Tackling Islamic Extremism in India - 4

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4186
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Postby Murugan » 24 Jan 2008 10:35

Pulikeshi wrote:
murugan wrote:In short, We can not define izlam as dharma with our way of defining dharma.


In other words - since from a Dharmic point we cannot understand Islam - we are back to square one and losing the battle for hearts and minds to EJs.
Which in turn tweaks Hindu takleef and there is no end to this....

Also, could you please explain yourself in full sentences rather than cryptic text. It is hard to read.

Not really sure what all this food discussion is about - folks get hungry when we talk of Dharma? :P


This is what i have personally understood - our way - or my SDRE hindu way of defining izlam is narrow, inefficient and incapable :x . totally personal view.

IMVHO, It somewhere fits in to the definition of demon's lifestyles and everybody knows what all those SDRE's gods did to demons - they never tackled them - they helped them rich heaven (or hell?) asap. SDRE hindu gods dont tackle the takleef - thats the page i have taken from this discussion and my reading of storybooks, epics and dharma books/scriptures.

may those SDRE hindus' gods give me (and to you too) the direction and strength with all that rajasic and sattwic food to despatch the demons to the place they deserve.

(the food discussion is all about)

***

mohanj: sattwic milk also start rotting and spoiling and become tamasic by your way of understanding. the tamasic - by above mentioned definition Dahi is used to make panchamrit and offered to god. the definition of prakriti/nature of food liked by different people given above will help.

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4186
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Postby Murugan » 24 Jan 2008 10:58

few examples of tackling (eliminating iirc) terrorism:

1)

tataH shUrpaNakhaa vaakyaat udyuk{}taan sarva raakSasaan |
kharam trishirasam ca eva duuSaNam ca eva raakSasam || 1-1-47
nijaghaana raNe raamaH teSaam ca eva pada anugaan |

"Then in a combat Rama eliminated all the fourteen demons who rebelliously came at him in the first round of combat incited by the provokes of Shuurpanakha, and then in second round Rama eliminated demon chiefs called Khara, Trishira, Duushana, who are none but the cousins of Shuurpanakha and Ravana, together with all of their hench-demons... [1-1-47, 48a]

2)

pravishya tu mahaaaraNyam raamo raajiiva lochanaH |
viraadham raakSasam hatvaa sharabha.ngam dadarsha ha || 1-1-41
sutiikSNam ca api agastyam ca agastya bhraataram tathaa |

"That lotus-eyed Rama on his entering the vast of Dandaka forest eliminated the demon Viraadha, and indeed descried Sage Sharabhanga, also even Sage Suteekhsna, also Sage Agastya and likewise Sage Agastya's brother... [1-1-41, 42a]

3)

sa teSAm prati shushraava raaxasaanaam tathaa vane || 1-1-44
pratij~naataH cha raameNa vadhaH sa.myati rakshasaam |
R^iSiiNaam agni kalpaanaam da.nDakaaraNya vaasiinaam || 1-1-45

"Rama conceded to the supplications of those sages of that forest, which forest has become an abode of demons, and Rama also promised those sages who are the dwellers of Dandaka forest, and whose glow is like that of the Ritual-fire, to eliminate all of the demons in combat... [1-1-44b, 45]

4)

tena tatra eva vasataa janasthaana nivaasinii |
viruupitaa shuurpaNakhaa raakSasii kaama ruupiNii || 1-1-46

"While Rama is living there in Dandaka forest, a guise-changing demoness named Shuurpanakha, who is a resident of Janasthaana, a place in Dandaka forest, is disfigured... [1-1-46]

(The SDRE's icon did not even spare the female demons)

5)

vane tasmin nivasataa janasthaana nivaasinaam || 1-1-48
rakSasaam nihataani asan sahasraaNi catur dasha |

"During his stay in Dandaka forest Rama eliminated fourteen thousand demons in all, who are the inhabitants of that very forest... [1-1-48b, 49a]


SDRE Dharma = to follow rama's example and if not possible help/encourage all those who are doing rama's work in Doda Forests, Dachigam Forest/wherever.

and Provide them good Rajasic and Sattwic material = that is dharma of the present day :lol:

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4186
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Postby Murugan » 24 Jan 2008 11:08

Before Chanakya - there was lord rama

abhyaSicya ca la.nkaayaam raakSasa indram vibhiiSaNam |
kR^itakR^ityaH tadaa raamo vijvaraH pramumoda ha || 1-1-85


"Enthroning Vibheeshana as the chieftain of demons in Lanka, then feeling that his task is fulfilled, Rama indeed rejoiced highly getting rid of febrility about any uncertainty of fulfilling his promises, excepting for Jatayu... [1-1-85]

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 24 Jan 2008 11:29

I see Shiv has indeed taken a drop and moved on; but since its really his fault in getting us all in here (in more ways than one) I will still take the liberty of making a point on the discussion so far.

The idea of "we must define Hindusim to protect it" Is a lost cause; let me explain --

We can sure write a new Dharma Shastra -- (and by no means I think Manu Smriti MS was either the first or the most important or most relevant) -- As long as Hinduism has been prevalent and living well; a Dharma Shastra has been written -- Arthshastra was a Dhrama Shasta in a way -- and nearly each phase of Hindu history has had one or more scholar expounding and rewriting the same.

However NONE of them were trying to DEFINE Dharma; what they were trying was -- based on the material so far and current context -- trying to create a social code with gelled with Dhrama and personal Dharma.

However the door to many was always open.

In that sense we already have a Dharma today -- it is the constitution -- and most Hindu's who are not people of a book; value that more than people of the book do.

The problem here is that the constitution according to Dharmic principles is flawed.

So the real solution is to fix the Constitution to reflect our Dharma as we understand and all will be well -- for now.

Further it the nebulousness which the strenght of Hinduism; It is point less if we destroy the very fuzziness of the system to fight against hard coded system. Even if we win; Hinduism loses.

The real victory is to accept the fuzziness; accept it weakness vis a vis Hier. Beau. BUT use the strong points of fuzziness coupled with its ability to form temporary HBs within it to win.

A Hindu soul in a Islamic body -- tough to do but even tougher and a great thing to conceive -- No wonder Swamiji is held to be so great.

So instead of breast beating on the lines of "why arent we more like them" we should accept "we are not them and wont be as long as we are we" -- what now?

The first and fore most task is not to bring out a new DS instead of MS; what is the first task is to make sure that basic tenets of Dharma is ingrained in every child in Hindu sthan -- this is a place where we are losing badly.

I want the chants of Vedas to echo though the land and understood -- and to do that we have to go through the constitution.

So Yes Rye the out come of all these threads is go out and vote -- it has always been that -- just as the entire Gita had a simple message -- lift the bow Arjuna

In the end Dharma is really very simple -- live and do.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 Jan 2008 16:07

Cross post
bala wrote:When Muslims in other countries abide by the laws of the nation; why is registration such a burden and why is 16 yrs of age okay for marriage.

Marriage registration not Islamic, says Muslim board

Opposing the recent Supreme Court order making marriage registration certificates mandatory, the New All-India Muslim Personal Law Board on Wednesday said the community would not accept the directive, as it was an infringement of the Muslim personal law.

Mohammed Hashmi Kanpuri, a member of the board, stated that each and every Muslim was bound with Shariat laws, given by Islam and guaranteed by the country's Constitution.

"Any marriage in Islam is certified by three people including a Kazi, and there is no need for any other certification," he said.

"Muslims are governed by their own rules which are different from the rules of other communities," said Mr Hashmi.

He stated that according to Shariat law, a girl can marry once she attains the age of 16 years, whereas the Constitution allows marriage only after the girl reaches the age of 18.

Taking a swipe at the government's anti-terrorism policies, another board member, Tauqeer Raza, said the community was being victimised in the name of curbing terrorism.

