Asia and the Middle East.

The ruins, including the monastery and domed shrines known as ‘stupas,’ will likely be largely destroyed once work at the mine begins.

The ruins were discovered as labourers excavated the site on behalf of the Chinese government-backed China Metallurgical Group Corp, which wants to develop the world’s second largest copper mine, lying beneath the ruins.

Hanging over the situation is the memory of the Buddhas of Bamiyan — statues towering up to 180 feet high in central Afghanistan that were dynamited to the ground in 2001 by the country’s then-rulers, the Taliban, who considered them symbols of paganism. No one wants to be blamed for similarly razing history at Mes Aynak, in the eastern province of Logar. MCC wanted to start building the mine by the end of 2011 but under an informal understanding with the Kabul government, it has given archaeologists three years for a salvage excavation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gentlemen,

Does this further add strength to the claim that Buddha was much before 5th-6th century BC that the 20th century historians assert?
Could have been the 1886 BC if we believe the Puranic chronology?
"Born as the son of Suddhedana of Ayodhya. Magadha during this time had the reign of 4th King in Sisunga dynasty 'Kshemajit' who ruled 1892 BC onwards. Buddha's date of birth lies at approximately 1886-87 BC"

Regards,
Virendra

[KLNMurthy]

@Carl the story told by Islamists about black slaves in US being unfit for freedom etc is not based in reality and is a rehash of narrative of whites who could not reconcile to blacks having the same rights as them. These whites created organizations like KKK which are embodiment of pakiness.

[johneeG]

Gentlemen,

Does this further add strength to the claim that Buddha was much before 5th-6th century BC that the 20th century historians assert?
Could have been the 1886 BC if we believe the Puranic chronology?
"Born as the son of Suddhedana of Ayodhya. Magadha during this time had the reign of 4th King in Sisunga dynasty 'Kshemajit' who ruled 1892 BC onwards. Buddha's date of birth lies at approximately 1886-87 BC"

Regards,
Virendra

If Buddha is indeed such an ancient figure, then Buddhism would have been in full youth(approx 2000yrs) when Christianity was born. That makes the following claim plausible:

Jesus is Buddha and Gospels are Buddhist propaganda

[Agnimitra]

@Carl the story told by Islamists about black slaves in US being unfit for freedom etc is not based in reality and is a rehash of narrative of whites who could not reconcile to blacks having the same rights as them. These whites created organizations like KKK which are embodiment of pakiness.

True. But the fact is that today prison-preaching is a field of success for Islamist organizations, with the Af-Am population being the prime target. They do manage to effect rehabilitation and create a new community that merges with their own oil droplet, and that it is on this solid basis that they boldly peddle such theories. At the same time, in private they will also declare that god made certain races to be master races, though its not clear what they mean by that.

All this cannot be countered merely by intellectual arguments. But a fight in the field, for the souls of men, has to be waged through the spread of ideas and the creation of cultural community, IMHO. Judge by the results. Unfortunately, a majority of Indics seem to think that this "proselytization" business is soooo un-Indian. The fact is that proselytization from a Vedic viewpoint is not the same as deracination, because the Veda is a meta-religion and a meta-culture.

[Agnimitra]

Need help to compile a list of historical references to the conquest of kaffir women by Moslems - both in wartime and in peacetime, and in E. Europe and Iran, apart from India. Need sources to be from the Moslem side, boasting of the practice, as well as from the kaffir side complaining of it. Need sources to be historical, but not just going back to the hadith and sunna. TIA.

[member_19686]

Need help to compile a list of historical references to the conquest of kaffir women by Moslems - both in wartime and in peacetime, and in E. Europe and Iran, apart from India. Need sources to be from the Moslem side, boasting of the practice, as well as from the kaffir side complaining of it. Need sources to be historical, but not just going back to the hadith and sunna. TIA.

SEX SLAVERY

http://voiceofdharma.com/books/mssmi/ch12.htm

KS Lal gives citations to his sources.

[Agnimitra]

^ Thanks. Also, is there a website that tracks such cases in modern day TSP and BD?

[member_19686]

To my knowledge no (specific site tracking sex slavery of non Muslim women) but a site called Mayerdak used to keep track of persecution of BD minorities but don't think its active now, google.

For Hindu sources mentioning this Muslim practice, IIRC Kanhadade Prabandha mentions men and women being captured as slaves.

