Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15730
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SwamyG » 14 Oct 2013 18:50

Entire argument is wrong.

1. Secular.
2. Rama and Krishna, are not ordinary heroes. They are considered as gods/avatars of gods. They are not like Raja Raja Chola or Ashoka. The historicity of them is yet another thing, and I do not want to get into who gave BG ityadi. For all practical purposes, those characters are treated as gods by the people. Hence they come in the religious sphere whether one likes it or not.
3. Hindu mandirs are a Hindu cause.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Prem » 14 Oct 2013 21:52

Haram Hatao, HeyRam Pathayo
Chaaj (superficial) Chorro, Makhan (essence) Khayo.
I think the prevalent word Patit or Maleen , Agyani sufficient to differentiate. Lacking Atam Gyan , their inability to perceive the Satya Supreme , they fell to low and got polluted. Now the Indians have to do Patit Se Pavan Kaam by dispensing Gyan.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 14 Oct 2013 22:15

SwamyG wrote:Entire argument is wrong.

2. Rama and Krishna, are not ordinary heroes. They are considered as gods/avatars of gods. They are not like Raja Raja Chola or Ashoka. The historicity of them is yet another thing, and I do not want to get into who gave BG ityadi. For all practical purposes, those characters are treated as gods by the people. Hence they come in the religious sphere whether one likes it or not.


SwamyG ji,

thanks for your input! I've a hypothetical situation, just to understand the principles, so please bear with me.

Let's say in 20 years Narendra Modi makes India a 100 trillion economy, with a kickass military, zero crime and with such shining toilets that Japanese stand in line to go to Indian pissoirs. After that let's suppose some of the more devout fans of Narendra Modi declare him Kalki Avatar, start making his Mandirs everywhere and worship Him in our traditional fashion.

Does that mean that the Indian State would also declare him a god and thus not someone who could be touched by a barge pole due to secularism or commemorated by the State as an exemplary Indian leader?

Just Asking!

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby member_22872 » 14 Oct 2013 22:27

Rama and Krishna, are not ordinary heroes.

How about Buddha?, if mythology makes the waters bit murky to define who is a hero and who is not. I hope we acknowledge Buddha existed one time as a human being. For that matter Buddha himself never considered himself as God. And there are temples and stupas to honor him as a great teacher.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15730
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SwamyG » 15 Oct 2013 00:00

RajeshA wrote:
SwamyG wrote:Entire argument is wrong.

2. Rama and Krishna, are not ordinary heroes. They are considered as gods/avatars of gods. They are not like Raja Raja Chola or Ashoka. The historicity of them is yet another thing, and I do not want to get into who gave BG ityadi. For all practical purposes, those characters are treated as gods by the people. Hence they come in the religious sphere whether one likes it or not.


SwamyG ji,

thanks for your input! I've a hypothetical situation, just to understand the principles, so please bear with me.

Let's say in 20 years Narendra Modi makes India a 100 trillion economy, with a kickass military, zero crime and with such shining toilets that Japanese stand in line to go to Indian pissoirs. After that let's suppose some of the more devout fans of Narendra Modi declare him Kalki Avatar, start making his Mandirs everywhere and worship Him in our traditional fashion.

Does that mean that the Indian State would also declare him a god and thus not someone who could be touched by a barge pole due to secularism or commemorated by the State as an exemplary Indian leader?

Just Asking!


My grandmother answered that line of questioning long ago, when I questioned some of the religious beliefs ityadi. She used the example of Mahatma Gandhi being worshiped by people in a thousand years. :mrgreen:

I cannot talk in terms of legal definitions and how Courts or a Country decides who is a god or not; however if the people elevate a person and deem him as a god and place him in the pantheon of gods; then there is not much people can do. On the flip side, what about people who treat Rama or Krishna as humans consider their actions heinous and want no temples and raze down all temples. Should the state allow destruction of temples because some people think humans should not be worshiped and these heroes are nothing my action-heroes or mythological heroes?

So when Modi moves from ordinary to extra-ordinary statesman, the then State has to decide based on the people's wishes. So if in thousand years, he is treated as an avatar of god, sadly he can no longer remain just in the irreligious sphere. Granted, the tools and methodologies of tracking history is better; there is a possibility that he will remain in the pantheon of humans. But nobody can predict what will happen in 20 years let alone 2000 years.

When we talk about Ashoka, we talk about him as humans. When we talk about Rama, we talk about his as an avatar of Vishnu. Period. Can one talk about Rama from an irreligious point of view? Sure.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby member_22872 » 15 Oct 2013 00:25

Being Agnostic/atheist and all, we think everyone subscribes to the thought the Rama is a mere mythological figure...for many millions, reality and the existence of legends cannot be divorced....secularism etc are the words of the intellectual elite and for people with lots of time to think.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 15 Oct 2013 01:20

SwamyG wrote:I cannot talk in terms of legal definitions and how Courts or a Country decides who is a god or not; however if the people elevate a person and deem him as a god and place him in the pantheon of gods; then there is not much people can do. On the flip side, what about people who treat Rama or Krishna as humans consider their actions heinous and want no temples and raze down all temples. Should the state allow destruction of temples because some people think humans should not be worshiped and these heroes are nothing my action-heroes or mythological heroes?


SwamyG ji,

The Sikhs treat Rama as a normal human being. Guru Gobind Singh in his Dasam Granth goes into this. Also Avatars like Parashurama, Rama, Krishna, Sugata Buddha, all these are considered human Avatars with emphasis on human here. Even the most devout Hindus would agree that these Avatars appeared as "humans". If these were Avatars does it take away their humanity?

Even for a "secular" state, what is of relevance is whether they were humans, children of the soil and whether they did heroic deeds for the nation! The level and form of reverence for them by the people is for the "secular" state of secondary importance. It should not detract the state from the contributions of these national heroes and people should be facilitated to revere these national heroes in a manner which suits the sentiments and traditions of the people.

