Few regions on earth can boast the rich cultural tapestry of Karnataka’s west coast.
The place is home to “literate” Hindus, Christians, Muslims, Jains, Buddhists; to speakers of a multitude of languages who eat different foods, dress differently. But the ongoing segregation and ghettoisation of communities, often, it seems, to the drumbeats of a democratically elected government, receives scant notice.
Suddenly, friends are no longer just friends; classmates are no longer just classmates; neighbours are no longer just neighbours. Almost everybody and almost everything is beginning to be brazenly, dangerously viewed through a constricted aperture custom-made to enhance doubt, suspicion and mistrust.
Sudipto Mondal, in today’s Hindu, reports from Panja, the chikungunya capital of Dakshina Kannada, where the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) has “successfully enforced” a ban in the Government composite pre-University college on Muslim girls wearing the burkha.
“Many girl students spoke about the humiliation they face every day. One of them said, ‘All the other girls have started calling us ‘Dambar Dabbi’ (boxful of tar). They have come up with rhymes that poke fun at our outfits.’
“According to her, every time she and her friends put on or take off their burkha, a few boys and girls start clapping or chanting ‘Jai Sri Ram‘. Her classmate claimed that some students regularly take her headscarf from her bag and hide it.
“The bullying extends outside the campus. An elderly woman told The Hindu in confidence that some men forced her to take off her burkha when she was walking back home one evening. ‘When I agreed, they began to celebrate and raised slogans of ‘Bharat mata ki jai’,’ she said.
Read the full article: ‘We were friends once but not any more’
Also read: Giving Lord Rama a good name, 24x7x365
What is liberation from the viewpoint of Muslim girls? Staying hidden inside the Burkha or getting out of Burkha and feeling normal like others? Why is secular Hindu’s correspondent fretting, when ABVP has done what secular Kemal Ataturk did nearly a century ago?
This is a pointer to the fact that in India, secularism is same as minority communalism and minority fanaticism.
I am all against Burkhas, its nothing but willful discrimination against women. The concept of viewing women as an object under possession deriving protection is degenerative thinking. This also includes the same vanara senas who object women/girls against wearing western robes. What they did was absolutely wrong and hypocritical, no one should force anyone to do anything which is legal and moral in society.
If we cannot tolerate what “others” eat, drink, speak, do, wear, etc, which may be different from what “we” eat, drink, speak, do, wear, etc, without hysterically getting the urge to change “them”, then there is clearly a massive problem, and I would posit, it is somewhere inside our crania.
“What is liberation from the viewpoint of Muslim girls?” Who are you to decide that? Why not allow Muslims to decide that? Why should a bunch of thugs acting in the name of Sri Rama decide that? Who are they to decide that? Why doesn’t the government of Karnataka decide that without allowing “non-state actors” to do their bidding? Why didn’t the BJP-led NDA government of Vajpayee decide that if it was that simple?
We can keep asking the questions, but they achieve nothing except to underscore our own fears, fantasies and stereotypes which seem to be increasingly getting closer to racism.
And what is “normal like others”? Normal like you? Normal like me? And who gave you the right to speak on behalf of me or the “others”?
At least Mustafa Kemal Ataturk had the backing of the people in his reforms drive, and a simple wikipedia check will tell you that, on page 126 of volume one of Ataturkism, Kemal Ataturk wrote: “The religious covering of women will not cause difficulty … This simple style [of headcovering] is not in conflict with the morals and manners of our society.”
Why is it such a problem for the sangh parivar’s goons, goondas and supporters to leave it to the people to decide what they want to do with their lives?
How much longer before some idiot, and there are plenty clearly, says it is wrong for Rajasthani women to cover their heads with their pallu? Or for high-society women in Bangalore to wear the saree dangerously below the navel?
who invented the Burkas? The most leacherous people from Saudi–they think they can do anything with other people’s women, but cover their own–The Burka symbolizes the Arab sickness and perversity with regard to women—France prevented a woman from obtaining citizenship for wearing a Burka and Burkas are not allowed in schools. Finally reason is beginning to dawn in the Western world when it comes to these things–let us hope it will also dawn in India.
Bye the way I do not believe in intimidating anyone, but the government should do what the Shah did in Iran–ban the burka. Even my Iranian friends look at disgust at this and say it symbolizes Arab tribalism.
Actually covering of women came from the orthodox Jews–their Orthodox women shave their heads and cover their hair so that men will not be distracted! Moreover, orthodox Jews are not supposed to look at each other when having sex, I was told! But Jews went to Europe and began to dress like Europeans and being all covered in black is found only among Orthodox Jews today in the modern world. Arabs got this custom from the Jews–after all they are the same people racially–but Arabs remained in the Middle East while the Jews went to Europe and intermarried with Europeans and so look different. So while their Jewish brothers got rid of covering, Arabs still cover their women from head to foot because they remained in the Mid East. If only Muslims know who they copied covering of women from! But they are too ignorant to know of the history of the burka!
Anyway, comapre this to the beautiful pagan celebration of the human form in Greek painting and Hindu sculpture. A completely different civilizational ethos! Freedom and art and beauty! However, after hundreds of years of Isalmic rule Hindus have also covered a lot and have become prudish which they formerly were not—
It’s hilarious to find these cretins calling themselves “liberators” of women when they wilfully unleash violence against any women who disagree on what liberation means. I don’t remember the ABVP muttering a peep about the ruthless assault on women in the pubs.
The goons doing this are fooling no one (except the ones who willingly delude themselves as the first two posts on this blog show). The aim is obviously to intimidate and marginalize the Muslim community in coastal Karnataka.
If liberation from viewpoint of Muslim girls has to be decided by Muslim girls only,
We would still be living in world
1)Slavery was legal
2)India will still be a Colony
3) Your house toilet was still serviced by a dalit who carried human waste on his head
Clearly there are something which go against the grain of modern society and exploitation of woman is one of them.
When McCauley banned Gurukulas your forefathers thought that who was he to decide science based curriculam is good for India. Result is for you to see. At least I lived beyond the average life expectancy of 17th century India thanks to modern education. Same goes for Muslims now. If there is no uniform civil code these type of aggression becomes the norm
“If there is no uniform civil code these type of aggression becomes the norm”
How about – we implement uniform civil code asap, but at the same time cull all these self-appointed societal/moral/vigilante ‘policemen’??
I see myself in agreement with Prashant Krishnamurthy for once!
Needs some tinkering though.
I say it’s no business of any non-Muslim org nor even the State (under any Govt) to decide what the Muslima must do or wear. In fact, give them Shari’a. All of it. This rule must apply to the Hindu, Christian etc etc.
I say this for the simple reason that a non-Muslim agency would not be effective.
Similarly, I think that Hindu students must be free to study in a Hindu environment where they are more comfortable. If the Muslima feels uncomfortable in this environment, then our Secular Govt provides for Minority Education funded by Govt. I say, please use the fund. And for the same reason, this fund must apply to Hindus too.
But why does all this not happen?
And here is where I refer to Gururaj’s last-liner – “This is a pointer to the fact that in India, secularism is same as minority communalism and minority fanaticism.”
– Secular-Liberalism imposes on its citizens its unique and forced “notions” of equality and fraternity. It takes this to ridiculous extremes and then the crying need for the State to see its constituents equal and “therefore, obviously” happy manifests in forced “communion”.
The reason Multi-Culturalism as the very legitimate child of Liberalism is so perverse is because the State plays footsie with Human Nature. It encourages diversity and then forces this diversity to achieve physical homogeneity with leeway given to “minorities” because they need to be “protected”. All you will have is friction.
Btw, Ataturk’s dress laws again (same link)- “The last part of reform on dress emphasized the need to wear modern suits instead of antiquated religion-based clothing such as the veil and turban in the Law Relating to Prohibited Garments of 1934.”
As you can see in modern Turkey, Islam is winning. He should have just let Turkey be and learn its lessons. But being the Secularist he was, he had to poke his fingers.
France prevented a woman from obtaining citizenship for wearing a Burka and Burkas are not allowed in schools.”
Larissa – France, like most of Europe now, is being foolish and is playing with fire. Why is it so necessary to allow immigration of vastly diverse people and then impose you’re mores and norms on them? Why can they not disallow such immigration once for all and also let existing (inassimilable) immigrants leave, thereby saving themselves a lot of pain. I’m sure such immigrants who feel so uncomfortable in France, will be at home in their own societies. Isn’t that much more humane and civilized?
“The aim is obviously to intimidate and marginalize the Muslim community in coastal Karnataka.”
Aloke – It looks like the ABVP chaps want to assimilate and not marginalize Muslims :)
Narayana – Some serious differences with some of you’re points.
1. Your house toilet was still serviced by a dalit who carried human waste on his head – Not really. The impulse to reform came from within Hindu society.
2. Gurukulas – Where is the conflict with “science”? I would request you to refer to The Beautiful Tree.
3. India will still be a Colony – I don’t see the connexion. Unless you feel Hindus actively refused Independence and the British imposed it on us :)
4. UCC – In my opinion, this would be the worst manifestation of Secular imposition on Citizens. And what is wrong with having our personal laws?
Again, its a moot point but you must prove that, if not for the British, our “traditional” education would have resisted medical advances within and without India.
Maybe the Ram sene types want to remove the burkha from poor muslim women and put it on middle and upper class hindu women?
“The goons doing this are fooling no one (except the ones who willingly delude themselves as the first two posts on this blog show).”
Unfortunately there are far too many people in this country who ‘willingly delude themselves’.
should we allow muslims to wear burkhas to schools? should we say who are we to decide what muslim wear?
same questions for hindu girls, should they be allowed to wear jeans and go pubbing or is it to right to say who is anyone to object what hindu girls wear and where they go drinking?
If you collect public opinion on this, I’m sure majority would come back and say, who are we to decide what people wear and where they go? let them do what they think is the best and right for them.
However, my concerns are not related to what is happening today. my concerns are about what is happening in our so called convents from decades. Every convent school puts a dictat saying you cannot wear bangles, flowers or kunkuma and puts strict rule saying skirts should only be knee length.
why did or is no one questioning this? why is it right when covents do it or wrong when ABVP does it.
Now, please dont come back and say, if you dont like the convent rules go to some other school, which I think ABVP will repeat saying if you dont like it here, go live somewhere else.
I personally dont care what you wear, where you go and what you drink.
All I’m saying is be freaking consistent in what you ask/talk, if at all you question what one person is doing then question what other person doing as well.
If you cannot do that, keep quiet, beacuse no one would listen to you and let everyone fight among themselves and die
thalaeharatae – Per my formula above, I would have to go with the “Convent” strictures. A Convent is a Christian institution.
If we want to dress like Hindus, we must not enroll in Convents. It’s the “France” logic I debated earlier.
This is the reason we must demand Hindu Schools and also funding by Govt. Let’s also look at rationalizing “Educational Property” held per basis of Student strength.