"Every time, a terrorist act takes place, Muslim youth are blamed and taken into custody on mere suspicion, whereas the real culprits are never caught," he said.

The board members were of the view that all the governments in power have adopted the policy of 'use and dump' whenever the issues relating to Muslims have come up.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 Jan 2008 16:15

Fewer Muslims in school in `07

BS Reporter / New Delhi January 24, 2008
Barring Muslims, all other social groups in the country - Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes - are sending more children to school.

A report by the National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA) under the Ministry of Human Resource Development for 2006-07 has data suggesting that while Muslim children constitute only 7.52 per cent of all children in upper primary classes (VI to VII), Scheduled Castes account for 19.87 per cent of total enrolment in elementary classes. This is 3.6 per cent more than their share of 16.2 per cent in the population of the country.

Scheduled Tribes' representation is a healthy 10.69 per cent, almost 2.5 per cent above their population share of 8.2 per cent. Both the communities have fared well compared with the 2005-06 figures.

The report says OBCs - who attracted much attention over a legislation providing 27 per cent seats for them in central higher educational institutions - are also well represented with 42.18 per cent enrolment at primary level and 41.23 per cent at upper primary level.

Though there is no census of OBC population in the country, random studies say their proportion is around 40 per cent of the population.

The data in the report show that OBCs are not falling behind. The OBC proportion also registered a slight growth when compared with the 2005-06 numbers.

However, what causes concern is the educational backwardness of Muslims. Of all children enrolled in primary classes (I to V), the community accounts for only 9.39 per cent of the total. Muslims comprise 13.43 per cent of the population, according to the 2001 census.

The report, which comprises data from the 1.19 million recognised (government and private) schools imparting elementary education in 35 states and union territories has collected data on Muslims for the first time.

Though no comparisons can be made with previous years, the numbers point to an immediate need for intervention. The statewise position of Muslims is interesting.

Data reveal that even in states where the percentage of minorities is high, their proportion in formal elementary education system is worrying.

In Bihar, while Muslims are 16.53 per cent of the population, only 8.95 per cent children in primary sections and 6.6 in upper primary sections are Muslims. The numbers from Kerala show that in the Communist-ruled state, the representation of Muslims is a dismal 10 per cent. Muslims comprise 24.7 per cent of the state's population.

In Gujarat, considered polarised on religious grounds, Muslim children constitute just above 4 per cent of all schoolgoing children. Their share of population in the state is above 9 per cent.

In Uttar Pradesh, the Muslim presence in elementary schools is half the percentage of their population. Delhi also does not provide a positive picture. With a Muslim population of 11.72 per cent, only 5.4 per cent students in its primary schools are Muslims. The proportion is 7.3 per cent at upper primary level.

NUEPA officials said the numbers "may not present complete coverage as the information was collected for the first time."

The annual report on elementary education, which falls under the government's flagship programme, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), presents a positive picture for 2006-07 by showing an overall increase in enrolment and retention rates, and better teacher-to-pupil and classroom-to-pupil ratios in comparison with previous years.

The report says more elementary schools in the country have pucca buildings, water and toilet facilities in the 2006-07 academic session than the previous year.


Muslim enrolment just 9% in primary schools: Study

NEW DELHI: Comprising more than 13% of Indian population, Muslim enrolment at the primary level (class I-V) was a meagre 9.39% while in upper primary (class VI-VIII) it was 7.52% in 2006-07.

The data of Muslim enrolment in schools, collected for the first time, only confirms what the Sachar Committee report indicated about their educational status.

The survey, conducted by the National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA) for HRD ministry, shows that in Muslim-dominated states like UP, Bihar, West Bengal and Kerala, the community needs a giant leap to make it to the mainstream. Assam, J&K, Andhra Pradesh and to some extent West Bengal are the only exceptions.

However, sources point out that since this is the first time that data on Muslims has been calculated, there is a probability of some data infirmity.

Also, it is possible that a few states could have included enrolment of OBC Muslim students in the OBC figures rather than factoring them separately. There is also a chance that a few schools did not report Muslim enrolment figures. "A clearer picture would emerge from next year," one official said.

NUEPA's education statistics released on Tuesday also shows that enrolment percentage of SCs/STs/OBCs has not changed much since the previous years.

But there has been a change in the overall ranking of states on the basis of Educational Development Index.

The EDI - based on indicators like access, infrastructure, teachers and outcomes in both primary and upper primary level - introduced last year, shows that Kerala remains the top state for the second consecutive year, but, Puducherry has climbed up two steps and is now in the second position. Delhi has come down to third from the second slot.

Tamil Nadu has come down to the fourth position from last year's third slot, while Andhra Pradesh has fallen four positions - down from eighth to 12th.

Even Karnataka has come down to the eighth slot from sixth last year. States like Bihar, UP, West Bengal, Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh continue to hover - a few notches up and down - among the bottom of the heap.

As for Muslim enrolment, in J&K with 66.97% Muslims, their enrolment is 62.52% at the primary level and 60.55% in upper primary classes.

Assam with 30.92% of Muslim population has also done well. Here enrolment in primary schools is 30.42% but comes down significantly in upper primary to stand at 17.39%.

Andhra Pradesh has 9.17% Muslim population and enrolment in primary level is 10% and upper primary 9.11%. West Bengal seems to have caught up.

With Muslim population of over 25%, enrolment in primary is 27.92% but comes down to 19.63% in upper primary classes. Kerala has 24.7% Muslim population but enrolment is pathetic - at 10.13% at the primary level and 9.59% in the upper primary level.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 24 Jan 2008 16:20

shiv wrote:Cross post
bala wrote:When Muslims in other countries abide by the laws of the nation; why is registration such a burden and why is 16 yrs of age okay for marriage.

Marriage registration not Islamic, says Muslim board

Opposing the recent Supreme Court order making marriage registration certificates mandatory, the New All-India Muslim Personal Law Board on Wednesday said the community would not accept the directive, as it was an infringement of the Muslim personal law.

Mohammed Hashmi Kanpuri, a member of the board, stated that each and every Muslim was bound with Shariat laws, given by Islam and guaranteed by the country's Constitution.



There's the confident expectation of dhimma at play in the assertion by the Muzlim personal law board that the Indian SC rulings too can't / daren't interfere in their charming world.

After all the precedent of Shah bano is already there and MMS is ahead of RG in the dhimmitude sweepstakes.

Point is, what happens if the SC verdict is actually sought to be implemented? Riots will break out. Like night follows day. What then? IMO, the longer we wait and postpone this inevitable conflict, the worse it will be. Even if we kafirs lose the battle, the awareness it creats among apolitical kafirs will position us better to win the long war.

The position the commies take is known. But how will the west and their stooges in our DIE and dhimmedia react? That would be interesting to watch. The west will be very interested because they're finally struggling with muslim minorities demanding separate and exclusive political and legal space in the west now.

JMTs etc.
Last edited by vsudhir on 24 Jan 2008 17:09, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 24 Jan 2008 16:54

Sanku wrote:I see Shiv has indeed taken a drop and moved on; but since its really his fault in getting us all in here (in more ways than one) I will still take the liberty of making a point on the discussion so far.


We have been discussing various whines on these threads for years, and since the "dharma" word was bandied about a lot, I assumed that all the dharma desirers would jump at the opportunity and rattle off dharmic solutions.

Unfortunately what i have seen so far is, (to repeat an analogy I used recently) like the crowd of cops slipping and falling down in a heap when the target they are chasing releases an oil slick in their path.

Using Dharma as a solution on this forum died before it started because Hindus like to use the word dharma as being needed for solutions in India but seem to know bugger all about dharma and are unable to serve as guides to anyone who may be more ignorant than them.