After all why should the state care whether some national hero is revered through a Samadhi or through a Mandir? Why should the State be in the business of deciding whether somebody is a rishi, a god, a deity, an avatar or something else, as long as he/she is a human and a son of the soil? All that is for the people to decide. State's duty is only to make the reverence possible considering that they were national heroes.

State's duty is only to provide the land, the physical connections, the funding for development, the security and safety arrangements for a proper monument to the national hero! The design, the architecture of the building, the development of the surrounding land, and the form of reverence should be allowed to the people who revere the national hero the most.

The problem with secularism is that it thinks with Abrahamic and European categories.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 16 Oct 2013 06:12

Published on Oct 16, 2013
By I P Singh
Bhagat Singh's family split on letting Modi release book: Times of India

"Modi is the face of change in the country and I don't see any conflict between Bhagat Singh's ideology and Modi releasing the book. He galvanizes youth. Rather we are printing those pages which were earlier left out and these could be uncomfortable to the Left, who have projected Bhagat Singh as a Leftist and an atheist icon," said Sandhu.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15730
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SwamyG » 17 Oct 2013 02:12

Does avatars take the humanness of the avatars? Well it is for the people to answer, and their answer would probably be based on the context. If Rama was just a human, then why insist that a temple be built in Ayodhya, or that 'Rama Setu' be not destroyed. After all, it is matter of a a King, however just and noble he was, who was born in Ayodhya or spearheaded the construction bridge. Why make a big deal out it? Historicity of Rama and the events have been contested. Whatever maybe be the truth, Indians consider Rama as a god and treat him as a god. I might look at Rama from purely a historical perspective, or even as a mythical creation - yet with values that can be looked up towards.

Memorials serve as places that remind people of the human(s). Temples are places of religious worship. Keeping in within the framework of common sense and legality, people have the right to build memorials and temples. And the government should not concern itself with religion, other than giving a level playing field to all. Since Memorials and Temples are not one and the same, the State which considers itself truly secular - and wants to maintain a healthy distance from religion, has no role in promoting and building temples.

Does the Government stop people from building their temples or other religious worship places? If it does, then there is a problem. Else, barring conflicts, it is up to the people to build these worship places.

Some can argue of the necessity of these symbols - memorials, and how the Government picks a human for remembrance. Every time the Government picks one person, it omits several other worthy individuals.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Prem » 17 Oct 2013 05:30

Avatars are supposed to work within the value system, parameters,limitations of what ever life or shape they happen to come in mortal world, as per RK.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15730
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SwamyG » 17 Oct 2013 06:02

If the avatars purpose is then served in their limited scope, and their human lives, then no need to worship and have temples no?

Any talk about avatar has to be in the context of Vaishanava tradition for the most part. Without getting into a discussion about avatars in other traditions, it can be safely said we are talking about an non-human descending into a human form. We immediately enter in to the realm of religion.

The historicity is a debate topic, and one can only conclude irrespective of the existence of individual King Rama, Hindus consider him as an avatar/god. What should do the state do? I think it should respect the sentiments of millions. One reason why I think Rama Setu should be left undisturbed, though I might have some concerns on its existence, let alone being man made, or engineered by Nala and Neela.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 17 Oct 2013 11:45

Honoring National Heroes

We have following phenomenon:

  1. A National Hero - A human, son (or daughter) of the soil, who has done great service to the national cause, which is to protect the rule of Dharma and Bharatiyata over the land and to spread Aryata across the world.

  2. People's Appreciation, Affection & Reverence for him/her - There is a wide spectrum of recognition that the people may be willing to bestow up the national hero, from a recognized leader to an Avatar even. It is really up to the people how and in what form they express this. It is often that the Virya Marga leads one to such public affection.

  3. Recognition of Services by the State - Every Rashtra needs to bestow Rashtriya Manyata on the National Hero. This is a fundamental duty, a fundamental characteristic of the Rashtra. Indian State recognizes this duty and one sees the state showing this in various forms - through medals, museums, monuments, naming of various government schemes and important infrastructure projects after the national hero. This recognition of service to the national cause has to be done independently and irrespective of the level of people's affection for the national hero. There are many heroes people may not even hear about. There are others the people may have deified or even accepted them as Avatars. For the state what matters is not what honor has been bestowed by the people onto the national hero, but only his service to the national cause, for that can be done as an objective assessment.

  4. How the State should give Recognition? - The State can do its part in its duty of recognition of the national hero through consultation with the people, and if there is not sufficient awareness by the people of the heroism of a certain national hero, state can proceed to give recognition to the national hero through its own devices: medals, naming, etc. However where there is affection for the national hero among the people, the State has to facilitate this honoring by the people by leaving the manner of honoring to the most ardent fans of the national hero and only act as a facilitating agent.

Now as far as I see it - Sri Rama and Sri Krishna are national heroes due to their contributions in
  1. Establishing Dharma over the Land of Bharatvarsha - Sri Rama through example (Purushottamta) & Sri Krishna through teaching (Bhagavad Gita)
  2. Overthrowing an oppressive and Adharmic order - Ravana, Kansa, Kauravas
  3. As exceptional leaders and administrators - of Ayodhya, of Dwaraka

So as I see it they more than qualify as national heroes, and the State needs to give recognition to that and that too by facilitating how their most ardent admirers desire to honor them - by building Rama Mandir in Ayodhya, and Krishna Janamsthan in Mathura.

Now this principle, I admit, does not extend to the third of the Three Great Temples - the Gyanvapi Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi to honor Lord Shiva. Shiva is not considered a national hero. His significance is at an altogether different level. So for that we would have to look into other principles. But as far as our national heroes Sri Rama and Sri Krishna are concerned, even a Secular India should be able to facilitate the construction of Ram Mandir and Krishna Janamsthan.