School uniform is fine – if someone wears a burkha get it off since it is not a part of the uniform or allowed accessory and they should go to some other school if they cant comply. This is for the school authorities to enforce BTW. But what about a pub or even a home? You will try to enforce uniform in everyone else’s private lives too?
What do you wear at home and outside? How about a big khakhi cheddi for your friends and you, all the time. Maybe then you can also enforce it as uniform and tell everyone to be freakin consistent.
If by assimilate you mean do what they are told by the ABVP… yes. exactly.
Valid point about the Christian schools refusing to let any expression of religious faith by non-Christians, but that does not make what ABVP does right.
Being from a Christian school where crucifixes were not on the same level as rakhis, I see your point and agree with you on the religious expression aspect of it.
But the point also is that the ABVP does not think that adult Muslim women are capable of making a choice of their own, and should be humiliated and abused for doing so. How does that fit in with a great “we are liberating women” agenda that they tout?
If ABVP is not stopped in this kind of behaviour, tomorrow they will be telling you and me whom to marry, how to speak in public and what to wear.
Of course this does not apply to those of you here too stupid to make your own decisions, preferring to let themselves be led like cattle to slaughter by the ABVP and its ilk.
The rest of us like our freedoms too much.
ABVP is far more tolerant…look at whats happening in Netherlands…
“Why not allow Muslims to decide that?” – Good point.!
They have decided that they will not sing Vande Mataram…Thats OK..
They want the Sharia….Fine let them have it…
Sharia says a woman has to wear Burka…thats fine let them practice it.
Now a simple question to you..
Should the punishment aspect of Sharia be also applied to them?
i.e If a Muslim steals something..then per Sharia his hands should be chopped of.. Or does suddenly Indian laws become applicable? Who decides to pick and choose?
Fake Secularism ! My Foot!
BTW wodefogg are YOU to decide what ABVP does or does not? There is a judicial system which decides that. None of your goddamn business.
@ Prashant Krishnamurthy…
This is from todays Times of India..
A particular community beats up cops..when they are doing their jobs…
SO BE IT ??
Fake Secularism..! MY FOOT.
(Btw it is so difficult to make out which is this particular community ..so
this is a perfectly secular news item)
Ghaziabad encounter: Protesters beat up cops
5 Mar 2009, 0700 hrs IST, Lalit Kumar, TNN
GHAZIABAD: In perhaps the worst rioting that Ghaziabad has ever witnessed, mobs on Wednesday evening severely beat up and injured two policemen, set
a police post, a police jeep and about half-a-dozen motorcycles on fire and vandalized the police control room on Meerut Road. They also damaged many of passing cars and buses.
Late in the night, prohibitory orders under Section 144 were imposed all over the city.
The rioting took place over allegations that two persons the police had claimed to have shot in an armed encounter early in the morning saying they were carjackers had actually been picked up from their homes around midnight on Tuesday by a police SI and four constables. Predictably, the cops denied the charge.
The rioting began around 5.30 pm but the New Bus Stand police post and some vehicles were still smouldering at 8.30 pm. Parts of Grand Trunk Road and the Delhi-Meerut highway, littered with shattered glass of passing vehicles and burning wreckage of a few, had to be blocked to traffic for almost two hours.
Mobs also vandalized the office of the city police chief, Anant Dev, around 10 pm when this report was being filed.
A heavy contingent of the Provincial Armed Constabulary and riot police had been deployed in the entire affected area under the City Kotwali and Sihani Gate police stations. Cases of rioting, arson, destroying public property, attacking government servants on duty and other counts had been registered. And, although the police were tight-lipped, a large number of alleged rioters had been rounded up.
Many in the mob also condemned the recent lynching of four alleged burglars, belonging to a particular community, in Loni’s Balramnagar area as the police stood by.
According to a police officer, it all started with about a hundred persons marching to the district hospital where the bodies of the two men killed by the cops, Feroze and Rahis, were kept in the mortuary. They beat up two constables on duty there. They had to be admitted to hospital. Some policemen who rushed to the spot to save the duo were also roughed up with the mob chasing them.
After this, the 200-300 strong mob, mainly from Islamnagar, Chaman Colony and neighbouring areas, marched to the New Bus Stand police post where they thrashed the few policemen on duty and set the post and some motorcycles of policemen and others on fire with petrol taken from the vehicles.
The angry crowd then went berserk on GT Road, damaging cars and buses and finally marching to the city control room, where they smashed windows and furniture besides burning two motorcycles parked there. A police jeep was torched. And, even fire tenders from the fire station a stone’s throw away could reach there only after everything was over.
Senior police officers were out of reach as they were huddled together in meetings. All police vehicles had been brought out on the roads and paramilitary personnel had been summoned from nearby districts.
@ Palahalli.. One Queshne saar
Nimma Pointu :”Why is it so necessary to allow immigration of vastly diverse people and then impose you’re mores and norms on them? Why can they not disallow such immigration once for all and also let existing (inassimilable) immigrants leave, thereby saving themselves a lot of pain.”
Would the same argument apply to Saudi Arabia?
Or are your arguments applicable to Kaafirs only?
“Riyadh (AsiaNews/Agencies) Saudi religious police last Tuesday destroyed a clandestine makeshift Hindu temple in an old district of Riyadh and deported three worshippers found there, Arabic daily al-Hayat reported.
Agents from the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, better known as the Muttawah, stumbled across a room converted into a temple while raiding a number of flats suspected of being used to manufacture alcohol and distribute pornographic videos.
A caretaker who was found in the worshipping area ignored the religious police orders to stop performing his religious rituals and was deported along with two other men who arrived on the scene to worship. Their nationality was unknown
Saudi Arabia is host to 8.8 million foreigners, mostly workers, out of a population of 23 million. The largest communities are from Bangladesh, India and Pakistan (1 to 1.5 million).
All forms of non-Muslim worship are banned in the country and Wahhabism, one of the most fundamentalist forms of Islam, prevails.”
Yen anteera sameee???
Well said, couldn’t agree more!
Thought consistency is what the pseudos need and their perversion stops them from accepting that!
Why don’t these guys ask sikhs not to waer turbons, Muslim males not to wear topis! Also Gujarati women to not to wear their pally over the head and so on…
dambar dabba is a freedom of speech issue. actually forcing a woman to take off her hijab is outraging the modesty of woman. those guys ought to be behind bars.
those guys are morons. evil ones at that. granted. but the un-morons amongst us should preserve this angst and logic and ensure that convents that ban boys and girls from wearing kumkuma or vibhuti and girls from wearing a shock of native flowers, harvested caringly by local horitculturalists in their braids are also atleast given an earful.
i really dont see a difference between the two. one is opposed to daily kankambra in the jeDe. the other is opposed to roses on valentines day. same to same.
prashant says What is liberation from the viewpoint of Muslim girls?” Who are you to decide that? Why not allow Muslims to decide that? Why should a bunch of thugs acting in the name of Sri Rama decide that? Who are they to decide that?
No rama sena should not decide but then who are the mullahs to decide that.Many women wear burkhas because of pressure from the mullahs.
So Prashant cleverly says let muslims meaning the mullah authority dceide that.Pray mr secular prashant how are the mullahs different from ram sene.
MUllahs ban tv, and recently banned coed madrasas which as posters pointed out is worse than what ramsene did.It involves basic rights more basic than going to a pub.But then people like prashant go back into their holes when these thng shappen in true psecular style.
A statesman editor gets arrested or the mullahs ban tv or coed education
AND we have to scream hey prashant where are you hiding?But yeah let the muslims decide but not the individual girls.That is reserved for the tolerant hindus and the real reason is the political benefits of bashing ram sne by flasely linking it to parivar and bjp.
Narco Parikshe – The Saudis, obviously, are not fools.
And they allow “migrant workers” not “immigration”, mind you.
Similarly, France should take in only those immigrants, if it must, that will assimilate French culture. The rest, it should never allow in.
How should Hindus solve this problem? They have somewhat, already. With a neat policy of “street reciprocity”. Quite obviously, our Liberals have no hand in ensuring peace in India.
AnnodEn ide? Navu innu mutthalRAgodanna dibBeku.
I think I’d better make my position clearer.
Hindu students in Minority schools will have to abide by their (school) rules because Hindus, largely, are unable to establish their own schools for lack of funds from Govt. And wherever the case is reversed, Hindus will be justified in forcing Muslims etc to abide by Hindu norms.
The Govt. discriminates against the Hindu.
If some folks here take this to mean Hindus must continue to suffer this arrangement, then these people are text book cases of Dhimmis. The “Prashanth Bhats” of the world would fit this case well.
The ABVP is not the issue. If any commenter feels that minus ABVP, etc…there would not have been any issue, that’s plain idiocy. Organizations are not formed by aliens. They are peopled by common folks like us. ABVP in this place will have members only from the local community/students
“If ABVP is not stopped in this kind of behaviour, tomorrow they will be telling you and me whom to marry, how to speak in public and what to wear. ”
And in addition, they will also get wonderful excuses and opportunities to molest women who trangress the moral code they choose to create.
if I’m not mistaken, these ‘convents’ are minority educational institutions or semi-religious schools, that have been granted the right to mix religion with education (however ridiculous that may be). So they are within their rights to enforce anti-kumukuma/vibhuti stance. AFAIK they are not forcing girls to go celibate and become nuns :)
dambar dabba.. he he. Nice coinage..
Narayana is correct.
ABVP should be condemned. That said..
A muslim woman wearing Burkha is making a statement against all the menfolk (both to Muslims and Kaffirs) that every male is a potential rapist out to seduce and ravage their bodies. This was the world view of 7th century arabia which provides them the reasoning to cover themselves from head to foot. This world view also believes that men get aroused at the sight of women’s not so private parts like the face, neck, legs, hands etc. And this arousal might trigger in them sexual passion and result in subsequent actions like abduction, rape or even consensual sex with men who are not their husbands. The enforcing of the Burqa is part of a huge cultural propoganda which gives the illusion for the women who follow it that they are protected and should limit their sexual interaction with their spouse.
Per our most accepted liberal modern day values and humanist ethics any one can do anything as long as it does not impinge on anothers freedom and wellbeing. Based on this women can viel themselves or wear chastity belts if that is what they want to do. But here again there has been no moral civil soceity who can provide such individual freedom. Public Nudity which can be a personal choice is banned in most countries. In the west naturists are restricted to only some select beaches and resorts. Prostitution is banned in almost all countries and sex is regulated by the government.
All we can think of now is a standard cultural zeigeist or the spirit of the age. Unfortunately Muslim women among many others are quite out of touch with this Zeitgeist.
I went to a convent and saw the rules that people above write of being implemented. But not once in my thought provocative years have I viewed it from the angle of suppression of ones right to relegion and associated right of display of relegious symbols. The times have changed so much.
It’s nerve wrecking, isn’t it? And the language used by “Narco Parikshe”, shall I say deplorable?