Like me talking about my beautiful and well endowed girlfriend, the problem really arises when I have to put my money where my mouth is and show her off in person. Like the dharma solution she ain't visible.

Talking about "dharmic solutions" is a joke that I will dismiss outright in future unless some serious minds can be jogged to bring sense into this "Let us have dharma" howl that I have heard for years now.

At least that little hiccup - i.e "using dharma" may be put out of the way and need not even be considered because nobody knows what to do when they are offered, on a platter, the chance to talk about it.

My rant has been harsh, but I will try and make amends by summing up. For all the talk of dharma, I have seen only 3 people talking about dharma in the context of islam - i.e Pulikeshi and Murugan and Sanku

Their takes below:

1)
Pulikeshi wrote:However, we are going back and forth between spiritual and social.
Sanathana Dharma (SD for short) does not absolutely define the bounds of the unbound able (God or Brahman for the ignorant).
However, SD fails in not defining social Dharma.

Islam however does not do much (similar to the Bible, unlike the Torah) on trying to define the bounds or describe the unboundedness of God.
However, it puts a command-control structure in place when it comes to society.

If folks have failed to see what I am threading (pun intended) towards, it is to write the new Dharma Shastra.
We got it wrong with Manu Smrithi - it is time to fix it or rewrite and not throw the baby with the bath water. :mrgreen:



2)
Murugan wrote:IMVHO, It somewhere fits in to the definition of demon's lifestyles and everybody knows what all those SDRE's gods did to demons - they never tackled them - they helped them rich heaven (or hell?) asap. SDRE hindu gods dont tackle the takleef - thats the page i have taken from this discussion and my reading of storybooks, epics and dharma books/scriptures.

may those SDRE hindus' gods give me (and to you too) the direction and strength with all that rajasic and sattwic food to despatch the demons to the place they deserve.


3)
Sanku wrote:In that sense we already have a Dharma today -- it is the constitution -- and most Hindu's who are not people of a book; value that more than people of the book do.

The problem here is that the constitution according to Dharmic principles is flawed.

So the real solution is to fix the Constitution to reflect our Dharma as we understand and all will be well -- for now.


To some extent my view corresponds with that of Sanku, with some differences.

The constitution serves as a guideline, and yes there appear to be adharmic problems in it which must be fixed.

But the presence of the constitution has not removed dharma from among Hindus and has not stopped them from recognizing adharma.

This has led to communal friction. The constitution being partial, accompanied by the majority Hindus being upset about adharma may actually have led to adharmic reactions by Hindus themselves at multiple levels.

But every adharmic Hindu reaction can easily be justified as a necessary reaction to Islamic adharma and this is where we are now.

A sense of dharma is alive and healthy among Hindus, although unstated in the same words. Hindus practise dharma unconsciously without being able to say what it is. This trick has been achieved at multiple levels by upbringing, home atmosphere, folklore etc - in much the same was as an Islamic upbringing makes non Islamic people "bad" to Muslims.

So despite my earlier rant we cannot dismiss dharma as part of the solution. Dharmic mindsets are everywhere even if people are stumped when asked to pin it down.

We need a new via media. A new way of communicating Hindu thinking to non dharmic observers in a way that has never been done before by Macaulayised mindsets, and a way of codifying Islamic thinking into how it s considered "haraam" from a dharmic viewpoint. Working forward from there we might possibly be able to chart a new path

This in fact may correspond to Pulikeshis take on remaking dharma.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4793
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Postby SBajwa » 24 Jan 2008 20:25

I have been researching the Saudi connections... Let me try connecting the dots.


1. Year 1979 when Osama bin laden had just moved to Afghanistan., Mecca (the grand mosque) was occupied by "Supposedly
Shiite muslims" who used Bin Laden trucks (bin laden company has exclusive rights for all construction in
Mecca, Medina and other "religious" places in Arabia) to get into the mosque. After several attempts by Saudi
army and naPaki army to free the Mecca Mosque., French Elite commandos were "converted" to Islam (Catherine Bin Laden
who is an Ex wife of Osaman's brother Yeslam bin ladin says that this conversion was "fastest ever in the world", 2 minutes to
convert over 200 commandos, don't know whether these french commandoes were circumcised too in those 2 minutes) and
they freed the mecca mosque by killing these "militants".

2. Osama's half brother Mahrouz was arrested for his role in the above uprising, later he was released when one of the
princes intervened.

3. Yeslam Bin Laden is in cahoots a napakistani named akberali moawalla. Check out the wiki pages of these characters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeslam_Binladin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akberali_Moawalla

4. akberali moawalla and Yeslam Bin ladin live in Geneva (Switzerland) and they invest Saudi money across the world through
their company named SICO. Akberali moawalla was allowed to leave from logan airport in that famouse kickout of bin laden
family in september 2001. French government and US governments are currently investigating these characters.


How.. .do I connect the dots?

It looks like a grand conspiracy where Shiite and Sunni radical muslims(bin laden brothers, etc) are trying to take over
Saudi Arabia through either economically (Yeslam bin ladin invests money of all 25,000 saudi princes and princesses through
his company SICO) and through terror (his brother osama).

and Pakistani government is deep down involved in this conspiracy., through ISI and their various fronts.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20825
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Postby Prem » 25 Jan 2008 00:49

shiv wrote:
Sanku
now.


1)[quote="Pulikeshi wrote:
However, we are going back and forth between spiritual and social.
Sanathana Dharma (SD for short) does not absolutely define the bounds of the unbound able (God or Brahman for the ignorant).
However, SD fails in not defining social Dharma.

Islam however does not do much (similar to the Bible, unlike the Torah) on trying to define the bounds or describe the unboundedness of God.
However, it puts a command-control structure in place when it comes to society.

If folks have failed to see what I am threading (pun intended) towards, it is to write the new Dharma Shastra.
We got it wrong with Manu Smrithi - it is time to fix it or rewrite and not throw the baby with the bath water. :mrgreen:



2we might possibly be able to chart a new path

This in fact may correspond to Pulikeshis take on remaking dharma.


About remaking of new Yugadharma , Puliskehi has echoed Great Swami's desire to have the combination of Vedantic mind ( keeping the spiritual knowledge intact) and Islamic body ( UTF United Takleef Front )

skganji
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 93
Joined: 01 Dec 2007 01:21
Location: U.SA/India.

Postby skganji » 25 Jan 2008 01:42

Prem wrote:When one has broken the barrier of 3 Gunas, person can eat anything and not get effected by it . i think nature of food is not the issue but that of person. Even the Compassionate One , Lord Budha ate meat, Sri Ramakrishana ate fish and hunting has been one of good pastimes of Devtas and Avataras.


I don't think Buddha ate Meat after his enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree. I don't think the statement about Avataras eating meat is also correct.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1407
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Jan 2008 02:54

shiv wrote:To some extent my view corresponds with that of Sanku, with some differences.

The constitution serves as a guideline, and yes there appear to be adharmic problems in it which must be fixed.


Shiv,

Constitution - is a social contract between citizen and state.
We can still amend or repair it if possible via constitutional means.
I'd rather that the state stay neutral (neither appeasing nor indifferent) regarding religious beliefs.

Social Dharma - has precedence for being rewritten and reinterpreted to suit the changing times.
Every great empire building activity of the Hindus has coincided with such a rewrite.
Acharya Chanakya was the last well know individual to do that...

This rise of India needs a renewal of Dharma and it ought to be the way to arbitrate with the "others".
The focus should not be spiritual/personal Dharma, it ought to focus razor sharp on Social Dharma.

Now, the next question is going to be why can't someone just write one and post it here. :mrgreen:
My answer is it can be, but what use is a Dharma Sashtra if it cannot be arrived at by a consensus after argument. That is how the previous ones came about.
Like all things Hindu, first we build the consensus to renew Dharma, once that sticks, the process itself will bring in the end the "book of rules".