SwamyG ji,

the problem with your view is that you think that if people start doing hero worship in some traditional form, that it somehow lessens the deeds of a national hero for the Rashtra and he becomes untouchable for the State. A national hero has to be given his due recognition by the State too.

The historicity of Rama is attested to by our Itihaas. It is a tradition upheld for thousands of years and there is no need to question it. The current dispensation in India has no right to heed Macaulayist revisionism over our Itihaasic tradition.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 17 Oct 2013 17:26

Misunderstanding on Nature of Religion

Continuing the earlier effort at definition

Religion is a brotherhood claiming to be divinely sanctioned, making exclusivist claims of universalism, with authority vested in those acting as guardians of theology and dogma around the divine sanction, pursuing a sociopolitical agenda.


Bhaktipanth is a collective pursuit of spirituality, philosophy, mythological reenactment, ritualized symbolism and devotion, in abidance with Dharma, often under the guidance of a founding traditional lineage.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 17 Oct 2013 18:30

Secular State & Interference in Religion

SwamyG wrote:Memorials serve as places that remind people of the human(s). Temples are places of religious worship. Keeping in within the framework of common sense and legality, people have the right to build memorials and temples. And the government should not concern itself with religion, other than giving a level playing field to all. Since Memorials and Temples are not one and the same, the State which considers itself truly secular - and wants to maintain a healthy distance from religion, has no role in promoting and building temples.


I do not wish to swerve away from the point at hand, so I'll just point that the State need not concern itself with various Bhaktipanths but have every reason to control Religions, as the latter challenge both Rashtra and Sabhyata.

Secondly the State is always interfering in matters of "religion" as far as India is concerned! If the state is allowing edifices of religion (mosques, churches) to persist/endure at places which were historically places of Bhaktipanthic practice (temples) and were built there by destroying the latter, then the State is legitimizing a historic injustice.

So there is no such thing as non-interference of State in matters of religion, where there are conflicting historic claims for places of worship!

In fact, for a religion whose historic mission was/is to destroy temples, it is even more important to show that their religious places were built without any destruction of prior temples.

SwamyG wrote:Does avatars take the humanness of the avatars? Well it is for the people to answer, and their answer would probably be based on the context. If Rama was just a human, then why insist that a temple be built in Ayodhya, or that 'Rama Setu' be not destroyed. After all, it is matter of a a King, however just and noble he was, who was born in Ayodhya or spearheaded the construction bridge. Why make a big deal out it? Historicity of Rama and the events have been contested. Whatever maybe be the truth, Indians consider Rama as a god and treat him as a god. I might look at Rama from purely a historical perspective, or even as a mythical creation - yet with values that can be looked up towards.


You're looking at it from a point of view of Abrahamic religions and an External Creator God.

In Sanatan Dharma, the concept is "Aham Brahmāsmi". The human is divine, and an infinite amount of divinity can be associated with a human, depending on how the Dharmics come to view his Dharmic Quotient. So a person can be a human and deified to be a god or even the Supreme at the same time. Deification doesn't take away a person's human existence.

Historicity of Rama can be contested from a Bharatiya PoV, and a Bharatiya would not do that. All other challenges and contests are immaterial.

There are many things for which Sri Rama is loved, however his contribution considered to be most important was, if I am not mistaken, that perhaps for the very first time in history a human defeated an Asuric order headed by an almost invincible Asura/Rakshasa, Ravana. For Asuras, check this.

SwamyG wrote:Does the Government stop people from building their temples or other religious worship places? If it does, then there is a problem. Else, barring conflicts, it is up to the people to build these worship places.

Some can argue of the necessity of these symbols - memorials, and how the Government picks a human for remembrance. Every time the Government picks one person, it omits several other worthy individuals.


In fact the Government is indeed stopping people from building their temples, as the Govt is not removing mosques built by tearing down previous temples. Are the Hindus responsible for removing the illegal structures/mosques/churches on their temple land? The State is responsible for that!

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby member_22872 » 17 Oct 2013 18:52

We want a memorial or a temple? memorials are western constructs, temples are Indic constructs....even Kushbu has a temple in Tamil Nadu I was told...in India temples play the role of memorials...temples for Buddha, temples for Shirdi Sai etc, so why not a temple for Ram, suddenly it is becomes a symbol of religion? if you look at it with a western perspective, everything takes on a religious hue in India. We are Indian but think like the westerners, talk about mental slavery to western concepts.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Prem » 18 Oct 2013 00:14

Forgotton Traditions Revival =FTR
Done by Sadhu makes it worth while. With Temples come the Akharas etc.

Image

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15730
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SwamyG » 18 Oct 2013 09:50

RajeshA wrote:SwamyG ji,

the problem with your view is that you think that if people start doing hero worship in some traditional form, that it somehow lessens the deeds of a national hero for the Rashtra and he becomes untouchable for the State. A national hero has to be given his due recognition by the State too.

The historicity of Rama is attested to by our Itihaas. It is a tradition upheld for thousands of years and there is no need to question it. The current dispensation in India has no right to heed Macaulayist revisionism over our Itihaasic tradition.

Why twist words or shove words into my mouth, huh? Where did I ever diminish Rama or Krishna's deeds?

Saar, you might not question the historicity, that does not mean that others cannot question the validity of histories in stories. It is a different matter to analyze the historicity, but you want to stifle such questioning. Saar, that is belief. To me the existence or lack of existence of Rama does not matter, to me historicity is not important; it is enough that millions consider him a god. Among the believers, one can assume 100% to believe Rama/Krishna as avatars (gods for all practical purpose), that is enough for me. Was he a real person? Was he a fictional character? Was he god? These questions do not matter. Historicity does not matter. Theism/Atheism does not matter.

SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15730
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SwamyG » 18 Oct 2013 10:08

I do not wish to swerve away from the point at hand, so I'll just point that the State need not concern itself with various Bhaktipanths but have every reason to control Religions, as the latter challenge both Rashtra and Sabhyata.

Lord Rama knows what point you are trying to make. You invited me here from the other dhaaga. Rather, you are using me to make some point. Now you go posts after posts on what no.

I never said Hindus do not have rights to expect or build temples. My point was the State should impartial and leave the religion to its adherents. Provide level playing field, offer protection and punishment to people fermenting trouble.

I never said anything about national heros, or itihasas, puranas or whatever.

As far as "legitmizing historic injustices"; that is a different matter and there are Courts that decide those matters.

You're looking at it from a point of view of Abrahamic religions and an External Creator God.

The human is divine, and an infinite amount of divinity can be associated with a human, depending on how the Dharmics come to view his Dharmic Quotient. So a person can be a human and deified to be a god or even the Supreme at the same time. Deification doesn't take away a person's human existence.

:-) Try telling that to aam admi. The philosophy is no nice to read and write about; and a worthy one to remember and follow. However, theism in Hinduism is much different. When people pray, they pray to deities/gods. Period.

Historicity of Rama can be contested from a Bharatiya PoV, and a Bharatiya would not do that. All other challenges and contests are immaterial.

Sorry, I have no idea what you are saying there.

There are many things for which Sri Rama is loved, however his contribution considered to be most important was, if I am not mistaken, that perhaps for the very first time in history a human defeated an Asuric order headed by an almost invincible Asura/Rakshasa, Ravana. For Asuras, check this.

So now, you are introducing me to Ramayana :rotfl: How about this: http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ ?

In fact the Government is indeed stopping people from building their temples, as the Govt is not removing mosques built by tearing down previous temples. Are the Hindus responsible for removing the illegal structures/mosques/churches on their temple land? The State is responsible for that!

Government has to keep in mind the law and justice, and allow the Courts to handle the issues. If the Government is insincere and interferes in the judicial matters for vote bank politics, then it is a different issue that needs resolution through elections.

I think I had answered your first set of questions, Khuda Afeez to you for now.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 18 Oct 2013 12:06

Secular State & Interference in Religion

SwamyG wrote:
I do not wish to swerve away from the point at hand, so I'll just point that the State need not concern itself with various Bhaktipanths but have every reason to control Religions, as the latter challenge both Rashtra and Sabhyata.

Lord Rama knows what point you are trying to make. You invited me here from the other dhaaga. Rather, you are using me to make some point. Now you go posts after posts on what no.

I invited you here as the point you made on Separation of State and Religion and State's impartial treatment of religions could not have been discussed in that thread. And yes, the issue you referred to is a widely held understanding among people and as such I am responding to your comments and using them to make a wider point, so please don't consider it a personal attack.

I've tried to put across two points basically:
  1. You talk about Separation between State and Religion, but there are only two religions in India: Islam and Christianity. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are not religions. They are Bhaktipanths. As such the whole concept of this Separation and Secularism needs to be rethought.

  2. On National Heroes

SwamyG wrote:I never said anything about national heros, or itihasas, puranas or whatever.


It is exactly because you never said anything about national heroes that I brought it up. The second point I was making is that you're relegating national heroes like Sri Rama and Sri Krishna completely into the "domain of religion" and asking the Rashtra to wash off its hands off its responsibility to honor them appropriately or facilitate their ardent admirers in honoring them.

SwamyG wrote:I never said Hindus do not have rights to expect or build temples. My point was the State should impartial and leave the religion to its adherents. Provide level playing field, offer protection and punishment to people fermenting trouble.

As far as "legitmizing historic injustices"; that is a different matter and there are Courts that decide those matters.


The State cannot be impartial between Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity) and Dharmic Bhaktipanths (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism) simply because the latter are not religions. The State can be impartial between religions - Islam and Christianity. The State can be impartial between Dharmic Bhaktipanths. But not between Religions and Bhaktipanths.

SwamyG wrote:
You're looking at it from a point of view of Abrahamic religions and an External Creator God.

The human is divine, and an infinite amount of divinity can be associated with a human, depending on how the Dharmics come to view his Dharmic Quotient. So a person can be a human and deified to be a god or even the Supreme at the same time. Deification doesn't take away a person's human existence.

:-) Try telling that to aam admi. The philosophy is no nice to read and write about; and a worthy one to remember and follow. However, theism in Hinduism is much different. When people pray, they pray to deities/gods. Period.


You are looking at Hindu Theism as contradictory to Deification. There is no contradiction at all.

The ontology and epistemology of the deities/gods has been built up through Indian philosophy and then these Deity Models were "released" among the masses, be it the Avatar Model, the Panentheistic Model, Atman-Paramatma Model, etc. or the existing deities were "approved" by such a process.

Theism in "Hinduism" is simply a means
  • to preserve philosophy through Anthropomorphism, Symbolism, Sensification (e.g. Visualization) and Ritualism as well as
  • to cater to the psychological needs of humans.

The deities have validity because the underlying philosophy has validity, and thus devotion to these deities have validity.

SwamyG wrote:
Historicity of Rama can be contested from a Bharatiya PoV, and a Bharatiya would not do that. All other challenges and contests are immaterial.

Sorry, I have no idea what you are saying there.


Most of those who contest Historicity of Rama do it, because of the urges implanted into them by continuous Macaulayization, Dhimmification, Deracination, Deculturalization in society. Their urge to contest is the result of work done by non-Bharatiya interests on Bharatiya people, say by the Colonials, Islamics, Nehruvians, etc.

SwamyG wrote:
There are many things for which Sri Rama is loved, however his contribution considered to be most important was, if I am not mistaken, that perhaps for the very first time in history a human defeated an Asuric order headed by an almost invincible Asura/Rakshasa, Ravana. For Asuras, check this.