Anyway, as all other debates, this doesn’t seem to reach any logical conclusion. My opinion was always that wearing uniform itself was a form of suppression, because it tried to inculcate the false sense of equality which never existed between humans. As far as ABVP’s actions, it would be a wasteful indulgence to try and teach a old dog new tricks.
How about Pink Burkhas?
Im amused that you can make a statement like
“I say it’s no business of any non-Muslim org nor even the State (under any Govt) to decide what the Muslima must do or wear. In fact, give them Shari’a. All of it.”
The ‘civil society’s’ opposition to shariat is not that is Islamic but that it is barbaric.A law that espouses public beheadings and severing of limbs, extreme punishment for drinking, execution of homosexuals, a law system where a man’s word is worth thrice more than a woman’s, is not a law system but mental illness. And never should this come into practice in the guise of multiculturalism, though it means “imposing on its citizens its unique and forced “notions” of equality and fraternity”.
>>Moreover, orthodox Jews are not supposed to look at each other when having sex, I was told! >>
Is this really possible OR are they using a new technique ;)
@ Vinay and Alok – You seem to have good intentions at heart, but the secular media that you so love has claimed you as a victim. In a separate thread, Vinay commented “side note: But also remember, several muslim women wear burkha because they believe that they are duty bound to, as much as their menfolk do. They want to be that way. In fact, I say that most muslim women themselves would not want to step out without a burqa. Visit any muslim internet forum and see for yourself”.
Is there any evidence (i) to show that muslim women (and more so the uneducated, not having a choice not to wear burqa types) speak without fear on such subjects ; (ii) or to show that muslim women actually have ever been given a choice to wear or not to wear; or (iii) whether they have ever even been provided enough opportunities to develop their faculty to make such decisions. Let us not be prejudiced and biased. But let us not be fools either!!
he he… As if the homosexual community is not persecuted enough, you want to impose burkhas also? :)
BTW Do they have any color specifications ?
I can agree with Prashant Krishnamurthy on one limited point – that reform cannot be imposed by outsiders. It has to come from within a community. However, Muslim society is permanently wedded to the Koran and the Sunnah which are fourteen hundred years old. Every word is Gods own, and is firmly held to be immutable. Liberals in that community are a scared lot. Perhaps, occasional external stimulus might be necessary, though it is not always safe.
I vehemently disagree with the view “who are we to decide what is normal”? If this attitude had prevailed during 19th and 20th century, untouchability would have continued to remained a holy practice in 21st century also. One cannot keep watching a wretched practice, merely because others follow it. We do not know, whether willingly or unwillingly. I would say that it is normal for any young girl of any religious denomination to dress up in a manner that flatters her. Surely no young girl would like to hide her talent under a bushel!
Vinay’s first comment would be the most welcome suggestion. Implementation of Uniform Civil Code. That would be a truly secular step and obviate the need for moral police and assorted senas. But, unfortunately, except the “communal” BJP none of the politicos even dare speak of UCC, except to condemn any proposal to introduce it.
rama sene, ABVP, all those mullahas and padris who propagate hate in the name of religion are all wrong, they need to be stopped. period. no questions about that. There is no place for people like them in a multi cultural, liberal society.
Bommanna: Anyone in India would have to agree that convents have done a lot in the education sector and have contributed. but that does not mean they can do anything they want.
School uniform is not fine. I’m not really an authority on how aided and unaided schools work. however, what I know is even if you are minority institution, you can be aided by the governement and the government is run by the people’s money.
If there is a minority school and admits students from only one religion/background no problems to anyone, everyone is fine with the rules and crap.The moment you admit people from different background and also you are aided by the government, it becomes schools responsibility that it allows and caters for people from all the background.
I might be wrong in how aided and un aided schools work. just my thoughts.
oh by the way, I dont wear cheddi at home, any color cheddi you provide is a luxury for me. you are more than welcome to provide me one, please go ahead and get me a cheddi. by the way it’s size 90cms.
People here ask why is france (or europe) allowing immigration? I think they know the answer as well because they cant survive without “migrant labour” given that their own population is not growing and they are too good to keep them as “migrant labour” and give them citizenship and they are too good once again to force them to adopt the local ways and give clarion calls for “multiculturalism” – which will increasingly haunt them in the days to come.
Interesting site to check out below – even if partially true, indeed dark days for europe.
bamboo – “The ‘civil society’s’ opposition to shariat is not that is Islamic but that it is barbaric.”
– Well, Muslim society doesn’t think so. They don’t think it barbaric at all. I have also not seen any “survey” or “poll” that tells us what they think of Shar’ia.
No, wait. We haven’t given them a chance to voice their “opinion”. Why don’t we have Shar’ia for Muslims and then let them decide if they want to continue with the amputations and the stoning?
Why are Hindus taking ownership of something purely Islamic, pertaining to Muslims? I don’t understand this. This will only invite stupid charges of “fascism” and assorted crap from assorted dealers in crap.
I’m hoping you got my point.
kannadiga, Not technique, just setting. Do it with the lights off and try looking at your partner’s face.
Why lament about dispensing with Burkha? It is a ugly and unflattering garment for women. There is a poem by Prof.Nissar Ahmed about his evening walk with his wife. After neatly dressing up, she came out and joined her husband for evening walk fully clad in Burkha!
Black Burkha absorbs more heat and makes the wearer uncomfortable. Probably, cladding one’s self from head to toe was necessary in Saudi Arabia, which has dry whether and results in rapid water loss from the body. Hence, protection from sun and against water loss was very important. Does Indian humid weather justify such dress, except perhaps in Thar desert and Rann of Gujarat?
In these days of terrorist threats, a burkha makes a perfect cover for a young Jihadi. Difficult to make out whether it is a slim man or a woman.
You are at it again. How could you bring up my name even before I had posted on this issue?
And heavens help you for being such a lowly individual as to take personal digs at someone.
Gururaj – There are many things, wretched, in Muslim society. Non-Muslims cannot be expected to take responsibility for their wretchedness anymore.
I think you’re analogy with Untouchability is very wrong. There was Hindu reform by Hindus. Even here, Hindu society, largely, was never opposed to “outsider” suggestions/ideas. This is simply not the case with Muslims.
For Hindus or even the Liberal State to do something about this would mean like the US going into Iraq on a “Democracy building” mission.
And Sir, a Liberal State is a Liberal State anywhere and will always succumb to the Multi-Cultural shebang. The fact that India has not implemented the UCC is not unique…European countries are slowly following India’s long lead..and this is very extremely important. They are succumbing to pressures to implement Personal Law AS THEIR SOCIETY GROWS DIVERSE.
My opposition to the UCC stems from a Non-Liberal argument. I want Personal Laws because they are the best indicators of the health of any society. They flow naturally. If a Personal Law is degrading to society, that society/community will give birth to forces of reform or die.
Yella OK – Yes. Europe will pay for neglecting its native White population. This again, is a spinoff of rampant Liberalism that focuses on individualism to the detriment of society and nation.
But the solution may not be large scale importation of people who will simply not assimilate but will remain different in addition to nurturing hatred for native ways of life. But Liberalism seems to have a “solution” for this too. Simply succumb.
Prashanth Bhat – I guess I owe you an apology.
1. It looks as if I picked you’re name at random because “Churumuri” combined by posts (old and new)
2. I used you’re name in “quotes” in indication of a thought process wrt to what you had said. A “model”, if you please. But still, I could have kept it impersonal. Sorry about that.
The point is that the most educated Muslims dont have the intent or the willpower to make up their mind that some things have to change with the times..They dare not speak against the mullahs fearing a backlash from the community members..It seems,the saffron brigade have decided to give them a brushup on this, though slightly crude it may seem.
Shame on the people who are bent on other males feel they are potential rapists, as one ‘Trayambakam Shastri’ pointed out here..In the end it comes to one thing, Does someone really care about Muslim women and their rights under Indian constitution? Let this issue not get diverted into the usual communal lines…plzz !
Its been an absorbing debate on the cloth culture of the muslim ladies.
But being from the muslim community, I feel Hijab is a blessing for the lady.
Hijab means wearing a scarf and covering your arms. Basically you are allowed only to expose your face and hands. But few orthodox people cover their faces too by a veil. I have seen in Maharashtra (Pune especially) , non-muslim ladies wear scarves and cover their arms. This is more for protection from the sun.
My point here is if the lady willing sports the Hijab, there should not be an issue here at all. I assure all here the average muslim lady is far clever then we perceive her to be.
But I accept the Mullahs have a say over the people in the lower starata of the muslim society.
And the only way to help the muslim lady is to help her join the mainstream. And by that i mean to educate her and give her job opportunities. And this reflects to the whole muslim community. They are getting more and more isolated.
The only way we can emulate Turkey, is not by banning a way of living, but showing an alternative. Bcoz if you enforce a law then it will only help political parties and make muslims a vote bank. The only serious way of
really helping the muslim community is by allowing them to enter the mainstream and allowing them enough opportunities in the education and employment sector.
I wont send you anything you beggar :) Buy your own clothes. Only don’t around trying to enforce on others what to wear and not to wear.
School authorities have published their rules beforehand according to the laws of the land. If they say no hijab, then no hijab, if they say no flowers in hair then same, if they say no short skirts then same again… You get my drift.
If you dont like it, go to another school.
Railing against convents and defending RSS type khakhi cheddi schools does not make sense. Ostracism which has nothing to do with the school belongs to this category. Defending mallige hoova but opposing hijab etc.
If you are against school uniforms of any kind, that is another thing, then you are probably in full favour of girls coming dressed as if this were Saudi Arabia. Nothing to say to you then :)
Dear King Khan
No doubt, education is the best way to show the way out of medievalism. Job opportunity is the best way to confer economic independence and exposure to the world out there. But, then how many would be confortable dealing with a burkha clad receptionist, or a bank teller, or a marketing executive? At least to fit into the modern world some amount of willingness to change has to be cultivated. For starters, it should begin with dress. At least this does not require any change is the basic outlook of a Muslim.
I am in full agreement with first two points you have made. I too have already said that no reform can be imposed by outsiders. But, then as you have rightly noted, Hindu society received stimulus from outside world, especially European influence and geared up to change itself. The reform started from within to adopt to the new social morals that were facing the Hindu society. Unfortunately, in the case of muslim society, though there are very strong stimulus for it to change, the change is moving backwards in time, to the seventh entury Saudi Arabia, to be explicit.
People who speak of retaining their identity in terms of language, dress, social mores, religion, especially the minorities, do not realise that that will keep them from belnding with the society at large, and sharing the advantages of modern laws which are more equitable. This is the price to be paid for espousing identitarianism.
Your observation about European compromise about personal law is quite right. Europe is gradually becoming Eurobia, and the whites are facing the possibility of Dhimmitude. The cause of this problem is same – Muslim community in Europe too is of the right size to influence political decisions. Europe was truly secular, in that it disregarded all religions. Now, it is also adopting Indian version of secularism, which is same as minority communalism.