Multatuli
BRFite
Posts: 612
Joined: 06 Feb 2007 06:29
Location: The Netherlands

Postby Multatuli » 25 Jan 2008 03:35

Quote : < When one has broken the barrier of 3 Gunas, person can eat anything and not get effected by it . i think nature of food is not the issue but that of person. Even the Compassionate One , Lord Budha ate meat, Sri Ramakrishana ate fish and hunting has been one of good pastimes of Devtas and Avataras. >

I am am quite certain this is all rubish, Lord Buddha never ate meat.

About the hunting : The Avatara´s appeared in royal families and it is the duty of Ksatriya´s to protect the people, this means that they have to hone their skills as a warrior. Some animals may become a problem ( like wolves, the big cats, etc. ) if they roam through inhabited area´s then they have to be captured or killed, for both these reasons the Avatara´s/Ksatriya´s would go hunting, but it doesn´t mean that they went hunting for meat. I know that there are some translations of the Ramayana ( and Bhagavad Gita ) in Hindi, which tell us that Rama ( or Krishna ) ate flesh ( Maas in Hindi ), but this is untrue, both the Muslims and Christians have falsified some translations of Hindu scriptures. They would deliberately add verses to lure the Hindu´s away from true Dharma.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jan 2008 03:41

Sanku wrote:So the real solution is to fix the Constitution to reflect our Dharma as we understand and all will be well -- for now.

Further it the nebulousness which the strenght of Hinduism; It is point less if we destroy the very fuzziness of the system to fight against hard coded system. Even if we win; Hinduism loses.

The real victory is to accept the fuzziness; accept it weakness vis a vis Hier. Beau. BUT use the strong points of fuzziness coupled with its ability to form temporary HBs within it to win.

A Hindu soul in a Islamic body -- tough to do but even tougher and a great thing to conceive -- No wonder Swamiji is held to be so great.

So instead of breast beating on the lines of "why arent we more like them" we should accept "we are not them and wont be as long as we are we" -- what now?

The first and fore most task is not to bring out a new DS instead of MS; what is the first task is to make sure that basic tenets of Dharma is ingrained in every child in Hindu sthan -- this is a place where we are losing badly.

I want the chants of Vedas to echo though the land and understood -- and to do that we have to go through the constitution.

So Yes Rye the out come of all these threads is go out and vote -- it has always been that -- just as the entire Gita had a simple message -- lift the bow Arjuna

In the end Dharma is really very simple -- live and do.
Second that view Sanku, you and I have come exactly to the same conclusion :)

A Dharmic Constitution IS the need of the hour. A constitution that promotes as you say the echos of our vedas across this land.

I have read some works to the effect, but nothing elaborate, yet. Let me know, if you have found something. This is an area, that is worth dedicating your life for, IMO.

Added: I also envisage a scrapping of the current constitution and the writing of a new one. Even without the Dharma thing, our consititution is in a horrible mess. This view has consensus across the political spectrum, except for the people, who have milked the system so far.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1407
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Jan 2008 05:04

ShauryaT wrote:Added: I also envisage a scrapping of the current constitution and the writing of a new one. Even without the Dharma thing, our consititution is in a horrible mess. This view has consensus across the political spectrum, except for the people, who have milked the system so far.


While you are at it (I hate to do this comparison), but tell us how you are going to avoid the fate the constitution -- aka toilet paper -- of TSP is currently suffering?
We haven't even fixed the rules for folks in "our" camp.
Yet, you think somehow we can impose a constitution on all :shock:

Good or bad, there is more broken in the implementation of the letter and spirit of the current Indian constitution, than there is with what is in it!

Caveat Emptor!

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Jan 2008 05:36

ShauryaT wrote:
A Dharmic Constitution IS the need of the hour. A constitution that promotes as you say the echos of our vedas across this land.
...
Added: I also envisage a scrapping of the current constitution and the writing of a new one. Even without the Dharma thing, our consititution is in a horrible mess. This view has consensus across the political spectrum, except for the people, who have milked the system so far.


With respect Shaurya - with nobody being able to even say what is dharmic in the narrow context of islam, I see your proposals as both without future and without any direction as far as the topic of this thread is concerned.

Many Hindus, it appears to me, talk a lot about dharma without being able to define it, recognise it, or say how and where it should be applied and without stating where in the history of India was dharma so rigid and fixed as the constitution.

It is a basic lack of understanding of dharma to imagine that it is some ethereal ineffable substance that wafts around like mist on a wintry morning.

It is equally a misunderstanding for it to be codified in stone like a constitution because dharma by definition has never pretended to be anything more than rules of conduct based on an understanding of what is eternal. The spiritual awareness (or blind acceptance) of that which is eternal is essential.

While spirituality and commentaries of that which is eternal in Hindu thought have gone so far as to describe the universe in terms strikingly familiar to what physicists speak of, in real terms "eternal truths" include what is important for humans, on a human scale. The sun may be "eternal" but is unlivable. Eternal truths for human existence include the acceptance of truths like "dharma" of a seed is to germinate and produce a plant or heat is the dharma of fire. These are "properties" that, from a human viewpoint, were considered eternal and unchanging.

Human dharma too has to learn to live harmoniously with these eternal truths.

This viewpoint of dharma can be criticised in many ways, but the fact is dharma was never meant to be codified in stone. It was meant to be relative to the circumstances.

In fact it you reapply dharma in a different way you can get a different take:

The dharma of a Muslim is to follow the dictates of Islam exactly as he has been instructed

The Muslim is being dharmic from his viewpoint, because he is doing his duty, but is he really dharmic or not?

The real test of his dharma will depend on whether his behavior supports a thriving society that accepts the eternal truths of nature, the earth and universe.

The Muslim accepts that his parents should be respected. That is dharmic. The Muslim believes in marriage and in having children. That is dharmic.

If the Muslim says Allah is his only god, that too is dharmic in the sense of his bhakti. His adharma would show up only if he tried to force this single "God" as the only God beyond which no eternal truth can exist on anyone else.

If a Muslim mentally equates Allah with the Atman and does not get himself killed by the Mullah and is serene in the understanding that he has reached - we have a perfectly dharmic Muslim. If the same Muslim cannot think such high thoughts and insists that his God is a killer God who needs your blood or your bhakti to survive, he is being adharmic. The God is a demon - not an "eternal truth"

The point is that Muslims can be dharmic, but the knowledge embodied in Islam is adharmic to a very large extent.

In fact this simple difference explains the behavior of Muslims too.

If Islam is the problem - why the fck do people want to change their own code or rulebook. Only ignorance would make people ask for that.

It is ironic that i find myself giving explanations of dharma - the last bloody thing my Macaulayized mind expected.

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Postby asprinzl » 25 Jan 2008 05:54

So, I say let the modern codification of Dharma or rather Modern Dharma Reformation begin. Let this codification/reformation be as relevant as possible to practical aspects of living and less on the "high funda" of obscure philosophy.

For reference, the reformers should scour the Sikh texts and Bhuddist texts for inspiration and guide. These are two Indic theological texts which borrowed heavily from ancient Hindu texts but with "modern" reformation at the core.

Avram

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Jan 2008 07:09

http://www.hindu.com/2008/01/25/stories ... 530900.htm

[quote]Nuances of Dharma
CHENNAI: Human beings unlike other creatures have free will and hence have choice in action. Because man has choice he has to conform to certain universal norms. While exercising his choice an individual cannot plead ignorance of Dharma. If one does not have knowledge of the matrix of Dharma then there is a defect in the system he is part of as the universal values (Samanya Dharma) are intrinsic to life.[b] For instance, if one asks, “Do you want to get hurt?â€

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jan 2008 08:20

Pulikeshi wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:Added: I also envisage a scrapping of the current constitution and the writing of a new one. Even without the Dharma thing, our consititution is in a horrible mess. This view has consensus across the political spectrum, except for the people, who have milked the system so far.


