Insiders, not invaders

[Yusuf]

Again, Kartic you are using Hindutva in the same vein as those who use it for convenience. Way or life or otherwise.

 

[KS]

Again, Kartic you are using Hindutva in the same vein as those who use it for convenience. Way or life or otherwise.

That Hindutva, the original Hindutva is so lost by the constant (mis) use by the media, by the secularists and even by right wing parties that ot doesnt make sense to keep repeating it again.

This Hindutva, I am speaking about, is clearly the wave, the feeling against the present form of tadka secularism that is being practised in India.

 

[pankaj nema]

Yesterday P Chidambaram was addressing the CM conference about the Internal security
situation in the country

There he mentioned about the how isolated ,small, local and low level communal clashes throughout the
country in 2011 claimed 91 lives

So it is not enough to say that hey we are all the same

Physically or genetically there is absolutely no difference between Indian people

It is the psychological differences or mentality that is the difference

The sense of superiority and the sense of entitlement that is pervasive amongst the Muslims
is the cause of all tensions

 

[Ray]

I have read this report before but not sure if it's posted here. I Remember Ray Sir bad sent me a link.

Yes, I sent it to you because of the interesting fact about the Dawoodi Bohras and Yemen.

 

[SADAKHUSH]

I have observed on this forum the debate on this Hindutva and Muslims in India has become quiet frequent with the registration of few new members. Whereas Bharatvarsh has many more challenges to meet from the scandals to our occupied land by enemies on both side of the border. Than we have the great divide between rich and the very poor which is growing day by day. If we together focus on those issues may be we can bring some lasting changes in Bharatvarsh. We cannot change the history let us move forward and work together to change the Government at the centre and replace it with which has the backbone to guide our foreign policy, defence policy without the outside interference.

 

[Sukerchakia]

Hindus , increasingly now, do have a heightened sense of Hindutva, only because of various factors starting from the 90s and continuing even today. If you are interested I will list it in the next post. Hindutva is a reaction, not an action. And only the political parties that profess bleed red secularism are to be blamed for that.

No action is isolated and is influenced by other things. So in a sense every action is a reaction too. But there seems a "not our fault, we had to respond" argument in your post. A sort of blaming others rather than oneself.

And political parties cut both ways. The so-called proponents of Hindutva do use it for political means and do not clarify what they really mean by it. Plus, if the word 'Hindu' itself connotes association with the Hindu faith then why use it? I know it actually stands for the shared history and common cultural ethos but most people don't. So usage of such terms alienates people, not only minorities but fair minded liberals.

Re, religion's origin being pointless, much of history is pointless...are we not discussing it ?

By pointless, I meant futile. The origin of a religion as a differentiating point between religions is futile. To differentiate between people because their religion was born outside the sub-continent is futile. There are bigger differences between religions born in the subcontinent.

 

[Yusuf]

That Hindutva, the original Hindutva is so lost by the constant (mis) use by the media, by the secularists and even by right wing parties that ot doesnt make sense to keep repeating it again.

This Hindutva, I am speaking about, is clearly the wave, the feeling against the present form of tadka secularism that is being practised in India.

Please define what form of Hindutva you espouse.

 

[Yusuf]

What does secularism mean in Indian concept? Is it Gandhi's secularism which is different from Nehru's secularism? The latter again different from his grandson Rajiv's version of secularism and yet all three belong to same organization.

Unlike Science, social terms always have a certain amount of fluidity.

Yes the definition may be fluid, but then those using certain terms should clearly lay down what it means according to them. it cannot be one thing today and another tomorrow as per convenience.

 

[parijataka]

Shuridh, absolutely. Indian Muslims are as Indian as Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Buddhists or any others. The independence movement did not envisage a partition of India along religious lines at all. Swami Vivekananda [my personal hero from Bengal] imagined a free India with the strength of Islam and the spirit of Hinduism and as Ejaz has quoted, even Sawarkar, the father of Hindutva, did not think of Muslims as aliens and of Bahadur Shah Alam as the leader of the 1857 movement. It is only in the past 2-3 decades that Hindus have started becoming more militant and I think there are reasons for that and those not because of what Indian Muslims have or have not done. Consider our ex-President Sri Abdul Kalam is loved and respected by all Indians without exception for his patriotism and his scholarship. The average citizen is more concerned with rozi-roti than hate mongering. Keep posting friend and take care!

 

[ejazr]

@Karthic Sri

The view that you are espousing is basically a diametrical opposite of what extremists in Pakistan would say. Not an Indian muslim. Basically, this section of extremists say/believe that we are martial race and outsiders and what not (all based on the British version of Aryan Invasion theory ) and here in India we have the mirror opposites extremists using THIS definition and applying it to Indian Muslims.