Hindu records of what the “law” of Islam meant to the Hindus are few and far between. But whenever they are available, they confirm the medieval Muslim historians. Gangadevi the wife of Kumar Kampana (died 1374 AD) of Vijayanagara writes as follows in her Madhurãvijayam regarding the state of things in the Madurai region when it was under Muslim rule: “The wicked mlechchas pollute the religion of the Hindus every day. They break the images of gods into pieces and throw away the articles of worship. They throw into fire Srimad Bhagwat and other holy scriptures, forcibly take away the conchshell and bell of the Brahmanas, and lick the sandal paints on their bodies. They urinate like dogs on the tulsi plant and deliberately pass faeces in the Hindu temples. They throw water from their mouths on the Hindus engaged in worship, and harass the Hindu saints as if they were so many lunatics let large.”

Chaitanya-mañgala, a biography of the great Vaishnava saint of medieval India, presents the plight of Hindus in Navadvipa on the eve of the saint’s birth in 1484 AD. The author, Jayananda, writes: “The king seizes the Brahmanas, pollutes their caste and even takes their lives. If a conch-shell is heard to blow in any house, its owner is made to forfeit his wealth, caste and even life. The king plunders the houses of those who wear sacred threads on the shoulder and put scared marks on the forehead, and then binds them. He breaks the temples and uproots tulsi plants… The bathing in Ganga is prohibited and hundreds of scared asvattha and jack trees have been cut down.”

Vijaya Gupta wrote a poem in praise of Husain Shah of Bengal (1493-1519 AD). The two qazi brothers, Hasan and Husain, are typical Islamic characters in this poem. They had issued orders that any one who had a tulsi leaf on his head was to be brought to them bound hand and foot. He was then beaten up. The peons employed by the qazis tore away the sacred threads of the Brahmans and spat saliva in their mouths. One day a mullah drew the attention of these qazis to some Hindu boys who were worshipping Goddess Manasa and singing hymns to her. The qazis went wild, and shouted: “What! the harãmzãdah Hindus make so bold as to perform Hindu rituals in our village! The culprit boys should be seized and made outcastes by being forced to eat Muslim food.” The mother of these qazis was a Hindu lady who had been forcibly married to their father. She tried to stop them. But they demolished the house of those Hindu boys, smashed the sacred pots, and threw away the pûjã materials. The boys had to run away to save their lives.

http://voiceofdharma.org/books/siii/ch10.htm

[member_20317]

http://varnam.nationalinterest.in/2012/ ... an-coffin/
bracketed comments & bolds not in the writeup.

So as it stands now, the mixing between the two groups (uropain & Indic) happened some time between 40,000 YBP and 12,500 YBP.
Going back 12,500 years we have to wonder what event was responsible for this shared ancestry between the ANI and Europeans? Did it happen during the Out of Africa migration phase? Humans reached India first before moving to Europe in which case the European gene pool would be derived from the much diverse South Asian pool. Or was there any other incident much later which was responsible for this?

Mogambo khush hua! Mmuuaah hahahahaha

[Supratik]

Will have to go through the paper but the journal comes from the Cell press which is highly reputed. The question now is
whether ANI is PIE (proto-Indo-European) and whether the Dravidian culture was developed by people who were already
a mixture of ANI and ASI. This would clear up a lot of cobwebs.

[shiv]

whether the Dravidian culture

What is Dravidian culture?

[brihaspati]

Carl ji,
you will have to start with Ibn Ishaq's Sira [life of Muhammad]. This has much in common with the so-called strong ahadith of Shahi Bukhari, etc., so that things can be cross checked. The Persian source texts are also available for Iran. For Syria, Ottomans, Egypt and Al Andalus others sources exist. For the earliest period, Baladhuri is a good start - even for the Caliphate. I will try to give a list.

[Lalmohan]

whether the Dravidian culture

What is Dravidian culture?

short dark rice and curd eating lungi dancing, no?

[Supratik]

whether the Dravidian culture

What is Dravidian culture?

I meant the Dravidian language family.

[shiv]

What is Dravidian culture?

I meant the Dravidian language family.

OK Thanks. I don't mean to be aggressive but I often come out sounding that way.

The "Aryan" invasion theory was cooked up to serve European egos. Since superior Aryans had to defeat someone, a Dravidian race was cooked up, with a separate Dravidian culture.

The European "scholars" who cooked this up originally did believe that the "Dravidian race" was an inferior race with flat noses and dark skin and it was "natural" for Aryans to subjugate and rule the Dravidians. But soon the church got into the fray and started saying "The Dravidian race" (who were hitherto declared inferior" need to be saved from the racist Hindu high caste Brahmins.