So now, you are introducing me to Ramayana :rotfl: How about this: http://www.valmikiramayan.net/ ?

I mentioned all this in the same spirit that you mentioned Ram Sethu, and the comments are also intended for a wider audience.

SwamyG wrote:
In fact the Government is indeed stopping people from building their temples, as the Govt is not removing mosques built by tearing down previous temples. Are the Hindus responsible for removing the illegal structures/mosques/churches on their temple land? The State is responsible for that!

Government has to keep in mind the law and justice, and allow the Courts to handle the issues. If the Government is insincere and interferes in the judicial matters for vote bank politics, then it is a different issue that needs resolution through elections.

I think I had answered your first set of questions, Khuda Afeez to you for now.

Courts can only work based on the Constitution and Law of the Land. The Government has to bring forth laws which enable the Courts to revert the possession of land to their former owners - the Hindus.

The Government cannot escape its responsibility.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4114
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Arjun » 18 Oct 2013 18:50

RajeshA wrote:Misunderstanding on Nature of Religion

Continuing the earlier effort at definition

Religion is a brotherhood claiming to be divinely sanctioned, making exclusivist claims of universalism, with authority vested in those acting as guardians of theology and dogma around the divine sanction, pursuing a sociopolitical agenda.


Bhaktipanth is a collective pursuit of spirituality, philosophy, mythological reenactment, ritualized symbolism and devotion, in abidance with Dharma, often under the guidance of a founding traditional lineage.

This is an excellent distinction you are making, RajeshA ji ! I hope all this thinking is soon going to be seen in something with wider reach and impact than BRF - like say a book..

Couple of minor quibbles - Bhaktipanth may not be the right term for what you have described. There could be some confusion with Bhakti Marg - which is just one of several Margs in Hinduism....Hinduism is much bigger than Bhakti alone (as a matter of fact - Rajiv Malhotra described Islam and Christianity in his book as Bhakti Margas, if I am not wrong, which are trying to universalize their particular ishta devata and shove down the throats of the world).

And in your definition, which is otherwise excellent, if it were up to me - would prefer 'non exclusivist' in place of 'collective' for the second one. The definition of the first one "Religion' - is perfect though !

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 18 Oct 2013 20:09

Arjun, i have been saying this for some time:

Harbans Singh ‏@brfharbans 14 Oct
@RajeshABRF @philotweepic Religion is organized orthodoxy. Spiritualism is different and it's highest form manifest in Dharma.

Once you start boxing Dharmic people that change/ evolve/ between different Dharmic strands into some kind of orthodox framework, one divides into groups what was not necessarily divisive. The purpose of quantifying Dharma into 10 qualities was to give society in general an aspiration to achieve as an individual and as a society. Groups that were purer in the 10 qualities earned respect. Groups that evolved themselves to those qualities got it too. There wasn't a static orthodoxy to Dharma and for that reason there was inherent freedom to take time to evolve to standards. When Islam and Xtianity entered India they tried framing their standards of orthodoxy onto various sampradaya's/ Dharmic strands. The generalized section became Hindu's, they couldn't divide us into too many groups though they could using the same orthodixy tools into Vaishnavs, Shaivites, Advaits, Dvaits, Bhatk Margi's, Gyaan Margi's. The simple reason they couldn't divide there was that there was interchangeable fluidity within each family and group. All these strands could have people/ groups intrinsically high in the 10 Dharmic qualities for instance and thus had tremendous respect irrespective of the sampradaya. Sikhs for example are very much into the Dharmic grouping but political and religious orthodoxy have separated it from the larger Hindu orthodoxy. The same is happening with Jains. We must realize that as long as we try to organize 'Hinduism' as some sort of religious orthodoxy, strands will splinter off like Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, Vaishnavs, Hare Krishani'tes..etc. If we don't consider it an orthodoxy than we must define the majority more in consonance with Santana Dharma with focus on Dharma. BUt the good change that is happening is many Hindu's are identifying with Sanatana Dharma..and it should continue.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby Sushupti » 18 Oct 2013 21:04

Image

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 18 Oct 2013 21:25

Misunderstanding on Nature of Religion

Continuing the earlier effort at definition

Religion is a brotherhood claiming to be divinely sanctioned, making exclusivist claims of universalism, with authority vested in those acting as guardians of theology and dogma around the divine sanction, pursuing a sociopolitical agenda.


Bhaktipanth is a collective though non exclusivist pursuit of spirituality, philosophy, mythological reenactment, ritualized symbolism and devotion, in abidance with Dharma, often under the guidance of a founding traditional lineage.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 18 Oct 2013 21:31

Arjun wrote:Couple of minor quibbles - Bhaktipanth may not be the right term for what you have described. There could be some confusion with Bhakti Marg - which is just one of several Margs in Hinduism....Hinduism is much bigger than Bhakti alone (as a matter of fact - Rajiv Malhotra described Islam and Christianity in his book as Bhakti Margas, if I am not wrong, which are trying to universalize their particular ishta devata and shove down the throats of the world).


Arjun ji,

1) I'm an avid fan of Rajiv Malhotra, but I think his emphasis are on differences at the philosophical level, while I think the meat of the difference lies in the sociopolitical agenda. The spirituality in religion, i.e. in a brotherhood is secondary and its purpose is only to strengthen the resolve of the adherent to stay within the brotherhood.

2) My basic premise is that we Bharatiyas, we don't have any religion. We have Sanskriti. Bharatiya Sanskriti is the product, the sum total of everything Bharatiya Sabhyata, the process, has produced. It includes philosophy, spirituality, rituals, Dharma, Dharmaarthic order, sciences, literature, technology, culture, etc.

Within Bharatiya Sanskriti, Bhaktipanths are what one would call the "religious" element. In the above definition, I'm trying to explain why this "religious" element is completely different than what we call religion, especially when looking at Islam and Christianity.

3) I think the "religious" element in Bharatiya Sanskriti has been so interwoven that we have not been able to find a proper word as a translation for religion. If you come up with other proposals instead of "Bhaktipanth" please feel free to let me know.

Arjun wrote:And in your definition, which is otherwise excellent, if it were up to me - would prefer 'non exclusivist' in place of 'collective' for the second one. The definition of the first one "Religion' - is perfect though!


Done!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 18 Oct 2013 22:16

harbans wrote:Arjun, i have been saying this for some time:

Harbans Singh ‏@brfharbans 14 Oct
@RajeshABRF @philotweepic Religion is organized orthodoxy. Spiritualism is different and it's highest form manifest in Dharma.

Once you start boxing Dharmic people that change/ evolve/ between different Dharmic strands into some kind of orthodox framework, one divides into groups what was not necessarily divisive. The purpose of quantifying Dharma into 10 qualities was to give society in general an aspiration to achieve as an individual and as a society. Groups that were purer in the 10 qualities earned respect. Groups that evolved themselves to those qualities got it too. There wasn't a static orthodoxy to Dharma and for that reason there was inherent freedom to take time to evolve to standards. When Islam and Xtianity entered India they tried framing their standards of orthodoxy onto various sampradaya's/ Dharmic strands. The generalized section became Hindu's, they couldn't divide us into too many groups though they could using the same orthodixy tools into Vaishnavs, Shaivites, Advaits, Dvaits, Bhatk Margi's, Gyaan Margi's. The simple reason they couldn't divide there was that there was interchangeable fluidity within each family and group. All these strands could have people/ groups intrinsically high in the 10 Dharmic qualities for instance and thus had tremendous respect irrespective of the sampradaya. Sikhs for example are very much into the Dharmic grouping but political and religious orthodoxy have separated it from the larger Hindu orthodoxy. The same is happening with Jains. We must realize that as long as we try to organize 'Hinduism' as some sort of religious orthodoxy, strands will splinter off like Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, Vaishnavs, Hare Krishani'tes..etc. If we don't consider it an orthodoxy than we must define the majority more in consonance with Santana Dharma with focus on Dharma. BUt the good change that is happening is many Hindu's are identifying with Sanatana Dharma..and it should continue.


harbans ji,

good of you to bring up the issue of orthodoxy or even organized orthodoxy.

We have to be careful that we do not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Orthodox usually means strongly adherent to tradition of rituals and established standards. I would presume Organized Orthodoxy is an institution responsible for the orthodoxy.

Creations of orthodoxies is a normal process. Also an orthodoxy does not rebel against Dharma. In fact some structure is very beneficial for the upkeep of Dharma. As NaMo often says ideas need to be institutionalized.

However there is a strong difference between the orthodox clergy of Abrahamic religions and orthodoxy of Dharmic traditions.

Clergy and Ulema are basically political positions within the hierarchy of the religious brotherhood with the brief of psychological manipulation of followers and social arbitration enforcing their loyalty and adherence to the political order built around divine sanction, otherwise also known as "revelation" and thus further the political agenda.

Dharmic Priestly Class has the responsibility of ensuring the perpetuation of rituals. Rituals are built around what I would call implementation of philosophy in form of Anthropomorphism, Symbolism, Sensification (e.g. Visualization, Bell Chiming, Incense, Prasadam, etc.), Repetition and Participation. The rituals interweave the fabric of the cosmos with that of the social individual and his consciousness.

There is a lot of difference between a Pundit or a Granthi on the one hand and the Pastor and Mullah on the other.

Here is a an interesting piece written by Subhash Kak on the meaning of rituals

I however agree fully with you that we need to build the Dharmic society transcending the various orthodoxies.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 18 Oct 2013 22:31

I however agree fully with you that we need to build the Dharmic society transcending the various orthodoxies


:) That's exactly what i am saying. Sampradaya's are organized religious orthodoxies. Dharmic society transcends the various societies and provides the freedom/ pluralist platform according to ones nature, attributes, liking etc, while clearly enunciating what it entails to be a Dharmic.

Xtianity and Islam are organized orthodoxies without a Dharmic society transcending that orthodoxy for guidance. The West realized the need for another field to transcend the religious orthodoxy of the Church over everything and hence came out with Secularism. A Dharmic nation does not need that. Because Western secularism is just a step towards a Dharmic transcendence over religious orthodoxy. That is exactly why i have been rooting for India to be declared a Dharmic and not a Hindu or XYZ nation/ rashtra.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4161
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby SBajwa » 18 Oct 2013 22:46

by RajeshA
Bharatiyas can also refer to Qu'ran as the Muhammad-Smriti. However among many Hindus there is a tendency to do superficial fusion without understanding the basics of our own philosophies, e.g. calling Muhammad an avatar or equating concepts of Allah and Eeshwar. I can't say I have any deep knowledge of them either. So I would request others to chip in.


Actually to call Muhammad as an Avatar of Vishnu (Dashavatara http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashavatara) will be considered an insult (Blasphemy) to these Ten Avatars, or any others (Brhama or Mahesh).

We need to educate such people. My own old relative would consistently argue with me about how Muslims are just like us and so forth! until I showed him this book (he finished it flat in three days) and converted to Dharmic overnight. Our people do not know! and simply equate Ravana to be same as Ram.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Not-Muslim-Wa ... t+a+muslim

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 18 Oct 2013 23:15

We may have Sampradaya's that differ in practice and tradition. Yet the respect for the overlaying Dharmic qualities transcends the differences in tradition and practice. That is why it is so common to see Vaishnavs in Shiv temples, Jains in other Hindu festivals, Hindu's in Sikh gurdwara's. Also on the other hand it is possible some sampradayic members may disrespect certain practices or rituals of other sampradaya's. BUt that has never translated to transgression of the basic 10 Dharmic qualites that are respected irrespective. It is not for no reason that Ram defended both Vashista and Vishwamitra who differed in practice and ritual. Abrahmic faiths by their practice and political legacy fail the Dharmic qualities. That is why the West had to opt for a Secular framework over and above the relgious orthodixy whereas in India we already had a Dharmic one. That is why Ram/ Krishna were really serious about defending Dharma than the sampradayic loyalties of a Sampradayic guru..with complete freedom to grow more and more sampradaya's within the overall Dharmic frameworks. Dharmics recognize 1 god many paths. But the paths are only valid with the overall Dharmic framework!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 18 Oct 2013 23:43

SBajwa wrote:We need to educate such people. My own old relative would consistently argue with me about how Muslims are just like us and so forth! until I showed him this book (he finished it flat in three days) and converted to Dharmic overnight. Our people do not know! and simply equate Ravana to be same as Ram.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Not-Muslim-Wa ... t+a+muslim


Going forward the issue would be how to convince the Islamics of the Dharmic viewpoint. There are many obstacles. However I would urge Dharmics to give earlier mentioned strategy a trial run.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 19 Oct 2013 02:15

Within the Sampradya or orthodoxy one can attain spiritual heights, but that entails observance of the 10 Dharmic qualities. Endeavour as a person and State whatever Sampradaya you are a part of to understand and observe those qualities. The Sampradayic loyalty provides the necessary disciplinal skeleton and Dharma the rest and more, even without Sampradayic loyalty adherence to Dharma alone should suffice.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17260
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RamaY » 20 Oct 2013 09:47

If we are to take SwamyG garus line of thought, current constitution of India has already become a "religious" document for Gandhi, JLN and BR Ambedkar have become teen-murthis of modern India and secularism has self-declared "fundamentalists" like MSAiyer. There is not a single village exists in today's india without a statue for one of these teen-Murthi's of India. What the hell, the name India itself is a religious one for people want to be called only Indian (not Hindu Nationalist) nationalist as if it is a kalima of India.

Perhaps it is time for a new constitution of India that is purely dharmic and not a religious script like BR Ambdekar smriti?

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 20 Oct 2013 11:09

RamaY ji,

interesting take! What the secularists propose as "Idea of India" is in itself an extremist idea requiring deculturalization of Hindus.

Let's take the following statement
SwamyG wrote:And the government should not concern itself with religion, other than giving a level playing field to all.

or the following premise
SwamyG wrote:Provide level playing field, offer protection and punishment to people fermenting trouble.


Question is: Is a level playing field being offered?
A level playing field is Adherence to Dharma. Under this level playing field, various Sampradayas, various Matas (मत), various Panths could offer their worldview.

This means
  1. No material inducements to join
  2. No coercion to join
  3. No threat at leaving
  4. No delegitimation of other paths (Non-Exclusivism)
  5. No closed brotherhood identity (separate Qaum)
  6. No financial and diplomatic support from transnational networks
  7. No land and property used for non-worship activities used for raising financial resources
  8. No state-sponsored appeasement

Now if these playing field advantages to the religious brotherhoods like Islam and Christianity can be rectified then perhaps one can speak of "level" playing field.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 21 Oct 2013 02:16

Which should work as a better overlaying Principle in society?

Society: A comparitive Dharmic overly vs a Secular overlay

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 21 Oct 2013 03:09

harbans wrote:Which should work as a better overlaying Principle in society?

Society: A comparitive Dharmic overly vs a Secular overlay


harbans ji,

nice to see your thoughts being laid out on a blog.

I concur with most of what you wrote, so I'll just mention a few quibbles.

harbans wrote:they failed to understand that some Sampradaya’s particularly the Middle Eastern varieties would not compromise on their ritual even if it broke Dharmic tenets outright.
harbans wrote:Dharmics interpreted it in terms of respecting the ritual and tradition however bizarre and violative of tenets it may be.


Even as the Dharmics respect the right of the Abrahamics to go about their rituals - mosque, namaz, Eid, etc. it is not because of the ritual directly, but because Dharmics have started following a very twisted logic.

Their thinking is,
  1. Islam and Christianity are paths seeking God
  2. All paths seeking God lead to God and thus all paths are valid
  3. Any path that seeks God must be considered Dharmic
  4. Any path considered Dharmic must be respected
  5. Violations in Dharmic behavior by Islamics must then also be violations of Islam and need to be curbed.

Problem is that this has created double confusion:
  1. they have accepted that Islam and Christianity are a darśanas, accepted without any scrutiny, and
  2. they have confused darśana with dharma.

First the Dharmics really have to see whether Islam and Christianity are logically consistent and philosophically complete enough to be considered a darśana. Here is one reason why Islam e.g. cannot be considered as logically consistent.

Secondly dharma is Indian system of meta-ethics. Dharma has its own independent existence as external to any darśana, but every darśana must both offer a theory on Dharma's place in the world as well as show itself to be in compliance with Dharma. This step too has been overlooked by Dharmics.

It is due to our sloppy and lazy Purva Paksha or even complete lack of it or systemic suppression of it if done that Islam and Christianity have escaped scrutiny.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby harbans » 21 Oct 2013 14:43

Rajesh Ji, many thanks and yes quibbles etc most welcome.

etc. it is not because of the ritual directly, but because Dharmics have started following a very twisted logic.


Yes i agree and that is what i wanted to convey has happened with the Secular overlay we adopted post partition, instead of a constitution based on our age old Dharmic values. I should have mentioned 'respect for right to go about their rituals' than 'repsect for their rituals'.

Their thinking is,
a. Islam and Christianity are paths seeking God
b. All paths seeking God lead to God and thus all paths are valid
c. Any path that seeks God must be considered Dharmic
d. Any path considered Dharmic must be respected
e. Violations in Dharmic behavior by Islamics must then also be violations of Islam and need to be curbed.


Good points, and i think i have tried to cover mistakes made by Dharmics in assuming c, d and e. The reason i mentioned is our partake and adoption of Secularism while at core most of us remained Dharmic. A lot of us assumed a secularist constitution is a Dharmic one. It was not to be as a,b, c, d, e you mentioned above were taken at face value by people as Institutions became disengaged with Dharmic thought and behavior. That has happened as you mentioned by a lack of Purva Paksha and blind faith in a 150 year old patchy secular model from the West.

Secondly dharma is Indian system of meta-ethics. Dharma has its own independent existence as external to any darśana, but every darśana must both offer a theory on Dharma's place in the world as well as show itself to be in compliance with Dharma. This step too has been overlooked by Dharmics.


Well put. Those reflections stopped a long time ago, Possibly since the time of the Islamic invasions. a-e are good points to reflect on mistakes in purva paksha we made.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 22 Oct 2013 13:13

Promotion of Communal Violence Bill

PREVENTION OF COMMUNAL AND TARGETED VIOLENCE (ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND REPARATIONS) BILL, 2011

A BILL

To respect, protect and fulfill the right to equality before law and equal protection of law by imposing duties on the Central Government and the State Governments, to exercise their powers in an impartial and non-discriminatory manner to prevent and control targeted violence, including mass violence, against Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and religious minorities in any State in the Union of India, and linguistic minorities in any State in the Union of India; to thereby uphold secular democracy; to help secure fair and equal access to justice and protection to these vulnerable groups through effective provisions for investigation, prosecution and trial of offences under the Act; to provide for restorative relief and reparation, including rehabilitation and compensation to all persons affected by communal and targeted violence; and for matters connected herewith and incidental thereto.


requires analysis!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 22 Oct 2013 13:27

Promotion of Communal Violence Bill

As far as protection of SCs and STs is concerned there is already a Law:

THE SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989

So basically the Bill is only used "protecting" religious minorities - Muslims and Christians! It is a way to formalize that the Indian State would be used for the specific purpose of protecting Muslims and Christians to the detriment of Hindus, or those who consider themselves Hindus.

These days if the Secular Govt wants to give some undue advantage to the Muslims or Christians, it is done under the pretext of grouping them together with other groups - either SC/ST or with others like Parsis, Jews, Sikhs, Buddhists as was the case of Minority Scholarships in areas where there are hardly any Sikhs or Buddhists or Parsis. Also "linguistic minorities" have been added to hide the purpose of this bill.

So for example, according to this law, it is perfectly possible that Islamics could attack Hindus like it happened in Muzaffarnagar, UP, but the State would intervene and prosecute if there is any form of retaliation by Hindus and those Hindus who do would be prosecuted under this law. Islamics would not be prosecuted as they are religious minorities.

Now isn't that giving an incentive for committing communal riots?!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 22 Oct 2013 13:52

Promotion of Communal Violence Bill

PREVENTION OF COMMUNAL AND TARGETED VIOLENCE (ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND REPARATIONS) BILL, 2011

3. (e) “group” means a religious or linguistic minority, in any State in the Union of India, or Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes within the meaning of clauses (24) and (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution of India;


1) Again no definition has been provided for "religious".

2) How does one become a "group"?
  1. By ideological association with religious or revolutionary brotherhoods, say Muslim or Naxalite?
  2. Naturally through procreative and associative expansion, say Jāti?
  3. By exclusion by others, say Kufr?
  4. By identifying with native culture, say Bharatiya?
  5. By adherence to a system of ethics, say Dharmics?
  6. By defensive posture of resistance, say Hindus?


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15949
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: The Bharatiya - Identity, Vision, Agenda, Proposition

Postby RajeshA » 27 Oct 2013 03:17

Jiski Lathi Usi ki Bhains

Continuing from "Narendra Modi vs the Dynasty: Contrasting Ideas of India" Thread

RoyG wrote:

Even the b@stards next door are beginning to love him. :lol:


There's one dynamic in Islam which is stronger than Mullah and that is raw power and authority of the Wali. Problem that developed in Pakistan was that the Jihadis were allowed to become stronger than the Wali, and so the Mullah got the upper hand.

But any Wali can assert his authority any time by the force of arms and authority. So the question becomes how come America despite beating the shit out of assorted Momeen in the region still cannot receive the respect? That is because Wali can only be one who is either one from the tribe, or one who forces the others to become his tribe by imposing his authority and slavery over them. The Wali is expected to crush all other centers of power and force others to accept him as the sole lord over them. He has to extend his protection over the people declaring them as his own - making them his Muwaliyooon.

So any Bharatiya who beats the shit out of every Paki who raises his head, would practically come to own all of that Paki's Muwaliyoon, his subjects. It doesn't matter if the Paki is some Jernail, Jihadi, Mullah or Taliban. If the Bharatiya can beat the Paki to pulp, he would own the fidelity of all Pakis under him. Beat all the Jihadis and Jernails, the Mullahs and the Talibs, the Ghazis and the Sardars, and the Bharatiya becomes the undisputed Wali of whole of Pakistan.

Then it is up to the Bharatiya Wali to tell the Pakis what direction would be their Qibla and how they should fold their hands when praying!

The point is no Paki really has respect or trust for any of their leader. They don't mind if the next day a new leader takes over. They understand the language of power and authority.

Should tomorrow a Bharatiya want to take over Pakistan, he can do it easily, if he knows how to beat the crap out of any Paki who has pretensions of his own.

Pakistanis crave for leadership, none of which they are going to get in Pakistan. If Bharatiyas choose a leader for themselves, Pakis too would buy in and be willing Muwaliyoon.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bart S, Chinmay, James, ravikr, Y. Kanan and 28 guests