KH, constitution is designed for a different purpose. social contracts are different. i bet according to constitution whom i rent out my property to is my choice. and yet it is abhorrent when muslims shabhana azmi cant rent a house. in india only minority institutions can set up their own institutions. in india modern progressive education has been linked to english education. which somehow the church has assumed that it is the true inheritor of.
King Khan. you have pointed out an important issue. too much outside needling will only make muslims go into a shell. that is only natural.
but the issue is not just that of outside needling. the issue is mullahs have ensured that even non-muslims have to stick to strict islamic code. it is impossible for anybody in india to study muhammad or the islam and the hadiths as an academic subject even, unless you reduce your study to hagiography.
but that is still ok. what is worse is even non-muslims are being subject to the ‘islamic’ code. see the latest non-sense about india being declared dar-ul-harab or dar-ul-islam for example. can you believe that idiocy? why are we even seeking islamic sanction for a concept that is entirely secular? why the fuk should it even matter? and guess who gets to decide on these issues? mullahs!! people who in ordinary life have not had even one original thought or have produced anything of any value to any community. these people get to decide the fate of other indians of islamic faith. bhesh!! the only thing worse than this is when high and mighty muslims like zakaria were seen last week peddling the idea that the world should learn to live with radical-islam of taliban. i dont know if it is the jaatre or if it is the jana themselves anymore. this thing is way wilder than mardi-gras.
back to your suggestion. What exactly is preventing muslim community from getting secular education and entering the main stream? is the country’s education policy discriminatory for muslims? muslims are not the only ones facing the economic or social pinch.
Gururaj B N
“-I vehemently disagree with the view “who are we to decide what is normal”? If this attitude had prevailed during 19th and 20th century, untouchability would have continued to remained a holy practice in 21st century also. One cannot keep watching a wretched practice, merely because others follow it”.
If we go by what you say above, then I would be very muchbe inclined to protest against idol worship, cow worship, snake worship, linga worship. Because not only is it illogical but also it is totally foolish to continue such acts of ignorance in the 21st century.
I hope I didnt offend you. Likewise my dear friend you acnnot determine whats right or wrong. A half empty glass might look a half full glass to me. So also the fact that Burqa is very much required in our society. We dont want our ladies to prance about naked and call themselves forward.
Gururaj – “Hindu society received stimulus from outside world, especially European influence and geared up to change itself.”
– Yes and more accurately, Hindus were ready to receive such ideas/suggestions for reform. The Muslims are not. Its a very basic difference we must respect.
I think burqa is a essential for a muslim women as long as the muslim men consider that the honor of a muslim man lies between the legs of the muslim women. A truly bedouin thinking fit for shoddy arabia.
A couple of Hindu Indians seem to agree with your views a lot:
Mr. Muthalik a woman beater:
Shobha Karandlaje, a keep to a politician, now a politician herself:
The second one is quite ironic, a keep advising girls about how to behave ‘non-provocatively’.
Soon Muthalik and co. will want to ban movies and other forms of entertainment which are ‘anti-hindu’.
Dont worry then you wouldnt have to point out to others hypocrisies, you can talk to them as equals.
Please read this article on The Hoot.
The Mullahs or the Bukharis do not determine or enjoy the support of the whole community, unlike the Mutts in the Hindu structure. This is visible by the political hobnobbing visible in Mutts and unlike in Madrasas or masjids
prior to elections.
Hence it is very easy to makeout the Muslim community is very fragmented and lacks leadership.
In view of the above scenario it is but natural that the average muslim leans back to his relegion for moral support. And wrong intrepretation
of the Holy Quran is subjecting the average muslim to lead a very orthodox lifestyle.
But if we could provide the muslims with a viable option, like an option for school teachings in Madrasas alongwith their curriculum, then the ward after completion of his course will have an option to enter the mainstream and once he comes in the mainstream his circle of understanding expands, and he will be able to reflect positively in the society he dwells.
I hope this makes some scence. Do add your viewpoint to this.
Dear Syed Rasheed,
The comments on this topic have generally focused on how a relatively trivial and external observation has gained undue importance. It is not about core beliefs of the religion. Burkha is not one of the five (six?) pillars of Islam.
About your observations on idol worship or polytheism of Hinduism, I suggest that you do not trade on toes. Take your proslytisation to the Land of the Pure.
Dear Gururaj B.N.
Your point taken in the right spirit. Also reciprocating your viewpoint, do not get too close for comfort. Let us maintain our
individuality. After all diversity of our culture is the unique positivity of our nation. If you look at each of our states, you will find diverse dress code, food culture, language, caste,etc.
Hence we should all be careful in treading each others toe’s.
Thank you for your gracious reply. Men and opinions are never equal and alike. Abhorring violence of the mind and body inspite of the differences is the need of the hour. Let’s not be unwillingly party to blind rhetoric.
@ Syed Rasheed:
Your statement “We dont want our ladies to prance about naked and call themselves forward.” did not convey anything. Could you please explain what you menat by this rhetoric.
@ Gururaj B.N.
I think the primary problem lies in the closed nature of Islam as a religion. Today, it’s possible to have an open debate in any corner of the city over the Bhagavadgeetha without inciting any anger or mob fury. But it would not be possible to do the same with Koran. We see innumerable kannada movies where Hindus, especially Brahmins are shown in very bad light and mythological characters are used for cheap humor and there never is an outcry against any of this. Whereas any satire on Muhammad or his followers will only be dealt by his followers with the sword. I have always wondered why a muslim woman has never been the face of a family planning advertisement by the central government?
Mr. Rasheed, the problem with burkha is not that we do not get to see the anatomy of your women, but the fact that such a thing is imposed upon them before their minds are open enough to choose for themselves. I do agree that we all have different cultural up bringing and that our customs are all varied, but we have managed to bridge the divide between the demands of contemporary society and our traditions with a rational choice of outlook towards life. Why is it that educated muslims still continue to wear awkward looking pants above the ankle level to office? I do not go to office in my dhothi and shalya because that was the prescribed attire years ago. Why is that these same people in the office run for their daily 5 times prayers overlooking the demands of their profession? I do not perform sandhyanvandhana at office, though trikaala sandhyavandhane is prescribed. Why is it that muslim women in offices refrain from talking to their male colleagues? Are we all potential rapists? I have absolutely no anger against the practices of your relegion even though it is the only relegion which proclaims itself to be the only way to God. I cannot be responsible for the ignorances of one community but if the practices are creating such a divide, why still continue to hold on to it?
An objective look into the issue will perhaps enlighten you that, you have the right to your practices but not at the cost of somebodys life. It’s not that every muslim girl who grows up looks up to the burkha and longs to own one. I am certain that she does not long for it as if it were a new pair of cloth to be gifted on her birthday and she is only desperate to show it off to her friends. I had 7 muslim girls who were my classmates and all of them were married at the age of 18 to 20 and all of them are mothers of 3 or more children. Is this abject co incidence or the result of years of cultural practice which refuses to die down owing to the stubborness of its followers. I do not profess to belong to a dharma of infinite purity nor do I make claims to pure practices, but we have managed to bring inequality amongst genders in our family to a minimum. And that has helped.
Belief in a power supreme can be attributed to our weakness or our reverence. Reverence is out of belief in ones own ability to do strike a chord with nature and such a belief in supreme power needs no guidelines. Weakness necessitates control. It desires support in quasi guidelines which are mostly anachronistic.
The choice is never hard to make; if only one decides to.
Dear Syed Rasheed,
“Let us maintain our
individuality. After all diversity of our culture is the unique positivity of our nation. If you look at each of our states, you will find diverse dress code, food culture, language, caste,etc.”
Maintaining separate identity as stated by you is another name for separatism. That gave us the Land of the Pure once. Linguistic separatism almost threatened to take away Tamil Nadu from India about four decades back. If some people want to be distinct from the rest of the society in all respects, at least occasionally, they must be prepared to invite raised eye brows or unkind comments like “Dambar dabbi”.
Having made a choice consciously, one has to live with unkind comments and smirks. In any case, India is a democratic country where freedom of speech is a highly valued right. One may rebut others comments. That is all.
as usual, i’ve enjoyed your posts.
you write, “it is impossible for anybody in india to study muhammad or the islam and the hadiths as an academic subject even, unless you reduce your study to hagiography.”
i couldn’t agree with you more, but why should a hagiography be undesirable? i am aware of the pejorative implication of the term, but hey, hagiography isn’t as useless as a method as it may seem as a subject. for example in india, the bhakti movement is really a chronicle of the saints, whether kabir or meera. in the west, cultural studies often are predicated on biographies, whether of mcluhan, marx, or milton — or even barthes. it is easy to use an ideology as a method — as seems to be the wont of many scholars — if the focus is on the individual.
just a thought. :)
Gururaj B N
“Maintaining separate identity as stated by you is another name for separatism”
There could not be a more fascist comment then the above which you have made.
If you even understand one bit of India’s demography, you would not have commented like this.
I request all others to oppose such bloggers
“There could not be a more fascist comment then the above which you have made.”
– Gururaj is clearly talking about an Islamic identity being nurtured in India. There is no argument that it is seperatist. Its a historical fact.
But I can understand that stating facts is also Fascist :)
Gururaj B N:
Maintaining separate identities and distinct cultures is not necessarily separatism. You are not new to this blog, and you should be aware of the discussions regarding the importance of maintaining Kannadiga identity and culture. There are people who would brand any Kannadiga, Tamilian, Marathi, etc. as anti-national for not knowing Hindi and not conforming to the monolithic ‘Indian identity’ as they define it. Retaining one’s culture and unique identity does not make one separatist or anti-national.
And you, Syed Rasheed:
Why is it that you failed to respond to all other points raised by Prashant Bhat and Gururaj? You have conveniently picked on one point made by him.
“Why is that these same people in the office run for their daily 5 times prayers overlooking the demands of their profession?”
“We see innumerable kannada movies where Hindus, especially Brahmins are shown in very bad light and mythological characters are used for cheap humor and there never is an outcry against any of this. Whereas any satire on Muhammad or his followers will only be dealt by his followers with the sword.”
“We dont want our ladies to prance about naked and call themselves forward.” did not convey anything. Could you please explain what you menat by this rhetoric.”
Is religion more important to you than anything else in life? Why do we see protests and rejoinders from Muslim bloggers only when the religion of islam is discussed?
Though I advocate that everyone has a right to preserve their own cultures, brutality cannot be condoned in the name of ‘culture protection’ or ‘religion protection’. Why do most Muslims want Sharia law?
-“Why is that these same people in the office run for their daily 5 times prayers overlooking the demands of their profession?”
I dont think practicing ones relegion is a crime.People in offices should ensure that their praying to Allah does not hinder others.The first and the last 2 of the prayers do not disturb any office timings. The afternoon prayer can be easily performed while in lunch hour. And the evening prayer can be performed between 5 and 6 asper the lunar calendar.