That set the stage for the Dravidian politics of Tamil Nadu, and also set the stage for cooking up theories of a combined "Dravidian-African" race who migrated directly from Africa to india from the now sunken and totally cooked up fake continent of "Lemuria". There was also a gradual absorption of Hindu epics saying that they are all derived from Christian tradition, driving the conversions and racist divides in Southern India.

[Supratik]

I meant the Dravidian language family.

Shiv wrote: OK Thanks. I don't mean to be aggressive but I often come out sounding that way.

Don't worry. I know you on BR for 14-15 years.

[member_20317]

fake continent of "Lemuria".

Lemuria.

As in the great white hope flying in to save the weakest of the federation (Arboria), dressed up in green kacha banyan, with a se_y white b_tch and a bright but helpless Whateverski, from the evil empire of Emperor Singh .

Which leads me to consider that it wasn't the comics that I used to read it was a bl..dy theology.

[shiv]

fake continent of "Lemuria".

Lemuria.

As in the great white hope flying in to save the weakest of the federation (Arboria), dressed up in green kacha banyan, with a se_y white b_tch and a bright but helpless Whateverski, from the evil empire of Emperor Singh .

Which leads me to consider that it wasn't the comics that I used to read it was a bl..dy theology.

I kid u not

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemuria_%28continent%29

Though Lemuria is no longer considered a valid scientific hypothesis, it has been adopted by writers involved in the occult, as well as some Tamil writers of India

[member_20317]

Shivji, I do believe you. And this Rabbit hole keeps going deeper and deeper. This is actually education for me. I had never heard of Lemuria.
In fact we should cannonize this 'continent' in the some Lemuria Puran. That could enable our offsprings to stake a claim to the whole of Indian Ocean as India's Ocean. Even take Australia, Diego Gracia, with some our own brand of Shanghai Logic.

Just the Singh in me, not thinking out aloud. Would just serve the bas.ards right.

[shiv]

Shivji, I do believe you. And this Rabbit hole keeps going deeper and deeper. This is actually education for me. I had never heard of Lemuria.
In fact we should cannonize this 'continent' in the some Lemuria Puran. That could enable our offsprings to stake a claim to the whole of Indian Ocean as India's Ocean. Even take Australia, Diego Gracia, with some our own brand of Shanghai Logic.

Just the Singh in me, not thinking out aloud. Would just serve the bas.ards right.

I just wonder if "Lemuria" has a connection with lemur as a cruel and sarcastic joke on the "Dravidian race" by the same racists who are setting them up to go against their roots

Lemur, a black faced monkey

[anupmisra]

Interesting thread. I came across this article by Koenraad Elst. Was There an Islamic "Genocide" of Hindus?

Elst first decribes the various "types" of genocides (try and pick the one that you think applies to us):
- Complete genocide
- Selective genocide
- Genocide in the Bible
- Indirect genocide
- Genocide by any other name

Elst then says this in the body of the article (which, by the way, although well researched, can become the basis of further research):

Hinduism's losses

There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like "punishing" the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.

Note that attempts are made to deny this history. In Indian schoolbooks and the media, an idyllic picture of Hindu-Muslim harmony in the pre-British period is propagated in outright contradiction with the testimony of the primary sources. Like Holocaust denial, this propaganda can be called negationism. The really daring negationists don't just deny the crimes against Hindus, they invert the picture and blame the Hindus themselves. Thus, it is routinely alleged that Hindus persecuted and destroyed Buddhism; in reality, Buddhist monasteries and universities flourished under Hindu rule, but their thousands of monks were killed by Ghori and his lieutenants.

Apart from actual killing, millions of Hindus disappeared by way of enslavement. After every conquest by a Muslim invader, slave markets in Bagdad and Samarkand were flooded with Hindus. Slaves were likely to die of hardship, e.g. the mountain range Hindu Koh, "Indian mountain", was renamed Hindu Kush, "Hindu-killer", when one cold night in the reign of Timur Lenk (1398-99), a hundred thousand Hindu slaves died there while on transport to Central Asia. Though Timur conquered Delhi from another Muslim ruler, he recorded in his journal that he made sure his pillaging soldiers spared the Muslim quarter, while in the Hindu areas, they took "twenty slaves each". Hindu slaves were converted to Islam, and when their descendants gained their freedom, they swelled the numbers of the Muslim community. It is a cruel twist of history that the Muslims who forced Partition on India were partly the progeny of Hindus enslaved by Islam.