While you are at it (I hate to do this comparison), but tell us how you are going to avoid the fate the constitution -- aka toilet paper -- of TSP is currently suffering?
We haven't even fixed the rules for folks in "our" camp.
Yet, you think somehow we can impose a constitution on all :shock:

Good or bad, there is more broken in the implementation of the letter and spirit of the current Indian constitution, than there is with what is in it!

Caveat Emptor!


Pullikesh: I do not know, your sources of conviction for your comments but on the matter of the state of our constitution, My sources of conviction come from a read of the following works and contemporary works of the following individuals, on the matter:

- The 1935 British Government of India, act – the source of over 80% of our laws today making Morley Minto – the real author of the Constitution of India
- Debates of the constituent Assembly 1946-49
- A reading of the constitution of India and its (100+) amendments
- The Sarkaria Commission report (Not implemented)
- The recent NCRWC report (Not implemented)

Books and works by

- Subhash Kashyap
- Zail Singh
- V.R. Krishna Iyer
- B.G. Verghese
- Soli I Sorabjee
- C.P. Bhambri
- U.C Agarwal
- S.K Sinha
- Lal Narain Sinha
- J.C. Johari
- Arun Shourie
- K. Brahmananda Reddy
- B.K. Nehru
- Vasant Sathe
- Dharma Vira
- N.A. Palkhiwala
- S.P. Malaviya
- Kireet Joshi
- Ramashray Ray
- B.S Raghavan
- Hari Jaisingh
- S. Sahay
- Vir Chopra
- R. Ramachandran
- S. Ramachandra Rao
- P.R -Dubhashi
- G.R.S Rao
- S.D. Bali
- V.S Rama Devi
- Y.C. Halan
- G.S Rajhans
- Dyal Singh Sodhi
- G.P. Srivastava
- P.G. Mavalankar
- S.R. Mohnot
- Suchinta Bhattacharya
- Kanhaiyalal Sharma
- Ram Swarup
- Abhas Chaterjee
- Suruchi Prakashan


As someone said....

It is sometimes said that it is not the constitution that has failed, but the people or the politicians, who have failed the constitution. Dr. Ambedkar or Rajendra Prasad or President VenkatRaman are quoted to make the point that there is nothing wrong with the constitution.

If the men, who are called upon to work the constitution are bad and dishonest and lack character, no constitution, howsoever good, can help.

If the constitution fails, men must be vile! This may be true. Our leaders, who have been charged with the responsibility of working the constitution may be vile, wicked and dishonest as most of us are. But, are they not products of the system? Has it not been the most perennial system of political science right from the days of ved vyasas Mahabaharat and Kautilya’s Arthashastra and Pluto’s republic and Aristotle’s Politics, as to how to find the best system that will give us the right kind of rulers?

If the men are good, yes, they can make even a bad constitution work. But, should we wait passively for good men to be born or angels to descend from heavens to make our constitution work or we should get on with the job of reforming our constitution, to suit the peoples needs.

A case for a review and reform appears not only unassailable but a categorical imperative in the present situation.


On your comparision to TSP et al, The current constitution has not worked is partly due to the decision not to use the only glue that binds this nation, i.e: of Sanatan Dharma or Hinduism.

If your understanding of this glue is similar to the one that Islam provides in the form of the Shariah, that TSP uses, then even you have fallen into the equal-equal trap.

In order to not fall into this trap, the number one thing required is to reject the idea that Hinduism or SD is a religion with any feasible comparision to Islam or Christianity, the contrasts are day and night. Both the monotheistic and exclusivist faiths and the pluralistic ways cannot be religions.

I have no fear that in a Dharmic state, folks who do not follow the Indic spiritual systems will be discriminated against. All they have to do is manage their takleefs, which a resurgent and confident set of Indians can do far better than the current confused state, where the state itself is not sure, what does secularism mean and, where various articles of the constitution contradict each other making a mockery of the constitution.

Only a dharmic constitution will excite the masses of this land because it is their Dharma and not an alien imposed concept of Secularism.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Jan 2008 08:39

ShauryaT wrote:- The 1935 British Government of India, act – the source of over 80% of our laws today making Morley Minto – the real author of the Constitution of India
- Debates of the constituent Assembly 1946-49
- A reading of the constitution of India and its (100+) amendments
< snip >

Only a dharmic constitution will excite the masses of this land because it is their Dharma and not an alien imposed concept of Secularism.


Once again Shaurya, with utmost respect to your learned view, may I point out that the constituent assembly worked for the preservation of India in the face of a situation in which very powerful forces sought to tear it apart.

If they were adharmic in the process, that adharma was for the purpose of preservation and not punishment.

If that constitution seems wrong and adharmic today it does not do to play with words and say that the constitution is as small as the small people who made it. It would be our own smallness of mind to be unable to put ourselves in the place of the people who were in the constituent assembly.

If we want a dharmic constitution someone has to lead the way and say it in clearly understandable terms. The difference between a man dying from diabetes 200 years ago and a diabetic man living a long life today is result of some human/s ability to lead the way and describe the problem of diabetes in clearly understandable terms so that specific measures could be devised to counter it.

Are you capable of saying what is adharmic and what is dharmic in our constitution and how it may be changed? Without an ability to say what is wrong in understandable terms you are already coming up with a "cure" in calling for a dharmic constitution.

Without disagreeing with you in your opinion that the constitution may need changing, I ask you to say why so that I and others may be convinced. Without proper reasoning, it would be equally valid to ask that our constitution be replaced by the Quran. If I wanted to act like a ch**th and put an obstacle in your path - that is EXACTLY what i would demand. How would you counter that demand?

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1407
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Jan 2008 08:55

A case for a review and reform appears not only unassailable but a categorical imperative in the present situation.


So what has changed to make the claim unassailable? Other than the takleef Hindu’s may have with secularism?
My very humble opinion, redoing the constitution (not really sure of what you propose or by what means yet) will open up a can of worms –
you of all should be very well aware of the intense debates that resulted in the present one.

If your argument is A bad constitution resulted in bad politicians –
Therefore fixing the former will result in fixing of the latter – I’d argue your argument’s causality is suspect!
My suggestion - if the current one is incongruous with separation of politics from religion (ok, neutral rather than secular), then it can be amended via constitutional means.

Since you seem to be well read in the constitution, it would be interesting to hear how you propose to go about implementing a Dharmic Constitution (what ever that is!), in a constitutional way. Or does your proposal require extra-constitutional means as well?

Interesting to discuss constitutional overhaul as India celebrates its Republic Day! :eek:

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jan 2008 09:04

shiv wrote:With respect Shaurya - with nobody being able to even say what is dharmic in the narrow context of islam, I see your proposals as both without future and without any direction as far as the topic of this thread is concerned.


That is entirely your prerogative, but I have to point out things as I see them, based on my understanding of things.

In this very thread, I have made at least 7-8 contrasting points (twice), with regards to SD and Islam. It is possible that these points are not valid, in your view, or I have failed to express them adequately, in which case, please do not blame the Gurus, such as Ram Swarup, who have spent a life time writing about these contrasts in his works (Hindu view of Islam and Christianity and On Hinduism: Reviews and Reflection). Please do look them up directly.