Essentially this is a very private affair,and as muslims we should be very careful of not affecting others. And performing namaaz does not take more than 5-10minutes.
-“We see innumerable kannada movies where Hindus, especially Brahmins are shown in very bad light and mythological characters are used for cheap humor and there never is an outcry against any of this. Whereas any satire on Muhammad or his followers will only be dealt by his followers with the sword.”
As Muslims we beleive that the Almighty has sent many prophets b4 Prophet Muhammed(peace be upon him). But the followers of those prophets have diluted the original teachings, due to the urge to be compatible with the changing times or for selfish reasons of the relegious pontiffs. Hence as muslims we even object to the sketches of Prophet Muhammed(PBUH) as we fear this may later on lead to idol worship.
-“We dont want our ladies to prance about naked and call themselves forward.” did not convey anything. Could you please explain what you menat by this rhetoric.”
BY calling themselves progressive, we see what the US and UK have done to their societies. Ladies in Muslim society have a very important role to perform as homemaker and bringing up the children. But we also encourage our ladies to be teachers,doctors and nurses. But the only criteria is to observe hijab at work(Hijab not Burqa).
I hope i have made things clear.
It is less than sensible, as some commenters here are doing, to allow for Muslim assertion of identity but expect it to fall within parameters defined by non-Muslims.
On the other hand, it is fool-hardy to equate the Muslim’s assertion of his identity with Hindus asserting their respective identities. This is wrong at the very root.
Hindus, no matter how different, have learnt to live with their differences. No one wishes to impose himself on fellow Hindus, nor do they have any notion of hell for dissenters. All their squabbles over language and borders and the rest, are still within the realm of resolution. This is not the case with the Muslim quest. There can be no resolution short of acceptance of Islam. We need not feel bashful in accepting this truth.
Syed Rasheed has a straightforward approach. “You mind you’re business and we’ll mind ours”.
Ambedkar, while discussing partition, had just this logic in mind when he said Muslims should be allowed a land of their own. Being the practical man he was, he also proposed strongly, exchange of population.
We cannot have Ambedkar’s solution today, but let’s look to Syed Rasheed’s proposal of mutual respect/distance at face value.
Even he knows what might occur when this pact is breached.
I would also like to remind Syed Rasheed that the path chosen has its consequences; good or bad.
When Muslims knock on the State’s doors for all kinds of favor because and as a consequence of their choice, they have not been able to thrive in society, then that is also a breach of the pact he proposes.
“People in offices should ensure that their praying to Allah does not hinder others”
As long as we agree on this, fine. Many don’t see it this way.
Whatever the reasons for objections to sketches, settling all arguments with the sword (and condoning the same) is not acceptable.
If US and UK were soooo bad as several people claim, we wouldn’t have people rushing there in droves. Immigration is always from Pakistan, Saudi, Sudan, etc. TO UK/US, Finland, etc. Never the other way around, all the talk of ‘moral corruption’ notwithstanding.
“It is less than sensible, as some commenters here are doing, to allow for Muslim assertion of identity but expect it to fall within parameters defined by non-Muslims.”
And this, is YOUR view. Because you consider yourself a ‘Hindu’ first. That is your principal identity as YOU see it. There are people who consider themselves principally Tamilian – that is their identity. Then there are some who consider themselves Brahmins. And there are some who consider themselves ‘Dravidians’ first.
What you are advocating is essentially a complete ghettoisation and segregation. And this, by definition, has to be in all spheres of life. As impractical as ‘having Ambedkar’s solution today’.
And while you accepted, in another thread, that there will be ‘negative effects and off-shoot’ arising out of your proposal, you said at the same time that this is the ‘price we have to pay for neglecting our society’.
Wah Re Wah! It’s always easy to talk bout’ collateral damage. But it ain’t much fun when you end up being the collateral damage yourself.
“BY calling themselves progressive, we see what the US and UK have done to their societies.”
So, there it is ….. its US right!!!
madrasa + math
no sir. madrasas were created for a specific person. and the govt has already provided all the support needed to allow them to exist. beyond that is not govts agenda. unless govt has a say in what goes in the madrasa – for example appoint teachers and decide on syllabus.
the govt should focus all its attention on strengthening the schools it has setup to instill modern, existential and perhaps mind expanding education to people of all communities.
these schools are open to all. whether to send their kids to these or not is a choice that must be made by individual families. choice is between a religious and a modern school. every other community in india makes this choice. muslims must too.
in any case, the decision of whether to teach math or not lies with madrasa and not govt. the govt already allows exclusive privileges for minority communities to set up schools. entrepreneurs from various communities have already availed of these facilities to set up modern schools and colleges. students of these schools then take a common public exam on common subjects.
if govt must help madrasas, then there must be common exams on islamic subjects, with the question paper set by govt appointed islamic scholars from universities, many of whom may not be muslims themselves, not just madrasa members.
“Ladies in Muslim society have a very important role to perform as homemaker and bringing up the children. But we also encourage our ladies to be teachers,doctors and nurses. But the only criteria is to observe hijab at work(Hijab not Burqa). ”
” ….. diluted the original teachings, due to the urge to be compatible with the changing times …… ”
Comments that highight the fear of the “us” regarding “others”. Why not encourage ladies to be musicians, actresses, software developers. There is a saying in kannada – educate “a woman and you educate a family”. This something that the consrvative “others” do not want to listen to – lest they start taking lessons for the male members of the society.
These comments are a slap on the face of all who proclaimed that women wear veils “out of choice” – yes they had a choice to choose one option out of one available.
People on this blog must view a movie called “Khuda Ke Liye” – a Pakistani movie, the kind of which our bollywood, kollywood, tollywood or sandalwood hasnt produced. It focuses on only one aspect primarily – music and religion and to some extent on women and religion. It is a movie that our secular liberals must watch. Wonder where these secular liberals among others are. The film deserves multiple sequels to highlight other aspects of the religion.
You are persuasive! I have enjoyed your posts. But I don’t understand why you oppose “dilut[ing] the original teachings, due to the urge to be compatible with the changing times.”
Christianity saw the Reformation, Hindu dharma underwent many similar introspective churnings (led by the Bhakti saints, by Sankara, by Vivekananda, etc.). Why is it undesirable for Islam to be similarly reformed to better meet the needs of current followers? I am baffled why the puritans control your religion so much — orthodoxy, after all, is a close cousin of intolerance/disrespect.
Why do the Wahabbis oppose reform? Why are progressive traditions such as the Sufis, Bohras, etc. scoffed at by the “entitled” Muslim puritans?
There is very little spiritual content in the koran and hadith. Most of it deals with instructions (?) daily activities like how to take a bath, brush your teeth, shave your arm pit , cut your finger nails etc. And it needed a last messenger from God to impart this common sense knowledge to the arabs is in itself a miracle. Read Sitaram Goels “Understanding Islam through Hadis” for more details. So what do you want to delete from the Koran the taking bath part OR cutting finger nails part…be specific ;)
I forgot to add, more than 70% of koran is plagiarised content of the bible and torah
Vinay, you speak of “Dravidians” and “Tamilians” etc etc…and yet you see divisions amongst them. Not even an opportunist like Karuna will speak the language of secession now. Jayalalitha is known for her nationalist stances.
Even so, these differences are resolvable. And once the Lankans are finished with the LTTE, you will notice plenty of careers in TN ending :)
The point you’re missing is this. Muslims are against you’re attempts and arguments to reform them. You’re say-so does not help but irritates them further. Please stop it.
“Ghettoisation and segregation” is a fact of life today with the Muslims. But unlike our “first claim to resources” wallahs, I hold the Muslim responsible because his economic condition is a product of his choice.
Once the shoe starts to pinch, the wearer will know to remove it. He won’t need you’re “reformist” arguments to convince him.
This approach is more practical & fair and less painful.
Yes, even “collateral damage” will be avoided.
Dont chase away Syed the Muslim by your endless rhetorical questions.
Swalpa thalme irali.
@ Syed Rasheed:
There can be no argument on what you have stated because basically what you speak is the essence of Korans indoctrination. I have made attempts at reading the Koran in the past 7 years (English version) and have realised that it does not recognise the rationality of a human being to be of much consequence. It always seems to provide a solution to all the problems or questions that arise in any gamut of our civilizational process.
In numerous web pages I read about questions asked where logic is taken to an entirely different level. I give you an example.
“Q: I wear nail polish. Is it allowed in Islam?
A: The Koran suggests that, before the prayers one must make sure that the water used for ablution touches all skin in the forearms. Since nail polish is a hindrance to it, it will be against Islam to use it”
I do not know what you make of it, but I see in it a rigid mentality which is very disturbing at times. When we live in a plural society, there is a necessity to adhere to some fundamental axioms of rationality in behaviour. The quest for a separate identity results in insecurity and aggression on the part of others. Though the violence cannot be justified, mob mentality is something which is beyond reason.
On an objective discussion on the values of Islam, I understand that the scripture preaches that everyone is born a muslim and that it’s only their society that makes them muslims or otherwise. And that anybody who does not adhere to the teachings of Islam, is bound to hell fire. Can you please elaborate on such an aggressive partisan stand taken towards your way to God? I had the good fortune of sharing accomodation with a muslim for 10 months in the fundamental hindu town of Pune. In discussion with him on Islam, I realised that there was never a chance for thought in the relegion. For example;
“Q: What or where is heaven?
A: That which you have not heard of or seen of is heaven”
It essentially is a clkosed chapter. If life on earth were to be possible by the complete advent of irrationality, why eat, drink and survive? When you have such strong notions about non believers, why benefit from the science, medicine and technology created by non believers. Today, you want to exress your opinion in a forum created by a non believer but on facing him he would be nothing more than a non believer.
Why isn’t family planning advocated in Islam? My muslim friends say that they are in a position to take care of them and that I shouldn’t be bothered about it. But I pay taxes for the streets and public services which will be crowded by your disrespect for society and its betterment. Can you brign up your childeren in the confines of your home and madrasa alone?
There are so many unanswered questions Mr. Rasheed. We all can take refuge in the irrationality of our respective relegions for all the heinous crimes we commit towards humanity. But I am most certain, if God does exist and if he was responsible for all that is good in this world, than an irrational Islam has no place in the books of God.
True Muslims encourage one and all within their community to read the Holy Quran(as umpteen number of translations in all languages are available). But certain people within the community oppose this for their selfish reasons(relate this with the purohit in the hindu community).
Hence my personal suggestion to the muslim cleric or the madrasa hod,is to teach the ward to learn some skills which will help him eke out a living, and not depend on the renumeration fromthe mosque or madrasas. If this can be somehow achieved, I guarantee you the muslim community will be a much more vibrant and tolerant lot.
Kindly correct me from where you see it.
-Why do the Wahabbis oppose reform? Why are progressive traditions such as the Sufis, Bohras, etc. scoffed at by the “entitled” Muslim puritans?