I have given enough examples in my post to show why this is flawed. There are more important issues to discuss rather than join the debate between the extremist view in Pakistan and extremist view in India. (Ironically, they would both agree on most points).

Just ponder on this point:
So basically, what I am trying to say in this post is that even if the genetics were of foreign origin, it shouldn't matter. Your race or religion is not correlated with how patriotic or loyal you are.

This is crucial to develop a strong united India. And those who oppose this are anti-national IMO.

 

[Sukerchakia]

Let me share my perspective on the rise of militant Hinduism. I hope I can use that term without any offence to anybody.

There are factors responsible for it both intrinsic and extrinsic. Pseudo-secular politics is a major reason. A middle-class Hindu saw plain votebank politics and felt deceived by the parties he had supported as a kid. There seemed to be two applications of the law, one for the Hindus and other for the non-Hindus big enough to constitute a vote bank.

Add to this, India's economic rise, the nuclear blasts -I and II, military victories, the global rise of Islamic militancy and its effects closer home. Thus was born the militant Hindu eager to protest and reclaim his rights. In the process some went about correcting historical wrongs, a la destruction of 500 yr old monuments and rewriting of text books along with payback for terrorists attacks with bombs.

 

[Yusuf]

Let me share my perspective on the rise of militant Hinduism. I hope I can use that term without any offence to anybody.

There are factors responsible for it both intrinsic and extrinsic. Pseudo-secular politics is a major reason. A middle-class Hindu saw plain votebank politics and felt deceived by the parties he had supported as a kid. There seemed to be two applications of the law, one for the Hindus and other for the non-Hindus big enough to constitute a vote bank.

Add to this, India's economic rise, the nuclear blasts -I and II, military victories, the global rise of Islamic militancy and its effects closer home. Thus was born the militant Hindu eager to protest and reclaim his rights. In the process some went about correcting historical wrongs, a la destruction of 500 yr old monuments and rewriting of text books along with payback for terrorists attacks with bombs.

Problem is, who played vote bank politics? Who is paying the price or bearing the brunt of this? Who is questioned about his loyalty every day?

Who has to bear the brunt when someone plays mischief raising paki flags to incite violence?

The entire logic is flawed. This whole thing was used by one section of the political class trying to get a toehold..it all degenerated from there.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Now Muslims in historic India consists of 1/3 of the global muslim population. Some of the most important shrines of the Muslim world are located in India. Some of the most widely followed Islamic schools of thoughts are INDIAN Islamic schools like the Deobandis and Barelvis.

There is nothing Indian about Deoband. How can a pan-islamic movement ever be "Indian" in the first place ?

So basically, what I am trying to say in this post is that even if the genetics were of foreign origin, it shouldn't matter.

Indians are anyways quite genetically diverse, I don't think "genes" were ever an issue.

 

[A chauhan]

I would take it as one of the proofs of forceful conversions by Islamic rulers long back in the Indian history, revealed through genetic studies !

 

[KS]

No action is isolated and is influenced by other things. So in a sense every action is a reaction too. But there seems a "not our fault, we had to respond" argument in your post. A sort of blaming others rather than oneself.

And political parties cut both ways. The so-called proponents of Hindutva do use it for political means and do not clarify what they really mean by it. Plus, if the word 'Hindu' itself connotes association with the Hindu faith then why use it? I know it actually stands for the shared history and common cultural ethos but most people don't. So usage of such terms alienates people, not only minorities but fair minded liberals.

The rise of right wing in India is precisely a case of reaction and not action. I have said many times that even when Partition has just been concluded on the basis of religion and when you logically expect Hindu nationalism to be at its zenith, still it was not and Hindu Mahasabha (the right wingers of those days) tasted defeat and under the sucessive Congress govts it did not gain ground. It all started with the abject and dismal surrender of the Rajiv Gandhi govt to the Mullah brigade on the Shah bano case and the resulting feeling "surrender" feeling sweeping through much of North India among the Hindus..Also the Sikh militancy that was going on at the same time had acquired Sikh vs Hindu form and that was another factor..Now to compensate for these two and regain the Hindu confidence the Shilanyas in Ayodhya were ordered opened. The Hindu right wing sensed the first victory there.

The Islamic militancy in Kashmir had just started and then came the gruesome genocide of the Hindu pandits from the Kashmir valley by both indigenous and Pak backed terrorists.The govt's apathy to their plight only added to the concern that Hindus were being killed in their own land. The BJP, then a small time org, sucessfully tapped into the brewing Hindu discontent and catapulted themselves into the limelight. Then the Ram janmabhoomi issue started and then the continuing Islamic terrorist attacks on Indian soil only added to the growth of the right wing.

Then Godhra happened which again contributed to the right wing growth...After UPA I took over, it was not terrorism that was the main oxygen of the Right wing groups but the blatant double standard and hypocrisy exhibited by the pseudo-intellectuals, the self-declared activists,the Congress itself which were utilized by the right wing groups and they continue to grow.

Coming to the second part where you said Hindutva is also being used for politics, yeah definitely. But then again wen every religion is being used blatantly for politics, why not Hinduva too..? If some one echoes the voices and aspirations of Hindus,why not ?

Yeah sure it may alienate few people..but so do I am when I see parties that were responsible for the partion of India like ML flourishing in Kerala or a party founded by Razakars, (Nizam'm mercenaries) the MIM dictating terms in Hyderabad. We all learn to live with it.

By pointless, I meant futile. The origin of a religion as a differentiating point between religions is futile. To differentiate between people because their religion was born outside the sub-continent is futile. There are bigger differences between religions born in the subcontinent.

I and my brother may be vastly different..but still he is my blood. Someone living two streets apart may be same as me characteristically, still we are strangers.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Islam in India has definitely not been Indicized. We wouldn't be even having this debate if that were true.

 

[KS]

So basically, what I am trying to say in this post is that even if the genetics were of foreign origin, it shouldn't matter. Your race or religion is not correlated with how patriotic or loyal you are.

Ejaz I dont know why you said this to me especially when I have said two times in this thread itself that almost 99% of the Muslims in india are the natives only and not some arab or turk or central asian.Rest 1% may have those genes.

My only point being Muslims, as persons, were never foreign, only the idealogy they follow is foreign. And that is true for almost all of the Islamic world barring Gulf or Persia where they have successfully persianized their Islam.

And when people say Muslims are foreign - it is not in a literal sense, but in a metaphorical way to allude to how they tend to identify themselves to the invaders who wreaked havoc on the native populations (which included their ancestors too) from a religious pov. To them the invaders were Islamic Ghazis who saved their ancestors from jahiliya even though that "saving" included untold miseries, killings, desecration and wanton destruction of architectural marvels, world famous centers of learning etc.

It is in that context that I mentioned Iran and how the Persian have managed to keep their Persian identity as their primary and everything else, including religion comes second and how they venerate their pre-Islamic history.. Same can't be said about many South Asian Muslims who tend to despise their pre-Islamic past.

 

[KS]

Let me share my perspective on the rise of militant Hinduism. I hope I can use that term without any offence to anybody.

There are factors responsible for it both intrinsic and extrinsic. Pseudo-secular politics is a major reason. A middle-class Hindu saw plain votebank politics and felt deceived by the parties he had supported as a kid. There seemed to be two applications of the law, one for the Hindus and other for the non-Hindus big enough to constitute a vote bank.

Add to this, India's economic rise, the nuclear blasts -I and II, military victories, the global rise of Islamic militancy and its effects closer home. Thus was born the militant Hindu eager to protest and reclaim his rights. In the process some went about correcting historical wrongs, a la destruction of 500 yr old monuments and rewriting of text books along with payback for terrorists attacks with bombs.

You are mostly correct my friend, except on the Ram janmabhoomi issue, IMO.

It was not a new found issue that was put to test by the right wing -- the dispute has always existed for about 200 years or more and it just exploded in full force on Dec 1992.

 

[Virendra]

Rise of Hindu right wing is hyped and mostly media bullshit. They don't have anything in the Hindu religion and Indian culture that they can use to brain wash the masses into extremist ideologies. The day it happens, there would be two symptoms to tell:
a) Hindu Terrorist organizations
b) Frequent riots
Hinduism is thousands of years old and its followers were a far ahead civilization than the Islamic hordes when they appeared at the frontiers. The civilizational learning curve has been traversed. Consider this for an example:

"The Gayatri mantra and the invoking of Savitur is at least 7000 years old. It already asks for enlightenment and not for bread, because they had mastered agriculture and had no problem with adequate food."

I hope that those who came later will also learn and also those who've forgot.
Lets go back to the genetic study of Indian muslims or else please close the thread. It has run its life.
By the way, can someone tell me the difference between "Mohammedans" (muslims) and "Islam". They were referenced like they're different.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[KS]

By the way, can someone tell me the difference between "Mohammedans" (muslims) and "Islam". They were referenced like they're different.

Nothing mate, I said Muslims ,as individuals, are the natives of this land (atleast the absolute majority), but the idealogy they follow - Islam - was a foreign one, originated in Arabia and brought to this land by invaders first.