Many Hindus, it appears to me, talk a lot about dharma without being able to define it, recognise it, or say how and where it should be applied and without stating where in the history of India was dharma so rigid and fixed as the constitution.
The modern state of India, a republic with a “constitutionâ€

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1407
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Postby Pulikeshi » 25 Jan 2008 09:09

Shiv wrote:The dharma of a Muslim is to follow the dictates of Islam exactly as he has been instructed


Shiv,

This line of reasoning is untenable. Personal Dharma requires every individual to think for themselves if the action they are about to
undertake benefits/hurts the many while definitely being beneficial to the self in some way.
This is to prevent externalities caused by an individual action on society at large.

It would not be hard to argue that several ayahs in the Quran would lead to the determent of the unbeliever – who is contained in society at large -
thus would not be Dharmic – no matter how you slice it!

The major takleef (of Hindu or otherwise) with Islam if not Islamists is that the externalities we need to deal with because of what the believer is led to believe by the text.

This is where I have trouble with bringing religion into the constitution.
A social contract between citizen and state cannot be religious in nature.
Such a constitution would be no different than the Quran! :shock:

Goes to the heart of disagreement between ShauryaT and Me -
Is Dharma a religion or not?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jan 2008 09:11

Doc, I have to sign off now. Will come back in a few days with a looong post - with my current understanding of what a Dharmic constitution, evisaged will entail. The works on the issue are extremely sketchy. So, anything, I post, will not be complete and will have holes, but it will be a start.

It does not mean though, that the current constitution is completely adharmic. Think of a reformed constitution, in dharmic colors. I will come back with my limited understanding of it, later. Good Night.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Jan 2008 09:37

ShauryaT wrote:Doc, I have to sign off now. Will come back in a few days with a looong post - with my current understanding of what a Dharmic constitution, evisaged will entail. The works on the issue are extremely sketchy. So, anything, I post, will not be complete and will have holes, but it will be a start.

It does not mean though, that the current constitution is completely adharmic. Think of a reformed constitution, in dharmic colors. I will come back with my limited understanding of it, later. Good Night.

I would much rather you DID NOT post it on this thread because I consider all posts about changing the constitution as being far beyond the scope of this thread which is limited in its aims.

But I think you need to post your views in the "Original articles/Opinion pieces" thread

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Postby asprinzl » 25 Jan 2008 10:18

Doc,
Is discussion on changing the Constitution and replacing it with another Treason against the Republic? It is not the same as amending a certain clause of the Constitution.

There are a whole bunch of people who intend to change the constitution of India. From the Marxist terrorists in Indian hinterlands to Islamic terrorists coming from without. They are all traitors to the constitution and from the stand point of the law are commiting act of treason.

I think you are right in discouraging such topic from being discussed.

Avram


Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 25 Jan 2008 11:26

Pulikeshi wrote:Constitution - is a social contract between citizen and state.
We can still amend or repair it if possible via constitutional means.
I'd rather that the state stay neutral (neither appeasing nor indifferent) regarding religious beliefs.


Pulikeshi; while I agree that Dharma has both social and personal aspects and it makes sense to appreciate the differences; I do not think that they can be made separate.

For example -- The civil code -- one marriage vs four; why? You can argue that constitution and law are two different objects; but so far we have been talking about them interchangeably and I want to avoid separating them since they are linked.

We have laws against dowry? Why? We have laws which give us tax breaks on charitable institutions but not religious ones unless they are linked? Why?

Why bank holidays on particular dates other than National holidays?

What is truly personal and what is social? isn't social an aggregate of personal views?

If your take is personal is all behavior which is independent of a human interacting with ANYTHING else; you can have a pure separation however that will be a extremely narrow field; and even that is not a robust separation.

For example -- In my personal life I am extreme Ahimsavadi person; I wear a cloth over my mouth to ensure I kill as few germs as possible -- The state asks for draft and wants me to kill a couple of Pakis?

What is my Dharma now?

So as you see this separation is untenable -- fine for refined understanding sure -- but untenable in practical law making.

For example you say when Shiv said that Islam is Dharmic for its followers

This line of reasoning is untenable. Personal Dharma requires every individual to think for themselves if the action they are about to
undertake benefits/hurts the many while definitely being beneficial to the self in some way.
This is to prevent externalities caused by an individual action on society at large.


Does Islam define a personal Dharma in that way; separate from Social Dharma? If not who are you; and I dont mean it in a bad way; to decide for Islam? Do the mullahs agree?

So while you may have your contention about private space; which too I think is untenable in the form you have talked of; my point here is that when pure Religions -- Islam etc. -- talk of religion they include both aspects and you have no hope in hell of convincing them other wise -- The Xians solved this problem my inventing secularism -- however that is a western solution and has seen to be flawed in Indian context. As a aside as west grapples with Islam we see secularism falling apart there too.

Secondly -- I say this again and I emphasis -- Your contention of asking whether Dharma is religion or not and asking for NO religion in public space is exactly the fruits of western concepts of Nation state that cause us so much grief.

Dharma is both a way of life and a religion. And a Dharmic religion even if accepted by state is quite all right. Since Dharma itself is dynamic. In fact Constitution is Dharma today for us.

A social contract can not be "religious" in nature but it can be Dharmic and has to be dharmic.

I dont see why do we have to do a equal equal in any case; I mean as Shiv said; yeah if we are being Ch**** maybe then yes; but not otherwise no.

But I understand we need to answer the question of how a Dharmic Const. is different from Sharia for Ch*** and no I dont have answers.

I will wait for ShauyraT to sally forth first.

The solution may still be a new interpretation of Dharma as you mention -- but even then please be aware that there will be no separating social and personal in the way you envisage.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 25 Jan 2008 19:40

Pulikeshi wrote:
Shiv wrote:The dharma of a Muslim is to follow the dictates of Islam exactly as he has been instructed


Shiv,

This line of reasoning is untenable. Personal Dharma requires every individual to think for themselves if the action they are about to undertake benefits/hurts the many while definitely being beneficial to the self in some way.
This is to prevent externalities caused by an individual action on society at large.



When you define dharma as "the nature" or "natural property" of anything, then the nature or dharma of an Islamist is his behavior.

In humans this "natural behavior" is changeable in order to preserve society.

When the "natural behavior" of an islamist is to damage (your) society, he is being adharmic and must be eliminated just as surely as a tiger that attacks you needs to be defeated. The tigers' dharma may be to attack you. You as human being are stuck with making the choice of whether you should allow the tiger's dharma to prevail, or think about your own society and dharma and opt to eliminate the tiger.

The actual outcome of such a contest may be the sum of your karma and that of the tiger, and the outcome again may be decided by events of an earlier lifetime.

But still, you have a dharmic decision to make and it is not a hard one to make if you are attacked by a tiger.

It is possible that Sanatana Dharma in the face of Islamism played a "give in" game of prisoner's dilemma in which the Islamist was allowed to be himself as long as he chose not to attack and destabilize Hindu society i.e santana dharma did not do a tit for tat attack because tit for tat attack may have been adharmic or not feasible for hit and run hordes (I am not sure which). But I believe that "balance" came only after decades or centuries of pillaging. Maybe because someone figured out that tit for tat is all that works against Islam.

However, Islamists did not respond favorably to sanatana dharma's "giving in" by a tit for tat "giving in" so both could accommodate because the "dharma" of islam, its innate behavior, is to attack and attack alone. Accommodation is not allowed except as dhimmitude. Sanatana dharma chose dhimmitude.

So in the game of prisoners dilemma, Islam always hit, and sanatana dharma probably tended to sit back and take it, imagining that real dharma could prevail at some stage due to innate goodness. Sanatan dharma probably did not realise that Muslims as humans could be good, but Islam would never be good.

The active elimination of opponents is as disruptive to society as anyone can get from the viewpoint of sanatana dharma. The codification of human behavior as being fixed and unchangeable and seeking to create a uniform unquestioning automaton of a human out of the Quran is also adharmic.