Islam strictly opposes all form of idol worship and advocates the basic fact that “There is only one Creator of this huge Universe, and Muhammad(pbuh) is the messenger of the Creator”. If this basic tenent of Islam is compromised, this isnot tolerated.
Usually we see in movies or in the back of our mind, that muslims are depicted as praying in front of graves. This is strictly prohibited in Islam. We beleive that, visit graves,but not to ask from them but to ask from the Almighty for forgiveness for the departed souls.
Yella NOT OK! I always wonder who this ‘secular liberal’ creature is, that I keep hearing about. This practice of mixing up different words and bundling them together has been made into a fine art by some people.
There are people on this blog who are ‘liberal’ in their outlook to life, e.g. do not mind females going to a PUB and having a drink (as opposed to textbook conservatives) but support the Hindutva agenda. Then there are people who would like to country to be ‘non-violent and gandhian and secular’ but who hate the liberals for ‘spoiling Indian culture’.
These buzzwords ‘psuedo’, ‘liberal’, ‘secular’ are gettin’ on my nerves. These are just ways to brand anyone who does not agree with your views.
Coming to the non-liberal-non-secular folks (see, I desist from calling them fascists), can anyone see how many contradictions there are among these guys? There are some on this blog who want Uniform Civil Code, like I do. There are some who want Sharia to be implemented for Muslims, ASAP. There are some who want everyone other than Hindus to reconvert or leave. There is absolutely no stand among the non-secular-non-liberal folks around here, barring a propensity to start that standard name-calling the moment anyone says a word that thay don’t agree with, or the moment anything is uttered against the BJP.
Yella OK, I request you to do a little Google searching for the opinion polls and surveys conducted by the UN and other Human Rights organizations in Iraq and Afghanistan about the opinions of Muslim women about the Burkha, and even about Sharia. Slap on the face ante – swalpa hogi nodi, what the ‘conservative’ Iraqi and Afghani woman wants and feels.
Again, completely missing the point, so bent are you on your agenda of imposing Sharia on Indian muslims.
“Vinay, you speak of “Dravidians” and “Tamilians” etc etc…and yet you see divisions amongst them.”
Don’t twist my statements. What I meant was, that there are several Hindus in the country who do not identify with a Hindu cause and Hindu identity as much as they do with other identities. The examples I quoted were just examples. No need to start talking about ‘division’, ’secession’, etc.
“The point you’re missing is this. Muslims are against you’re attempts and arguments to reform them. You’re say-so does not help but irritates them further.”
Tarlesubba avare, nodi, ivaaga yaar ree ‘escapist’? Implement Sharia for Indian Muslims because the state trying to ‘interfere’ will irritate them?
I have seen enough of all the arguments here and so I have decided to propose a solution derived expressly from the tradition of the sane and the just Indian kings of the yore. With Burkha I see a non-religious garment which when deployed judiciously has the calming effect on society. IMHO both men and women can revel in this garment. Let me explain…We should encourage or even go so far as to put vile men like Muthalik in a ‘Hindu’ Burkha–may be a pink one. That way that man is out of sight and comfortably alone with his mind. Coming to women who see themselves ugly and don’t want to inflict their ‘real’ or ‘imaginary’ ugliness, they should be encouraged to don or undo the Burkha as they wish! They may choose to do so every monday or alternate Wednesdays or I don’t know Sundays. Well it is up to them. Lovely comely women after tiring of unending gaze from Secular and Fundu X-Ray eyes may take refuge in Burkha. Yes I have it–we should make Burkha so much acceptable as a counter to rational thought pretty soon people will start taking to it with great enthusiasm. Some one like Dirty will say look I was a PM of the country and I ruled for 10 months wearing a burkha–meaning untouched by external thoughts or influences. We could even have proles saying, “Saar he is not available; he has donned the burkha (become incommunicado)…”
We should collect a wishlist of persons you would like or love to see in a burkha. Here is my wishlist: President Prathiba Patil; Shabana Azmi; Dirty; HDK; Yeddi; Shobha Dental; Thiruka; Muthalik; Tendulkar;m MMS; PC; Kapil Sibal; Arun Shourie; …you get the picture? Just look at the possibilities! Jagada kaiku?
Vinay – No matter what one professes to label oneself, basic impulses delineate a trend. That is how one is a Liberal or Conservative etc etc.
I would characterize you’re stance as Liberal.
Not only do you want to impose you’re Multi-Culturalism on unwilling Muslims, you also want the State to help you in you’re task.
As a result, you cause two unnecessary problems.
1. Muslims take this to be Hindu imposition – False because you don’t speak as a “Hindu”, you speak as a Secular/Liberal. (Here, the fact that the ABVP is pushing this agenda makes them less Hindu and more Secular and Liberal! I hope you understand this.)
2. Muslims go against the State because they see the State as instrument of imposition, when in fact; the State is merely following its Secular-Liberal ideology.
The fact that the Indian State has not yet imposed any such law against Muslim female gowns is little assurance for the Muslim. He remains suspicious.
All in all, you are creating conditions that will repel the Muslim and provide excuses to him on a platter. Both unhelpful.
On Dravidians etc etc. You do not get the point Sir. The BIG point is that these differences are not deep enough. They can be resolved…repaired. I do not deny that there are many who assert their Caste, Region, Language etc etc. over being Hindu. I support the fact that folks take pride in their identities. That’s Hinduism’s unique strength. But such assertions are intrinsically different from the Islamic assertion to identity.
To you’re first point, I am not bent on imposing anything. I am hell bent on giving them their laws, the laws that they want to apply to themselves.
Allow them to stir in their own soup is what I say. Syed Rashid sees merit in Shar’ia today. Tomorrow, he may not. That’s still his and his fellows decision to make.
There is another thing I don’t understand about Liberals. The “I want to save the world”, impulse. Why?
What can we do for women in Iran or Afghanistan or Pakistan, shortly? Do you want to import these women into India minus their men? Or do you to want to export yourself and fight their men? What is it you people want to do?? Or is it now a fashionable cause to talk about Muslim women? Or arbit women’s varied “oppressions”??
My cousin is a lawyer and he tells me horror stories of foisted dowry cases. This threat is used by unscrupulous women to blackmail their husbands. I guess men should now want their Men’s Lib!
You might have read the “Autobiography of a Yogi”. In it, Paramahansa Yogananda talks about his parents and in one conversation his mother has with Paramahansa’s elder sister, Roma, she confides to her the fact that the parents slept together once a year, in order to give birth to children. The father comes across as extremely loving and devoted to his wife and family. He remained a widower for close to 35 years. The wife loved him deeply.
I have tried to cover more things in my post, but the central thesis is “interference will not help especially when it is not appreciated”.
Thats awesome. :) Had a hearty laugh. BTW who’s this Thiruka?
I dunno why tendulkar and shourie should be put in a burkha? :)
Thank you! Thiruka is Karunanidhi; Tendulkar should actually be put in a pyramid because he has become the ‘Mummy’ of cricket!; Shourie should go into a burkha for slaving lies on the Nuclear Deal–I never thought he would stoop to that level.Just think how can the BJP align with the communists and try to trash the Nuclear Deal!!
Doddi Buddi – “for slaving lies on the Nuclear Deal”
– Could you please elaborate?
I honestly don’t think opposing something that Commies are opposed to, means “aligning” with Commies. That’s strange logic.
Sometimes, I get this feeling that you are cracked in the head.
“There is another thing I don’t understand about Liberals. The “I want to save the world”, impulse. Why?
What can we do for women in Iran or Afghanistan or Pakistan, shortly? Do you want to import these women into India minus their men? Or do you to want to export yourself and fight their men? What is it you people want to do?? Or is it now a fashionable cause to talk about Muslim women? Or arbit women’s varied “oppressions”??
What the fuckk do you mean by this crap? I was telling ‘Yella OK’ that many Muslim women willingly, WANT the burkha, WANT their daughters to wear it and WANT to preserve Sharia and Islam. This is something to do with Yella OK’s comment about ‘slap on the face’. This is a something he has asked me before.
I have no interest in saving Iraq or Afghanistan or the world, all I am interested in is saving India and Indians.
You lack skills to interpret facts as presented, you have this highly irritating habit of putting your own spin on stuff, putting words in people’s mouths, making excessive generalizations, trying to read between the lines when there is nothing to read.
For the last time, stop taking every discussion on a tangent, and learn to stick to the point. Pinch yourself when you feel that you are diverging, and get out of this irritating habit of attributing labels and thoughts to people without any basis.
‘Liberal’, ‘Secular’, ‘Pseudo’ – ella labelsna haakbittu, sumne badkotaairodu. Attribute any ‘liberal’ trait to anyone irrespective of what that particular individual’s views are. And there was an ‘unsuccessful abortion’ case on another post who was praising your analytical skills!!!
I do not know how many Brahmin boys are around but here’s some food for thought for you.
Janmana Jaayathe Shoodraha,
Vedhapaate bhaveth vipra,
brahma jnanathi braahmanaha.
By this yardstick, I do not think there is any Brahmin here.
Vinay, good if you limited yourself to India and Indians. Care to comment on my responses within that scope, if you will.
We can talk about analytical skills later.
Thiruka is an awesome name. For all the atheism and anti-brahmin rhetoric that he propounds, I found his daughter shopping for some devotional music @ the citadel of Brahmanism in chennai, The music academy. :)
I never really understood the nuclear deal though.
U missed the most important guy though, U R Anarthamurthy. He should be put in vacuumed container so that he cant listen to his own words. :)
Vinay – I am as puzzled as you are. Who the hell indeed is this “liberal”, “secular” and “Liberal secular” or “secular liberal” or whatever shit that they profess themselves to be and who the hell is “communal”, “fundamentalist”. “non-secular” and “anti-secular”. This Liberal seems to be the metamorphosis of the “intellectual” that we had in 80s and 90s. Only a few people deserved the tag “intellectual” by the media and these “intellectuals” happily referred to each other as “intellectual” and felt proud and denigrated others (as if nobody else was intellectual). As an aside, in a news report regarding a recent meeting called for by DeveGowda of “intellectuals”, the reporter wondered why no “intellectuals” attended the meeting (presumably because URA and GK did not attend) – while there were other people reasonably and as or more eminent, including professors, writers, etc, who did not deserve to be called intellectual. So, these “intellectuals” are a coterie, in my view.
So, Vinay, maybe this is the answer to your question – A liberal (or secular or secular liberal or liberal secular) is a label used half-mockingly at people who believe that “they are part of an elite group that is liberal (or secular or secular liberal or liberal secular) and who believe that a certain group of people cannot be termed liberal (or secular or secular liberal or liberal secular) irrespective of that group’s actions or motives and that a certain other group of people simply cannot not be termed liberal (or ….) irrespective of that certain other group’s actions, behaviors, etc.”. For example, The Hindu newspaper is “liberal”, was “liberal”, will be “liberal” and will continue to be “liberal” – why? only because the “Hindu” calls itself liberal – even if it is biased most of the times and fails to see obviously genuine points of view of people it calls otherwise. (check out cbcnn.blogspot.com).