Elst also states this at the end of article (take for what its worth):

Healing

What should Hindus say to Muslims when they consider the record of Islam in Hindu lands? It is first of all very important not to allot guilt wrongly. Notions of collective or hereditary guilt should be avoided. Today's Muslims cannot help it that other Muslims did certain things in 712 or 1565 or 1971. One thing they can do, however, is to critically reread their scripture to discern the doctrinal factors of Muslim violence against Hindus and Hinduism.

Or, let Karma takes its course. Karma is, after all, a she-dog.

[member_20317]

Shivji, thats how i thought at first.
Apparently this guy too thought the same (per wiki):

J. H Moore writing in his book Savage Survivals (1933) wrote: “It is believed that man evolved somewhere in southern Asia, or possibly, still further south than the present boundary of Asia, in lands now drowned by the Indian Ocean. This supposed land is called Lemuria.”

And it could actually be so because the father of this theory, now I learn was, Philip Lutley Sclater (4 November 1829 - 27 June 1913) was an English, a Lawyer and a Zoologist (Dangerous combination in those times, something like Monkey with a sword - Monkeys are the amongst the smartest of animals ).

But on a more serious note Shivji while going through the wiki page on 'Lemuria' I came across the following sentences:

“The acceptance of Darwinism led scientists to seek to trace the diffusion of species from their points of evolutionary origin.”

I mean these guys are terrifyingly Linear. They know everything that they accept (and hence teach as such) is worth knowing, at least they behave like they do, then they have classified everything since their noledge is infinite. And now it can all be fossilized in a university to be learnt as the 11th commandment.
And then this:

“Prior to the acceptance of continental drift, biologists frequently postulated submerged land masses in order to account for populations of land-based species now separated by barriers of water.”

Now if an overactive imagination of a well meaning Indic supplies the logic of say animals moving around in Pushpak Vimana. That would be oh so mythical/exotic/fantastical/destined to be false. But this is not. This character still is to be eulogized as 'The English Lawyer and Zoologist, the father of Lemuria, inspiring other scholars to teach a lesson to the evil emperor Singh'. See the manifest destiny getting acted out by the raktabeeja of ‘eminent intellectuals’.
And then in next step:

“After gaining some acceptance within the scientific community, the concept of Lemuria began to appear in the works of other scholars.”

So when did this begin to appear in the works of other scholars (ref. J. H. Moore above). Basically 20 years after the death of the ‘Father’.

Now this is not enough. There are other claimants to the glory of this naming business too. Someone is claiming the glory for this guy

Ernst Heinrich Philipp August Haeckel (February 16, 1834 – August 9, 1919),[1] also written von Haeckel, was an eminent German biologist, naturalist, philosopher, physician, professor and artist.

Doctor saab let me take time to laugh at this point.

[brihaspati]

There can be two realistic roots of the Tamil narratives.

(1) The more likely : a large chunk of land was above the water during the last glacial maximum around 20000 YBP. This would be a coastal strip all around the southern peninsula, and given the submerged geo-profile now measurable - this would be a continuous strip of land that begins to widen out roughly just south of Chilka in Orissa, all along the Andhra coast, and gradually widening quite a bit along the modern TN coast and all the way up to Karnataka, narrowing a bit and again widening around Gujarat and Kutch.

At its largest extent it would have included the Lakshadweep as a continuous land, Maldives and Sri-Lanka.

This contiguity remained in stages of 16000, 12500, 10000, 8000, 5000 - when the final shape mostly happened. Assume roughly an average width of 100-150 kms all along this arc, and that is indeed a huge piece of land. They could have had all the rivers and "mountains" that are traceable now under water - that they claim in Kumari Kandyam.

But obviously the exaggaration represented by Lemuria is difficult to support by current geological wisdom - as the continental shelf goes down rather steeply very quickly after the outline I mentioned. [Having siad that there are some marine archeologists - such as some working in the Caribbeans who speculate that specific geological conditions might have led to sudden deep ocean sinking of coastal settlements. Not sure whether similar speculation would be allowed for offshore India].

(2) The other more remote possibility is that Tamil founding fathers could have had a civilizational memory of origins in South East Asia at the height of the ice age - which then would be a continuous and a very large land mass - incorporating most of the territory currently comprising the Indonesian islands - and attached to mainland Malaysia/Asia.

There are indications of a substantial early civilizational development in this land mass - which would greatly be destroyed as sea-levels rose.

But this would be politically sensitive to accept.