I think that if we are looking at it from the dharmic viewpoint we have to separate Islam the religion from Muslims who are human. Muslims can be good because they are human and can judge dharma, but without massive modification Islam is adharmic and must be opposed as wrong and as a mental disease on earth.

I think it is only political correctness and "secularism" that makes Hindus say that Islam is acceptable. It is not. It cannot be - given its rules. It is totally against Dharma.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Jan 2008 09:21

asprinzl wrote:Doc,
Is discussion on changing the Constitution and replacing it with another Treason against the Republic? It is not the same as amending a certain clause of the Constitution.

There are a whole bunch of people who intend to change the constitution of India. From the Marxist terrorists in Indian hinterlands to Islamic terrorists coming from without. They are all traitors to the constitution and from the stand point of the law are commiting act of treason.

I think you are right in discouraging such topic from being discussed.

Avram
Doc, You will have to excuse me for responding to this but this view NEEDS a response and needs to be nipped in the bud.

Avram, I am sure you mean well, but you will have to use the words treason more carefully, for asking for a change in the constitution is no act of treason. ( A serious charge for betrayal of the nation). It is the most solemn democratic right of a citizen to ask for this change in a democratic manner.

The founding fathers of our constitution itself allow for the wholesale amendment/replacement of the constitution through a new constituent assembly. The entire constition can be amended, except for a handful of clauses.

It is funny that you mention Marxists and Islamists asking for changes in the constitution for that is EXACLTY what they achieved through the 42nd amendment with the addition of the words "Socialist" and "Secular" done under pressure from the marxists and the vote bank politics of the Congress. In case you are not aware of its significance, the entire constitution is an exposition of the preamble. Do lookup SC judgements on the matter.

I want to respect Shiv's decision here but the suggestion that it is treason to ask for a wholesale change was something, I could not digest.

Tamang
BRFite
Posts: 689
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Nai Dilli, Bharatvarsh

Postby Tamang » 26 Jan 2008 12:58

Jamaat-e-Islami protests Tricolour at madrassas

Bhopal: The Jamaat-e-Islami in Madhya Pradesh may object to hoisting the national flag at madrassas, but many other Muslim bodies and intellectuals see no problem in such a move.

Anwar Safi, spokesperson of the Jamaat-e-Islami (Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh), had said in a statement Thursday that hoisting the Tricolour on national festivals should not be mandatory for madrassas.

Safi said this after a plan document of the 11th Five Year Plan said it would be necessary for every educational institute, including madrassas, to hoist the national flag on national festivals.

The document also talks about a special grant for madrassas to celebrate national festivals such as Independence Day and Republic Day.

Criticising the government's move, Safi said that madrassas were religious bodies and making the flag-hoisting compulsory was unnecessary.

A madrassa is a place where religious preaching is imparted. It is a religious body. All Muslim bodies across the state will protest against this non-secular move," Safi told IANS.

Safi's remarks, however, have not gone down well with many other Muslim organisations in the state as many leaders have criticised him severely for his "fanatical" stand.

"What is the logic behind raising such frivolous issues? It is nothing but idiotic fanaticism. If the Tricolour could be put up at the Arafat-kaa-Maidan and the Indian Haj Council office in Makkah, what is the harm in hoisting it at a madrassa?" asked All India Muslim Teohar Committee chairman Ausaf Shahmeeri Khurram.

"Such things speak of Al Qaeda mentality," he added.

Madhya Pradesh Minorities Commission chairman Anwar Mohammad Khan also criticised Safi's views, saying he was raking up an unnecessary controversy.

"The Indian constitution makes it mandatory for everyone to respect the national flag. The madrassa is an educational body. What is the harm in hoisting the national flag? Madrassas get grants from the government and they should obey its directives," Anwar said.

"Why shouldn't the national flag be unfurled at a madrassa?" asked Anjumm Barabankvi, a prominent Muslim personality and a poet.

"Everyone should celebrate all the national festivals with great enthusiasm and madrassas are a part of the system in which we live," said Anjum.

Madhya Pradesh has 5,200 recognised madrassas out of which more than 1,100 are receiving government grants. Bhopal alone has 96 madrassas that receive grants.

Dilbu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6110
Joined: 07 Nov 2007 22:53
Location: Deep in the badlands of BRFATA

Postby Dilbu » 26 Jan 2008 13:40

SC: Are there castes among Muslims?
NEW DELHI: After Christian groups, a Muslim organisation has joined the quota race by challenging in Supreme Court validity of the 1950 Presidential Order limiting reservations to scheduled castes in Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, and sought reservation benefit for Dalit Muslims.

Though both Christianity and Islam prohibit practice of caste-system and consider everyone equal, the petitioners have hinged their demand on the recommendations of central government appointed commissions headed by Justice Ranganath Misra and Justice Rajinder Sachar.

A PIL filed by Akhil Maharashtra Muslim Khatik Samaj on Friday stated that there were Dalits within Muslim community who needed reservation, a benefit extended to similarly placed persons in Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism.

The petitioner said though Hindu Khatiks (those who slaughter animals) were included in the SC category, the Muslim Khatiks were not, despite being in the same social strata and facing similar discrimination. Muslim Khatiks are generally considered as 'Ajlaf' (the base strata of society), it said.

Though the Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan issued notice to the Centre seeking its response on the issue, it asked the petitioner whether Islam permitted caste-system.

"Since when have the Muslims have started following caste-system? It is surprising. We thought that it had only rich and poor divide. The assertion that caste system is practised in Islam and that certain sections need reservation is new to us," the Bench said.


Referring to the strict dictats of Quran prohibiting practice of any forms of caste system within Islam, Justice Balakrishnan said there was no such discrimination on the basis of caste among Muslims in Kerala, his home state.

On Tuesday, the apex court had given six weeks time to the Centre to file its response to similar petitions filed by Christian organisations and individuals seeking extension of reservation benefit to Dalits within their community.
Last edited by Dilbu on 26 Jan 2008 13:44, edited 1 time in total.

sanjaychoudhry
BRFite
Posts: 756
Joined: 13 Jul 2007 00:39
Location: La La Land

Postby sanjaychoudhry » 26 Jan 2008 13:41

It is really a shame in this country that while HIndus are forced to beg or borrow to establish schools for their own poor, the madrasas and christiann schools recieve generous grants from the government. Only in India can the majority take this kind of bull shit and not retaliate.
Shame on the mental blindness of Hindus that congress continues to be voted to power by them. Is 50 years not sufficient to understand that this party has organised a deliberate apartheid against them?

pradeepe
BRFite
Posts: 741
Joined: 27 Aug 2006 20:46
Location: Our culture is different and we cannot live together - who said that?

Postby pradeepe » 26 Jan 2008 14:15

As I never tire of saying, truly feel blessed to be able partake in learnings from such a fine discussion.

Just wanted to state my humble 2 cents.

I was thinking when it was stated - "We cant even define dharma so how do we even fight for it". IMHO Dharma is simply "live and let live". Its primal and by reason its open ended in its implementation. Its always striving to live and let live, so by definition it includes finding means to protect that aim. Vedas etc., come after that underlying principle.

So there can be a personal dharma as pulikeshi says which one can implement to live a more productive life, as long as it satisfies the live and let live dictum and that might in turn throw up a social dharma (the constitution as a work in progress example) all of which continually evolve. But fundamentally they all rest on live and let live.

Coming to how Dharma handles adharmic onslaughts. As noted above, living dictates protecting it too. The angst is not new. Wasnt the Gita built around the question. Some of our best learnings on dharma come from when it was countering adharmic forces. Ramayana and Mahabharata.

Means of living by Dharma have evolved over periods of time and will continue to do so. This thread itself seems to be an example of that.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 26 Jan 2008 19:50

Tamang wrote:Jamaat-e-Islami protests Tricolour at madrassas

Bhopal: The Jamaat-e-Islami in Madhya Pradesh may object to hoisting the national flag at madrassas, but many other Muslim bodies and intellectuals see no problem in such a move.