And Vinay – Ok, I trust you if you say there have been surveys in iraq and afghanistan about muslim women wanting to wear burqas, etc. Sure there might have been surveys and women might have said what you claim they have said. But what you have missed out is (1) that it is not the opinion of all veil wearing women; (ii) it is (in many, many cases) not a choice they have made after evaluating various alternatives – wearing the veil is the only thing they know because they do not have experience or exposure of themselves not wearing the veil and leading a life or of seeing other people not wearing the viel and leading life in that manner. To give another example, as recently as 10-15 years back, I remember my ajji and many women in Karnataka (cutting across castelines) would pull the “seere seragu” on top of their head when they come across a person – today this practice is fast vanishing (or even vanished – even among the same women and not just among the next generation) because these women (and people around them) are open minded and exposed to different practices and cultures and have the rationality of taking in what they believe is best for them. And if these women are asked to repeat that practice of “pulling the seere seragu on top of the head” today, their response would be “get lost”. Education and exposure empower women to evaluate choices and decide for themselves – they have the strength to call themselves “loose, forward, pub-going women”.
To summarise, the problem is not that of the veil itself but of larger issues (we are all experts at mistaking symptoms for problems) of education, experience, tolerance, open mindedness, ability and willingness to adapt and be flexible. If these larger issues are not addressed Vinay, you will continue to call me non-secular, non-liberal (and be happy you did not label fascism). The problem is not the veil or the veil wearing women but the attitude or the belief which prompts saying “Ladies in Muslim society have a very important role to perform as homemaker and bringing up the children. But we also encourage our ladies to be teachers,doctors and nurses. But the only criteria is to observe hijab at work(Hijab not Burqa).”
In my last post, I had urged people to watch Khuda Kay Liye. In this, I would urge people to read a book by the name “Devaru” (a must read for “liberals” and “fascists” alike) by AN Murthy Rao, born in the brahmin caste (bomma – pls take note), atheist at a young age and for life, the book questions the existence of god (mainly of hindu gods), and various religious practices (mainly hindu religious practices).
I wasnt referring to people like AN Murthy Rao or even someone like UR Ananthamurthy.
I was referring to casteist, fanatic, Ram Sene supporting posters who raise strawmen like ‘liberal’ ‘secular’ and then attempt to attack these creations in their hate filled minds.
And other Brahmins who jumped to post big posts about Hindus and Hinduism to show the Muslim poster that Hindus can be as fanatic and illogical as a Muslim fanatic.
No matter what the larger issues are, there should not be an iota of sympathy for a bunch of self-styled activists who take the veil off ladies on the street in the night. These very same activists might well start demanding that women continue pulling the ‘seere seragu’ over their heads. And worse. That is not going to solve any larger issues.
If you have read my posts, you’ll realize that I recognize the issues, but what I am against is the proliferation of goons of all kinds in society. And my method for ‘dealing with the issue’ is to NOT impose selective Sharia law in India, unlike what Palahalli is advocating.
And I have seen Khuda Kay Liye last year, and I realized that in Pakistan there are bad mullahs and good mullahs, and the FBI is as bad as the bad mullahs. :-) (This para was tounge-in-cheek)
bomma – It would be great if you cared to spell out who these illogical and fanatic Hindu posters are.
Yella Ok – Labels that describe a politics, are legitimate. I want to say that they can be mis-used but labels themselves do not lose their meaning.
I reject Liberalism because I see it as having a debilitating effect on our society/people. It has dis-armed Hindus wrt Multi-Cultural challenges and legitimized Secularism in society, thereby cutting off of our roots.
Obviously, to be Traditional and Conservative is a positive with me. Please note that this does not mean being against reform.
My opposition to any imposition on Muslims of any law that they feel is alien, arises out of my respect for their respect of their own tradition. I say give them their Shar’ia…the whole thing. Not just the Personal Law as it is today.
We all know that outside pressure has rarely, if at all, worked on the Muslims.
I think bomma calls this stance of mine “Hindu fanaticism” :)
Bomma – Ofcourse you were not referring to URA or ANMR :-) That would defeat the whole purpose of your “brahmin boys” comment. I wanted you to notice because these two gentlemen are also “born brahmins” – so being a “born brahmin” has nothing to do with what one thinks. You seem to have a hate filled mind against brahmins – maybe you could begin with getting rid of that hate.
Vinay – The Hindu society has gone beyond that. People in cities will not be forced towards such practices. And I know such practices are continuing, say, in rural Rajasthan, and that needs to change and will change – there is evidence that things have changed significantly in the past 50 years.
I agree – forcibly “taking the veil off ladies on the street in the night” should not be encouraged. But the debate has gone beyond this. Most of hindu Civil society does not encourage violence – the voices that you hear are because (1) of selective biased reporting by “liberal” media like The Hindu, NDTV, etc; (2) lack of evidence of seeing any kind of true liberalism amongst the others – apart from in khuda kay liye – we dont see or hear of the “good mullah” :-). Forget the mullah (maybe there is no truly “good religious leader” in any religion), where are the normal average you and me kind of open-minded liberal people amongst the “others”. And worse, your “tongue in cheek” kind of thought is what people like Imran Khan are feeding on in justifying the Taliban violence in Pakistan. It will be unfortunate if there are more “Imran Khans” than “Naseeruddin Shahs” in India who will force women to wear veils because FBI has treated Mansoor.
There are quirks and anomalies in every religion. The question is why are we seeing mostly representatives from that community like the one commenting here and why not more of Naseeruddin Shahs (http://blog.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10&pid=1620&eid=5). Will we ever see the community evolve for us to see a “pink mini skirt” or a “pink skull cap” campaign against the people proclaiming fatwas against Sania Mirza or Taslima Nasreen. I know one question will be posed – why the hell do you care? I do, because we all live in the same society.
To that extent, I will even concede to the “liberals” for playing their part in not letting Hindu society – but any such good work is undone by the bias, and acidity.
I was talking about brahmins who want to live their casteist and intolerant fantasies. Not born and unborn brahmins. BTW love for something and hate for the other things is filled in everyone’s posts, even yours. If one can label and use the word hindu, christian and muslim freely for their hating, I see no problem in adding Brahmin esp. since many of the RSS/VHP/ABVP/Ram Sene defenders are not denying it. Look at the role of brahmins in hinduism from a historical perspective, just the way you are looking at islam and other religions.
kumbulkai kalla andhre… :)
Do not understand what & why the “Autobiography of a Yogi” is being quoted time and again. illeno bearene heaLthaare………
Dear Syed Rasheed,
Rabel rousing is no answer to a logical question. Attaching borrowed labels like “facist” may create a smear campaign, but does not explain the difference between separate identity and separatism. It seems like a distinction without difference. Freedom of speech is not limited to praising your views. In India, Emergency was over in 1977, when Indira Emergency Gandhi had snatched away the freedom of speech. No no such emergency exists.
VP – I quoted one piece of narration from the book in reference to a larger point I was making.
I read Acharya’s article. I have also known strong minded Hindus speaking highly of the book. Eg, Seriously Sandeep has an article in his blog. http://www.sandeepweb.com/2007/08/22/book-review-autobiography-of-a-yogi/
So, varied opinion.
bomma – “I see no problem in adding Brahmin esp. since many of the RSS/VHP/ABVP/Ram Sene defenders are not denying it. Look at the role of brahmins in hinduism from a historical perspective.”
– Yenaiyya matadtaidiya? I myself apart from Karihaida and others have opposed this Brahmin characterization of Hindutva organizations, made by you. You have not bothered to refute it. Now you lie that it’s been accepted or not denied?
Find by “Shudra”
Yes, let’s look at the historical role of Brahmins I say. First get into the discussion instead of simply taking useless pot-shots!
Sumsumne sullu helbardu ri. Sikhakond bidtira.
-Rabel rousing is no answer to a logical question. Attaching borrowed labels like “facist” may create a smear campaign, but does not explain the difference between separate identity and separatism. It seems like a distinction without difference. Freedom of speech is not limited to praising your views.
Dear Friend, I am not writing for getting praised. I am just expressing my thoughts so that some kind of a positive result is arrived for the betterment of our society.
w.r.t separate identity and separatism, these two are totally different. Kindly appreciate the inbuilt difference of our country, wherein lingo,dress,culture,accent,food habits differ in a span of every 50kms also.
I request yr goodself to elaborate yr viewson the same.
You dont have to tell me what to discuss and what not to. This is not an RSS shaka for you to dictate things. Nobody cares about issues which tear you up :) Now listen to Syed Rasheed and give your Brahminical mixed with RSS fascist retort to it. Try to make it a little entertaining, less name-calling and hate if possible. Or is that asking for too much from a Ram sene man?
bomma – Little was expected from you, you have admirably delivered even less :)
I’m not telling you what to discuss and what not to discuss. I’m just telling you not to blatantly lie in an open forum :))
And what the f*&% is this?? “your Brahminical mixed with RSS fascist retort to it”.
– Are you not telling anybody who bothers to listen to you, that these two are one and the same?? There is a word people use to call out idiots :)
Oh btw…I’ve posted quite a lot in this thread. Read them.
And whoever told you someone dictates anything in the shakha? Have you ever attended one? Or just heard gossiping Liberals :)
I did not understand what you wanted to convey.
The post in the first place was about forcible imposition of rule against wearing of Burkha which is completely deplorable and needs to be dealt with sternly. Such incidents in coastal karnataka is not isolated and it has been a breeding ground for fundamentalists for a long time. As a matter of fact, the muslims, “maaple” or “byaaris” as they were called were primarily middle men for selling of agricultural produce and there was a helathy and not acrimaonious relationship between the communities. In fact, people wer not worried about the caste issue at all because agriculturists mostly had developed a symbiotic relationship with the traders. And actually other than a head scarf, there was no actual practice of wearing the burkha in coastal karnataka. The women were characterised by tanned faces because of their hard work in the sun and wore large ear rings which I still recollect very vividly. Some of the old women made for excellent portraits. It was in the late 70’s and early 80’s that the RSS began to grow in strength and started to assert its identity and this resulted in fear of suppression amongst the byaari community. They started to impose restrictions on their women to assert their identity and the increase in their population without suitable development, especially in areas of kasargod resulted in uneducated youth who took to petty crimes. A day never passed without the local dailies mentioning news of some crime or the other which had a byaari involvement. And the current generation grew up ignorant of the fine relationship shared in the last 80 or 100 years. Things today have worsened.
As far as the issue of “dambar dabbis” go, it’s unfortunate. But in this forum as the discussion snoballed into specific discussion on the merits and de merits of the burkha in particular and koran in particular, pointing out to what one thinks are the short comings of a relegion has got nothing to hatred. You do not hate all that you dislike, do you? As far as your fury on the brahmin goes, I do not understand where you derive your opinions from. I do not speak in defense of any community or relegion but to use vile language in a tirade against a community does not amount to much.
Please let know if you have any pro active solution to the problems facng the society rather than indulge in mindless boosting of ones ego.
Prashanth Bhat – Good exposition.
I do have some questions though.
Why did the RSS grow so rapidly in this region?
Why should this growth have produced the specific reaction amongst the byaaris that you say it did?
Was there an increase in “Hindu on Byaari women” crimes after the RSS became stronger? If yes, is there any evidence to prove RSS growth as cause for such an increase?
Ball in you’re court :)
I hate as much as you do. BTW personally I dont care if a person is a brahmin or muslim, I hope that I dont judge people in real life too much by such things. But it does seem to make people who go about talking a lot about other religions and castes very uncomfortable when you use the same tactics of name-calling and hate they indulge on the forums they post in.
About wearing a headdress in school – go up and read my first post, I personally think that it is up to the school to decide their uniform and then expect students to follow the code, or have their parents make them go to another school. Same with flower in hair or whatever. Outside school ostracism is a different issue.
About the recent historical perspective you have mentioned, I am aware of how things have been playing out in South Kanara. Just like anywhere else in India, with the rising population and migrations.
So what? What long term solutions do you have? And by writing a longer and self-righteous post, what problem have you solved? If writing long post of this forum went beyond mindless ego-boosting and really ‘solved problems’, all Muslims, hindus and chrisitians would probably be dead from the hate and curses of everyone else :)
It is the ego boost that makes you post and reply. Maybe you are practicing your writing skills. Nothing else. Though you may believe otherwise.
I am liberal. And you are casteist brahmin :) Dont know what happens in RSS meetups, but you sure read like a hitler when you post on the forum. Keep it up, it is quite entertaining. Otherwise what is there for me to reply to?
“Dont know what happens in RSS meetups” – Then may I request you to shut up and don’t talk about something/anything with zero awareness!?
I’m not a “Casteist” Brahmin even though I believe in all our traditions that invariably, are rooted in Castes.
You read like a Brahmin hater but don’t say why. Is it supposed to be a self-evident truth or some bullshit like that? Who do you think reads like “Hitler” now?
Some things I believe in;
1. Reservations for Dalits including the creamy layer. (With utmost emphasis on free and quality education-tutorials). I’m opposed to reservations for minorities of any hue.
2. I have written about the need for Hindu organizations to display/imbibe Hindu diversity in their ceremonies. I want animal sacrifice along with the lighting of the lamp. Something as specific as that. I want a meat oriented menu in their functions. These are not campaign recommendations but are positive in their inspiration.
3. I’m conducting Upanayana for my 8 year old daughter shortly. I believe in the need for Upanayana for all Castes without diluting neither their tradition nor any kind of benefit that might accrue to them. I like reading Chandrabhan Prasad. He seems to me a very practical man. I hate VT Rajshekhar and his ilk.
4. I eat all kinds of meat including beef.
5. I recently was part of a re-conversion ceremony in Kolar where forty two former Dalit families (Christian, Muslim, including two eunuch couples) were re-converted. I am proud of the VHP and these people.
So, what’s you’re justification for abusing me?
Maybe abuse for abuse sake :)
All P Bhat said was to try and think of a solution to the problem instead of jumping on to the hate brigade (which you so accuse of other “castiest brahmins”).. And you did everything but to name call P Bhat.. Methinks that you neither have thinking capacity nor the inclination to solve actual problems but you know, just to hate hate hate :)… without justification/reason/logic and so on.
Go ahead, call me whatever you want… that’s after all, your specialty :)
Dont know what happens in RSS meetups, but you sure read like a hitler when you post on the forum. Keep it up
hmmmm….it is that time again
RSS Brahmin boys,
No need to explain what you do. It is evident in the recent news reports from Mangalore.
Vitlan Potli – heh heh…that was fun. How did I miss it till now?? Thanks :)
I agree with you; you are not an “RSS type,” and you are most definitely not Brahmin!
Great to see yr set of beliefs, at last:
-“1. Reservations for Dalits including the creamy layer. (With utmost emphasis on free and quality education-tutorials). I’m opposed to reservations for minorities of any hue.”
What about reservation for christian and muslim dalits? Why shouldnt there be any reservation for them? Does relegion matter at all? After all they are dalits.
-“2. I have written about the need for Hindu organizations to display/imbibe Hindu diversity in their ceremonies. I want animal sacrifice along with the lighting of the lamp. Something as specific as that. I want a meat oriented menu in their functions. These are not campaign recommendations but are positive in their inspiration. ”
You are determined to classify all castes, sub-castes as hindus, which is not true.
“- I hate VT Rajshekhar and his ilk.”
Whats your problem with VTR?
“4. I eat all kinds of meat including beef.”
Brahmins truely are hypocrites. They never do what they preach.
No he’s not an ‘RSS type’ – he is a strange admixture of different strains of thought. He wants selective Sharia imposition in India, unlike the ‘Uniform Civil Code’ guys, for instance.
i want to know (whatever it is) What is or makes a ‘RSS Type’?
“What about reservation for christian and muslim dalits? Why shouldnt there be any reservation for them? Does relegion matter at all? After all they are dalits.”
Why should there be a reservation for converted Dalits? After conversion to Islam or Christianity, they are no longer oppressed right? or are you saying that they are oppressed by upper class Muslims and Christians? If so, can we say that the purpose of conversion didn’t serve?
why so much angst i say, you sad puss this is for you
jai byadr bomma!!! chillax – peace out
Some interesting observations :) Let’s see now,
Mysore Peshva – Request. Please define “RSS type”. Please also define, if you can, Brahmin.
Ashoka – “Does relegion matter at all?”
– Doesn’t it? What happens to the anti-Hindu cottage industry if you’re correct? Think!
Dalits converted to Islam and Christianity on being promised “equality & freedom” from Caste oppression/discrimination, because these religions were supposed to be harbingers of these great values.
Dalits were given no “time-frame” nor were they told of any “small print” before conversion.
I will be happy to concede reservations for Christian and Muslim “Dalits” if the Pope and Dar-Ul-Uloom admit that Islam and Christianity do not guarantee nor ensure “equality & freedom” from Caste oppression to their adherents.
“You are determined to classify all castes, sub-castes as hindus, which is not true.”
– Please explain yourself.
“Whats your problem with VTR?”
– Everything about him stinks to high heaven. Be specific if you want more from me.
“Brahmins truely are hypocrites. They never do what they preach.”
– Laughable! This Brahmin DOES NOT preach vegetarianism.
Sudha – “He wants selective Sharia imposition in India”
– What’s “selective” about it? I want Muslims to have their entire Shar’ia. Not just the “personal (civil) law”. Since it is Qur’anic, it would only be applicable to Muslims, correct?
Please define “RSS type”.
From the above story –
“Hindus believe in idol worship. So to attract them to Christianity, idol worship is performed in churches,” Menengis said.
“The duty of every Christian is to convert non-Christians to Christianity by any means,” the priest told the commission.
During cross-examination the priest confessed that “no girl students are permitted to use kumkum, bangles and wear flowers. In our institution, we have moral science textbook.
I am of the opinion if a dalit converts to Islam, Christianity, budhism, jainism or sikhism, his economic status isint elevated. And please dont
mix relegion with economic condition. It is a constitutional right to follow
or convert to any relegion a person likes.
And by linking reservation to relegion, this leads to a very biased view.
The whole argument vis a vis Dalit conversion to Islam or Christianity is centered on religion (away from the “stranglehold” of Hinduism..) and not economics. I find it amazing but not surprising that it is being sold as an (only) economic imperative today to the exclusion of religion.
****This is the new Marxist argument with its proverbial “economic” angle. But even here, what do Marxists have to do with religion when they see all religion as opium? Or do they still view the two “cousins” as revolutionary? :) *****
All this is testimony to the truth that Islam and Christianity, the two most vociferous champions of the “equality & freedom” myth, have failed miserably.
Well relegion is not important is the point i am driving through yr thick head. And we should treat a human as a human, not break him down into classifying him..relegion,caste,sub-caste,etc.
We need to have a common platform. Economic condition is one. Relegion is a very private affair, as long as it doesnt spill over and affect others, we should leave it alone. And of course respect others relegion is prominent on my list.
But guys like you derive immense satisfaction by criticising other relegions. Dear friend, it is very important to sort out our house b4 criticising others. If we cannot help the cause, atleast dont pullit down further.
Your own words suggest you are not a practicing brahmin, atleast dont make statements which make the brahmin community look more worse.
Ashoka – Some questions I had asked.
1. I will be happy to concede reservations for Christian and Muslim “Dalits” if the Pope and Dar-Ul-Uloom admit that Islam and Christianity do not guarantee nor ensure “equality & freedom” from Caste oppression to their adherents. Agreed?
2. “You are determined to classify all castes, sub-castes as hindus, which is not true.” – I had requested you to be clearer.
3. Specifics on VT Rajshekhar. Why does he appeal to you? If at all.
4. Please lead me to just one piece of information wherein Dalits have been asked to convert because of their economic condition and not Religion and Caste.
5. When, in you’re eyes, the Brahmins are bad, how will my meat eating make them look worse? And what is the meaning of saying this? Assuming that you eat meat today and become vegetarian tomorrow, will you be worse?
Please respond to these questions in order and we can proceed further.
You seem to have this dogmatic and strongly held view that “Brahmins are out to get me” Can you please clarify the circumstances that lead you to such a belief.
Look at the dichotomy in your statements:
Well relegion is not important is the point i am driving through yr thick head. And we should treat a human as a human, not break him down into classifying him..relegion,caste,sub-caste,etc
if so why do you want the assertion ‘Dalit’ let alone “Dalit Christian” “Dalit muslim” now who is being thick headed.
We need to have a common platform. Economic condition is one. Relegion is a very private affair, as long as it doesnt spill over and affect others, we should leave it alone. And of course respect others relegion is prominent on my list
Economic condition, good choice; did you know a whole lot of uppercastes will also come under this purview then what will happen to your Brahminophobia? Now coming to the respect part; where has anybody here disrespected any religion? All here are discussing the merits and de-merits about making amends per the changing times to make life that much more better within the confines of ones own religion.
But guys like you derive immense satisfaction by criticising other relegions. Dear friend, it is very important to sort out our house b4 criticising others. If we cannot help the cause, atleast dont pullit down further
Am I missing something here? where was the criticism about other religions? if so please elucidate why it is unfair to criticize religion (ones own or others)?I would also like to know. Please enlighten more about the ’cause’ that you are talking about.
Kindly refrain from calling names ‘coz once we do that all logical & sane debate as we know it vanishes.
..and before i forget i am not a Brahmin (neither by birth nor devise, I know it is very important for you to know when someone posts here, how much ever to the contrary you might claim :))