Raju wrote:
Shall the society remain perpetually divided on this basis...if not, what is the timeframe ? Especially considering the Generation-X of any community isn't exactly aware of these historical issues ? Are we seeking an apology from them as well ? Or is the idea to remind them...so that they can apologize ?
I have noted the exchange of views between you and jwalamukhi. You bring up a very uncomfortable subject that I have addressed in my own mind. Sorry -but this is going to be a long post..
I believe both of you are right but in a nearly mutually exclusive way.
If your view holds, the historical facts will remain buried until they become innocuous - like the killing of Aztecs. (As compared to say records of Hitlers camps, or the inquisition).
If his view holds - is it going to be an indicator of a permanent irreconcilable cleft?
I have thought about ways in which these contradicting views can be reconciled with each other and there is no easy method. You cannot target (for criticism) a historic group without being insulting to their present day descendants. But does this mean for example, that Nazis could be criticized without upsetting all Germans?
Ulitimately there has to be a trade-off. Germans might have been upset, but the idea of raking up still fresh issues was not to punish all Germans. Until that became clear to Germans as a whole it is quite likely that many would have felt anxiety that they would be made to pay for things that they had personally not been part of. But as time showed, they were being asked for reconciliation, and not to take the blame or pay damages for what they had not done. Surely that is feasible in India?
There is also the flip side of the coin that is almost never brought out into the open.
When the mullah criticizes (in private) Hindu practices or passes a fatwa against a Hindu related act, is he restricting himself to a minor geographical area and acting for a small group of local people who have brought a problem to him, or can his judgement cover all Hindus?
Should a Hindu who has nothing to do with the original problem, upon hearing the judgement, assume that a judgement calling upon Muslims (for example) to not eat festival sweets offered by a Hindu is directed at some small local group, or should he feel that it is directed at all Hindus and at him? How is he to know?
On the other hand, does the mullah take the sensitivities of all Hindu into account when he passes the fatwa? Surely he should be expressing the very same sentiment that you have expressed about hurt feelings in the Hindu community and a permanent cleft.
Similarly, imagine an evangelist who suggests to a person that he will get this world and next world benefits from changing his faith because his existing faith is wrong, and the word of (his) God says so.
Is this exchange a private exchange between the evangelist and Hindu? If another Hindu hears this, should he consider the exchange as a private exchange that is not meant to be critical of Hindus at large, or should he feel offended that Hindu belief is being critcized? Should the evangelist NOT express the same sentiment that you have done and worry about the sensitivities of the larger Hindu community.
I believe that neither the Mullah nor the Evangelist are concerned about the sensitivities of the larger Hindu community.
In relation to the discussion between yourself and jwalamukhi, we can have a situation in which:
a) Records and discussion of historic excesses by Muslims and Christians are swept under the carpet by wellmeaning Hindus who do not want to perpetuate a cleft
b) A similar sentiment of NOT creating clefts is NOT followed by the mullahs and evangelists of today.
This in my view is wrong and unfair to Hindus.
The situation we find in India is that it is Hindus who do not want to talk about the violent history that involves evangelists and mullahs for fear of hurting the feelings of peopel of minority communities. The present day counterparts of those violent evangelists and violent mullahs are still active and do not acknowledge excesses of the past and still have no sensitivity to the feelings of Hindus today.
To the Hindu, the saddest part, and the part that causes most guilt is hurting the feelings of perfectly Indian Christians and Muslims today by raking up these issues.
But the only people who are helped by not raking up these issues are the unrepentant mullahs and evangelists.
The sad truth is that these issues have to be raked up at the risk of causing hurt to Christians and Muslims. Unfortunately, neither mullahs, nor Evangelists are in the slightest bit concerned about causing hurt to Hindus. The only way forward is to NOT hide hurt feelings and express them aloud and start taking the actions needed to set that right.