Thank you for posting this. If we are to discuss this here (as we must) let us do it dharmically.

When modern independent India was created (15 Aug 1947) and later the Republic of India created (59 years ago today) it was not a given that everyone exactly agreed or everyone saw eye to eye. A whole lot of people disagreed with a whole lot of things that were decided or done.

One of the reasons why people said that India would break up was because so many people seemed to disagree with anything and everything. Ramchandra Guha's take on history since independence makes a good read albeit a bit heavy and boring because he brings out a large number of these disagreements which people had with India the nation and how they were overcome.

For modern day Indians, the biggest and most traumatic disagreement that insulted the Hindu psyche was the assertion that Muslims cannot live among Hindus for a long list of reasons that was basically unfair to Hindus, and predicted that Muslims would be treated badly by Hindus when independence and parliamentary democracy came to India, and therefore India needed to be split up into lands for Muslims and Muslims alone so that the interests of the Muslims of India would be served well by letting Muslims have their own independent land, leaving the Hindus to do what they please (to rot, it was expected, by all that I read).

As many have pointed out, this desire to see a split was not "all Muslims" but a subset who had been privileged as Muslims. They had lost those privileges, and expected that the British, whom they blamed for removal of privileges, would somehow restore all those special privileges and kingdoms that they felt they owned before leaving India.

The idea that these formerly "privileged" Muslims (Ashraf?) could expect any kind of privilege in India over and above anyone else is deeply distasteful to Hindus who retain memories of the murder, looting, rape and destruction brought in by the ancestors of of those Muslims who considered themselves somehow "privileged" and who felt they were entitled to something special in India.

I would like to point out a curious fact at this juncture. If you study the Christian world and the Islamic world - their histories appear to be "written". So the Christian world is dead sure of its history for 2000 years. Time starts years ago for the Christian world 2000 years ago, and, using the calendar that the world uses - it is now the "Twenty first century AD" after Jesus Christ. So time is measured from Christ by the world. For Islam time is measured, and history recorded from Mohammad's time.

What is forgotten by both these groups in their confident sense of certainty is that history extends far back beyond 2000 years for both Hindus and the Chinese.

Muslims of India who felt "entitled" because of their short 1300 year history do not see that Hindus were there before and if anyone is going to ask about a sense of entitlement, Muslims are fairly low down in the pecking order. India has had a millennium or more of history BEFORE MOHAMMAD.

But still, at the time of independence, the followers of Mohammad did something really nasty. They said that humans CANNOT be equal if some are Hindus. They said, for fairness and equality, all Muslims must come together in their own land within the borders of ancient India.

What people do not talk about is what Hindus of India did after allowing the creation of Pakistan by a bunch of Muslims who were willing to subvert India the way the same bunch are raping Pakistan now.
Hindus agreed to say:

1) It is not true that Hindus are cruel
2) It is not true that Muslims would not be allowed to lead their lives in india

And in saying this, Muslims were given special privileges in India that were not given to Hindus. This was basically a magnanimous symbol from Hindus who were almost begging to Indian Muslims "Stay with us. Let us make a nation. We the majority Hindus will allow you to have your laws and allow you live more Islamically than you can live in Islamic nations. just agree to get along and be friendly, like we are willing to be friendly with you"

And in the decades after independence, Hindu have kept their part of the bargain in terms of laws and the constitution even as Pakistan constantly played to the Muslim gallery in India telling them that they (Indian Muslims) are traitors and should follow an Islamic cause, if not a Pakistani cause.

With Pakistan and the Islam of Pakistan eating shit today, the time has come to clearly ask Muslims of India which choice was better - a totally Islamic Pakistan or a Pluralist coexisting india?

Muslims of India have to join the rest of India and stop whining and complaining about takleef. A very large number of Indian Muslims have already done that. But the few intransigents who are holding back need to be told in no uncertain terms to see the writing in the wall. Islam the religion was accepted by Hindus as a special dharma. Dharma is irreligious and if they say it is not Islamic they are wrong. If they violently insist then fine, their view is adharmic and must be eliminated. e will not allow Islam to either create new Pakistans, or create a Pakistan like chaos in India. Even if it means hardship and bloodshed.Our dharma is still alive and not that stupid, It has seen many centuries more than Islam, and has handles many more religions wisely.


Six decades have been spent swallowing and suppressing Hindu takleef so that Muslims would not feel takleef. But the time has come for plain speaking. Muslim leaders need a change of tack and a change of course. Just see the shit that is occurring in Pakistan and the news reports on this thread about Muslim backwardness. Neither freedom in a Muslim country, nor special privileges in India can bring Muslims out of the shit pit unless their leaders can see that they are on the wrong path, The Islam they follow is definitely leading them up the wrong path. They can keep their Quran and beliefs, but they need to come to their senses and stop following idiot Saudi Sultans and make a new path for themselves. They need to reinterpret the Quran rather than idol worship the Quran, set as it is in stone as they do now.
Last edited by shiv on 26 Jan 2008 20:10, edited 1 time in total.

vsudhir
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2173
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 03:44
Location: Dark side of the moon

Postby vsudhir » 26 Jan 2008 19:58

Great post there, shiv.

Tks for sharing these thoughts.

Deleted. OT.

prashanth
BRFite
Posts: 511
Joined: 04 Sep 2007 16:50
Location: Barad- dyr

Postby prashanth » 26 Jan 2008 20:25

Wonderful post Dr.Shiv.

This is very important . Hinduism has absorbed many tribes like Kushans, schytians and has given birth to Buddhism and Jainism, long before both Christianity and Islam were born.And various sects of Christianity(that migrated to India from europe) exist even today in India which have long ceased to exist in Europe!

I would like to point out a curious fact at this juncture. ....

What is forgotten by both these groups in their confident sense of certainty is that history extends far back beyond 2000 years for both Hindus and the Chinese.

Muslims of India who felt "entitled" because of their short 1300 year history do not see that Hindus were there before and if anyone is going to ask about a sense of entitlement, Muslims are fairly low down in the pecking order. India has had a millennium or more of history BEFORE MOHAMMAD

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7533
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Postby Gerard » 27 Jan 2008 02:39

IUML protests India’s participation in Israeli Spy Satellite launch
Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) has strongly protested against India's participation in the launch of the Israeli Spy Satellite Tecsar.
The IUML however appreciated and thanked the Government for declining the French proposal to allow that country's award to be conferred upon Taslima Nasreen during the French President's visit to India.

IUML leader, in no uncertain terms, appealed to the Government "to revoke her visa and deport her immediately.

"We emphasise that both Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen be never allowed to enter India at any time in future," he said.

shyam
BRFite
Posts: 1419
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31

Postby shyam » 27 Jan 2008 03:41

Tamang wrote:Jamaat-e-Islami protests Tricolour at madrassas

Bhopal: The Jamaat-e-Islami in Madhya Pradesh may object to hoisting the national flag at madrassas, but many other Muslim bodies and intellectuals see no problem in such a move.


Isn't it possible to seek derecognition (or ban) of jamaat-e-islami for insulting national flag?

G Subramaniam
BRFite
Posts: 405
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 17:58

Kerala Marad Killers get bail

Postby G Subramaniam » 27 Jan 2008 07:23

http://www.hindu.com/2008/01/24/stories/2008012450010100.htm

28 accused in Marad case get bail



Special Correspondent



High Court finds delay on the part of Special Court in disposing of case





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

Bail granted on stringent conditions

Special Court needs 10 more months for trial


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



Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Wednesday granted bail to as many as 28 accused in the Marad massacre case on stringent conditions.


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest