Sounds of Silence

THIS ABOVE ALL - by Khushwant Singh

2007-12-30T03:40:00.000-08:00

Idol speculation

PREETAM Giani is an iconoclast (an idol-breaker) in more senses than one. He was born of Pakistani Muslim parents, given a Muslim name and brought up as one. He changed it to a recognisable Hindu-Sikh name Preetam Giani. While a student of English literature in Cambridge University, he openly proclaimed himself to be a gay and continues to champion the cause of homosexuals. He has been in trouble with the police. Looked upon by the orthodox as a renegade, he also declares he is an idolater: he worships Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth. However, Lakshmi has not been very kind to him as he is always hard up for money.
Preetam lives in Abbotabad (Pakistan) and often writes to me. Some years ago, he came to Delhi with his Pakistani friend. I took an afternoon off to drive them round the city. He was not interested in seeing monuments but agreed to visit Ghalib’s grave in Nizamuddin. While his friend recited the fateha beside the tomb of the poet, he stood at a distance taking photographs. He showed no desire to go into the dargah to pay homage to Amir Khusrau or Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya. Instead, he went next door to the Ghalib Institute and handed over a set of his translations of Ghalib’s Diwan.
In his last letter to me, Preetam wrote: “Anyone who has ever kissed the photo of a loved one should be able to understand the reason for idolatory.” That I think is going too far. Most of us have photographs of people we love or admire on our walls or in silver frames on our tables but we do not worship them.
However, one has to concede that the dividing line between respect, admiration and worship is often blurred. However much some religions decry worship of idols, it manifests itself in different forms in all of them. Jainism and Buddhism question the existence of God and decry worship of idols as symbolic representations of the Divine. Nevertheless idols of Mahavira and other Tirthankars and those of Gautama Buddha are the central pieces of all Jain and Buddhist temples. Hinduism, which often maintains God is nirankar (without form), in practice makes no apology for representing the formless God in human or symbolic forms. The only Hindu temples without idols that I came across were in Bali. Reformist sects like the Brahmo and the Arya Samaj which tried to discard idol worship failed in their quests.
Sikhs, who also profess to be against idol worship, treat the Granth Sahib much the same way as Hindus treat their idols. The Granth Sahib is “woken up” in the morning (prakash) and put to sleep (santokhna) at night. It is draped in rich embroidered silks and taken out in processions. In homes of the rich, a room is set apart for the holy book (Baba ji da kamra), and fans or ACs are kept going round the clock in the summer months.
Christians deny they are idol worshippers. However, the reverence they show towards the statues of Jesus Christ and Virgin Mary are no different from reverence shown by idol worshippers to their deities carved in stone or wood.
Muslims claim with pride that they abominate idol worship and regard idol-breakers as their heroes. It is true that they do not allow pictures or idols of the Prophet to be made but Shias in Iran have pictures of Hazrat Ali Hasan and Hussain in the streets and on walls in their homes. More Muslims visit dargahs, where their holy men are buried, to ask for favours than they go to mosques to offer namaaz. Instead of worshipping idols, they worship graves of their peers, rightly described as kabar-prasti.
Idol worship is inherent in human nature.

=======================================

Saturday, December 20, 2003
THIS ABOVE ALL

The art of doing nothingKhushwant Singh
I spent my childhood and youth shirking work by bunking school and college lectures. But for the fear of parents and teachers, I had no problems spending my days playing and loafing about. That attitude to life continued into the years in office. I found an excuse to absent myself, roamed the streets gazing into shop-windows, see the raunaq of bazaars, people going from nowhere to nowhere. I looked forward to week-ends and holidays. If the office closed down in honour of the demise of some national leader or departmental head, I celebrated it as a bonus by taking my family to the pictures or a picnic. My role model was a loafer.
Things began to change when I became my own employer and had to live on what I earned by my own efforts. I proved to be a hard task-master. Painful though the transition was, I learnt to rise before dawn, slog all day into the late hours and cut down on my social activities. Slogging became my second nature. I lost the ability to relax, to sit still and stare at nothing without a care in the world. I can't make up my mind whether it is better to be a loafer or a workaholic. Since I am determined not to drive myself hard anymore, I am trying out different techniques to teach myself to do nothing.
I sit in my garden basking in the winter sun. I keep my habit of picking up a book or a magazine under check. I succumb to crossword puzzles because they keep my mind from going to sleep. I watch my cats (they've multiplied to six). They spend their day doing nothing besides playing with each other and dozing off. I envy their carefree existence. They can do so because they live on my bounty. Envying cats does not solve my problems. I have eliminated some causes of my restlessness and come to the conclusion that both the impulse to restless activity and the desire to do nothing ultimately depend on one's mind. How can one train the mind?
Very reluctantly I turned to meditation. I did my best to keep the outside world from intruding into my solitude. I read the morning papers and watched TV to keep abreast of world events. Then put the world out of my mind. I tried some preliminary exercises like shutting my eyes and focusing my mind on inhaling and exhaling my breath. I found it very soothing. For a few fleeting seconds, I could also still my mind and prevent it from jumping like a monkey from one branch to another. It didn't last too long. The mind is simian: it is its nature to jump about. It continues to do so when I am asleep. I cannot control my dreams because I cannot control my mind except for a few fleeting moments.
In any event what does stilling my mind produce? Some maintain it produces peace of mind — which in its turn produces nothing besides peace of mind. I am in a conundrum: should I persist in trying to meditate? Or should I give it up as an exercise in futility? I wish some reader knowledgeable about the subject would advise me.

============================================

THIS ABOVE ALL

The potent Gayatri Mantra

by Khushwant Singh
I HAVE succeeded in memorising the lines (like to show-off the little knowledge Ihave) but I have failed to comprehend their meaning nor understood why Hindus regard it as the mantra of all mantras. To me it appears to be no more than a hymn in praise of the sun. Allama Iqbal in his poem Aaftab also regarded it as a litany of solar worship. I have two other versions in translation. The first is by Professor V.N. Datta. The second by Nafay Kumail Radaulvi. Before their versions I reproduce the original:
Aum Bhur Bhuvah Svah, Tat Savitur VarenyamBhargo Devasya Dhimahi Dhiyo Yo Nah Prachodayat
Professor Datta translates the lines as follows:
"O Lord, who pervades the earth,
The intermediate world and the world of life,
We mediate on the supreme light
Of the illumining Sun-god,
That he may impel our mind."
Rudaulvi, who is himself a poet of some calibre, translated the same lines in more poetic words:
Oh Lord, the soul of this beautiful world and the founder of day and night
You are the creator of the universe and the provider for all
The Moon the Sun are there due to you and help creation
The life and death is subject to your existence
You are the Noor that is everywhere
The heart beats and all breathe with your permission
Please have mercy in the name of that noor
The knowledge and Aql gets the right intellectual orientation
Can some reader tell me why this mantra is looked upon as the most potent?

Social activism and not politics need of the hour: Govindacharya

2007-11-28T06:49:00.000-08:00

Former general secretary of the BJP, K N Govindacharya, once a well known face in party circles has been quite a recluse for some time now. However, he continues to keenly observe political developments in the country and the world. Proud of his long association with the RSS, the soft-spoken ideologue considers the Pokhran explosion as the greatest achievement of NDA regime, and feels the Indo-US nuke deal is irrelevant. In a free-wheeling interview to Arun Chaubey, he calls Nandigram a natural reaction to the forces of marketism and touches upon topics like terrorism and impact of liberalisation on the Indian society.

Excerpts:

What is your opinion on the Indo-US civil nuke deal?

Neither is the deal required nor would it be helpful in its objective. The deal has very little to offer. It is only for power generation, and in terms of power also it would fulfill merely 10% of energy demand. As far as technology is concerned, India has evolved on its own and not at the mercy of US. In fact in the present situation, US needs India more. Therefore India should begin negotiation from a higher pedestal, as this treaty in an indirect way of forcing India towards NPT. India should have made it clear to the US that the Hyde Act cannot be a feature of the deal.

Is the US failure responsible for Islamic terrorism in India as well as other parts of the world?

The US has tackled the international situation in a wrong way. It has become isolated and got the image of ‘Dadagiri’. And this wrong approach is responsible in promoting jehadi terrorism across the world. In the post-Cold War era and with the disintegration of USSR, the US lust for attaining the sole leadership position was even further whetted. But it in return got the sting of 9/11. Since then, the foundation of international relationships has changed radically and the US has not been able to cope with the change. At this juncture, India has to play an active role instead of adopting a defensive stance. In that way, US can be a useful assistant to India. We need to shed the hangover of inferiority and assume a leadership role through aggresive political diplomacy.

On the home front, how do you view developments in Nandigram?

Nandigram is a natural reaction to forces of marketism. Singur and Nandigram are specimen events on the process of struggle but their context has not been taken cognisance of. In Singur, Mamata Banerjee despite her 45 days’ epic fast could not attain the needed result. While the role of violence in Nandigram has undervalued the limitations of peaceful methods of protest in the public discourse, which is tragic and unhealthy for democracy as well as the nation.

How would you describe your long association with the BJP?

As far as my association with BJP is concerned, I contributed my bit on an ideological level. On electoral plank, I was a witness at close quarters of power circles. I could observe that coming to power is easy, but status quoists and insensitive operatus in the party create hurdles.

Please explain the status quoists and their role in politics?

The tool of implementation for the party was state machinery, which was not tuned for the purpose of change, therefore the status quoists created hurdles. The political leadership, which was also deficient in terms of motivational and competence, failed to act against it.

But this status quoism lead to disillusionment especially among youth?

Since the political leadeship was not trained, they were satisfied with their mediocrity of performance and failed to notice that expectations were high from them. The gap between expectation and performance led to disillusionment.

Is there any hope for alternative leadership?

Indian youth is capable of going ahead on its own. Only thing it has to have is the robustness of Indian civilisation. It has to have the capacity to limit and rule the state power. Only then the establishment and the state will be able to understand India in its own way and not in the European context, and India will be able to contribute its worth globally.

You see hope for India in second generation of leadership, but youth movements have been a failure in India?

People’s movement including JP movement, anti-Boffors or Ram Janmabhoomi movements and also pre-independence movement were mainly fought against the onslaught, menace and distortion of the state. Therefore, all these movements ended up changing the state, as they neither had the stamina for systemic change nor had the ability to make the government conducive to Indian ethos. Indian society and youth are now ranged against forces of marketism, indiscriminate globalisation and degeneration of democracy into a sort of ‘corporatocracy’. The need of the hour is to galvanise a parallel political movement like the pre-1934 freedom movement. The structure needed, methodology adopted and traning needed for the leaders of the movement has to be original.

How do you see the role of so called nationalist parties?

Are they losing their edge? The political space for vibrant nationalism coupled with pro-poor is vacant in the public sphere of India. As far as nationalist parties- who offer verbal support to the nationalist issues- are concerned, they have lost their credibility because of the disjoint between their promises and their deeds. And those who have pro-poor approach are deficient if not ignorant about the traditions and moorings of the nation. You have spared a lot of time in studying the impact of liberalisation on Indian society.

What is your observation?

My study on the impact of liberalisation on Indian society has come to the conclusion that:

Rural poverty has not decreased; instead despair and anarchy are looming large in the countryside.

Urban poverty decreased a bit in terms of heavy cost of unemployment, but pollution, crime and atrocities on weaker sections have increased.

Inequalities have increased manifold and the system is attending to only 30 per cent of the society, leaving 70 per cent to their own fate.

Attitude towards women has degenerated to mere consumerism.

Consumerism and permissiveness have pervaded the social fabric resulting in erosion of Indian values and functioning levers of the society.

It has eroded the confidence of India in contributing its might globally, thererby affecting self-pride and self-confidence of Indian society.

It has created acute tension in the socio-political fabric of the nation. New structures, new tools of change will have to be identified, harnessed and integrated as a fighting unit in its own way.

Besides, globalisation has directed towards further centralisation, homogenisation and monopolisation in which democracy is captured and controlled by money bags. The organs of the state including media and channels of information are used to condition the minds of society for creating false demands to manipulate the system for immoral profits alone. This process in turn creates disconnect between state and markets and society and state, while markets collude together to deprive the society from fulfilling its aspirations.

Therefore, I feel that the battle has to be fought on multiple planks. It has to be decentralised, diversified and localised so that localised communities which defy the dominance of the state as well as market and yet are able to lead a prosperous life based on inter-dependence and cultural advancement.

Besides, it requires a three-pronged robust effort in the direction of intellectual, constructive and educational activities in a decentralised, localised mode.

For all this, an understanding has to be evolved about the concept of development- ways of development based on family being the unit- which has to be nature-friendly in the context of investment, technology, management and participation of people.

Will you return to active politics? If not, why?

I do not agree to this proposition. The role of the party and power politics in India is mostly alien and unmindful of Indian tradition as well as needs. And the whole idea has been borrowed from a society carved out by the formulae of Social Contract theory and the individualism evolved through Protestantism as an ideology. So unprotected individual participation in politics leads to dominance of politics by local and foreign money bags that disconnect the state from the understanding and organisation of the society itself.

The basic dictum about the state’s existence is supposed to protect the interest of those who cannot protect themselves. But the state has played the role of obstructor, disruptor and speed governor upon the society. Therefore, understanding the limitation and role of party and power politics, my plan is to carve out a social dynamo to speed up the progress and create social deterrant to bring back party and power politics to the rails of values and issues to salvage the society from self-destructive marshy land of crass power game.

Since there is not much difference in politics with regard to sense of purpose, discreet world view, national vision of their own manifestos, the political parties have degenerated into gangs vying for power with no-hold barred methods, visualising power as a tool of social progress. They have turned into groups competing for power, which has become an end in itself and not the means.

Internal participation merely will not suffice as the external pressure of societal level is the need of the hour. So I decided to contribute in the unity of nation and the society in constructive and educational mode, desisting from being a part of the partisan and power politics.

On Kamala Suraiya's conversion

2007-11-23T09:07:00.000-08:00

Varsha Bhosle
Prophet-sharing
We feel that it is an incumbent duty of Intellectuals like us to announce to the world via the Press, our private decisions concerning our personal life. Hear ye, hear ye: We have resolved to embrace the great religion called Islam because our freedom had become frayed at the edges. We have outgrown the desire for freedom. Hinduism is too lenient for us; there is simply too much freedom... Naturally, Hindu fundamentalists are crying for our blue blood. But so are the, er... remarkably devout sections of our future co-religionists. They denounce us as a Hindu mole! We simply fail to understand! What have we said that can be construed as shedding a poor light on Islam, we ask you?!
We Intellectuals tend to come full circle: When Hagar was cast out by her husband Abram and his first wife Sarai (later christened by God as Abraham and Sarah, respectively), and was languishing in the middle of the desert, the angel of the Lord said unto her, "Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael... And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren" (Genesis 16:1-16). And, lo, Ishmael was fruitful and begat twelve princes, who begat twenty-one tribes, which multiplied into the Arab nation, the soil for our beloved Islam.
You see, we, too, were abandoned by Lord Krishna (to whom, our grandma told us when we were a twee princess, we were married) and the other 30 million Hindu gods who are presently too busy to regulate and discipline our life and protect us. It was because of these entities that we sent shockwaves through strait-laced India with our erotic works; under their influence we became the controversial rebel who exploded hypocrisies. And so we are left with no choice but to augment the augury on Ishmael: We are a wild personage, and we shall dwell here, and we shall speak frankly and fearlessly about the religion we were accidentally born into, and our hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against us. (Figuratively! You have a filthy mind!) If Allah is merciful, we will also be fruitful and beget many tribes (which we will keenly monitor, just in case they show a propensity for Buddhism).
These fundamentalists are mad at us for revealing to an interviewer that we are converting Lord Krishna, our former intimate friend and love, to Allah, as well as making him a prophet after naming him "Mohammed." They are threatening us with death. We do not see what this fuss is all about! For, as you know, "Brahma" is just a distortion of "Abraham," and Sarah is really Saraswati, and the ten thousand cows in the Vedas actually refer to the ten thousand saintly companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). As far as we're concerned, God is an abstract entity. Even so, that will not prevent us from visiting Mecca and embracing the soil of Madina asap. You see, towns and soil are also abstract entities.
In any case, we don't give a rat's ass about these fundamentalists. We have been getting calls from almost all the Muslim countries extending their support to us; many have invited us to visit their countries. Our announcement has greatly enthused the Muslim community in our state. And their enthusiasm enthused us so much that we promptly informed UNI about the welcome-to-the-fold telegram from Abdul Nasir Mahdani, founder of the Islamic Sewak Sangh, temporarily residing at Salem Central Jail, framed under various sections of the IPC, including 153 (a) spreading communal hatred, 120 (b) criminal conspiracy, 124 (a) sedition, and under the Arms Act. Now all we are waiting for are communiques from Dawood Ibrahim and Osama bin Laden. Then we can embrace the soil of Pakistan and Afghanistan, too.
If you remember, barely three years ago, we had said that we believe that God is there in every cell of our body, your body, every cell of this world. Some kind of power, that is how we thought of God. We had said that that God was good enough for us; that we didn't need "Gods trapped in mausoleums, temples, churches, mosques"; that we didn't need such "Gods who can be imprisoned." Now we know: we never did have a clue about God. God is He who's trapped in the Ka'ba. Now we are wiser: we need gods who can be imprisoned. And why just gods? A fact of life is, all feminists need to be imprisoned.
The immediate reason for our accepting Islam seems to baffle others, we do not know why: We were travelling in a car from Malabar Hill to Kandivili. We started the journey along the highway at 6.45 am. We looked at the rising sun. Surprisingly, it had the colour of a setting sun. It travelled with us and at 7.00 am, it turned white. For years we have been looking for signs telling us when to convert. Finally, we got the message: People squat. Besides, we are against the Hindu way of cremating the dead; we do not want our body to be burnt. We would prefer to rot and be gnawed away by maggots.
Hindus have abused and hurt us. They (they!) have often tried to scandalise us (us!). We cannot repose faith in Hinduism because Hindu gods never forgive. They only punish. Our feeling is that Islam is a religion of love, the religion of forgiveness. Allah is the fountainhead of love and compassion. We will write about that. We will write poems with illustrations from the Quran and the Hadeeth, the holy books containing the religious, social, civil, commercial, military, and legal codes for Muslims:
* Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you may dislike it. But you may hate a thing although it is good for you, and love a thing although it is bad for you. God knows, but you do not. (Surah 2:216)
* Let believers not make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful -- he that does this has nothing to hope for from God -- except in self-defence. (Surah 3:28)
* He will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. They serve other deities besides God for whom He has revealed no sanction. The Fire shall be their home; dismal indeed is the dwelling of the evil-doers. (Surah 3:151)
* Those that deny our revelations, We will burn in fire. No sooner will their skins be consumed than We shall give them other skins, so that they may truly taste the scourge. God is mighty and wise. (Surah 4:56)
* Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them [captive], and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (at-Taubah 9:5.10)
* Fight those who believe not in God nor the last day... nor acknowledge the religion of truth, and fight people of the book, until they pay Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Surah 9:29)
On second thoughts, we would not like to comment on controversial subjects. We have no interest in making a speech about the Shariat. Let others take care of it. We are concerned only about the good things Islam can offer to us and to the world at large. Like Omar Bakri Muhammad: "Using any biological weapons in self-defence is, in Islam, permissible, and I believe that we are currently operating under a defensive jihad... Obviously we regret what happens to people but there are always people who are war casualties." Or Uganda's Idi Amin, who slaughtered 300,000 of his people, mostly Christians, after he embraced Islam. Or Nawabzada Nabiullah Khan, the ideologue for Jamaat-i-Islami: "More science and technology is bad for civilisation. I had completed civil engineering, hence I am privy to scientific knowledge. I can tell you how corrupting that is. It even makes you question the glorious Quran. There are many Hadeeths which say that the earth is flat. But any science will tell you the earth is a sphere. But you can use the same science like relativity theory to prove that the earth is flat." Or even Abul Kalam Azad, who forced Tagore's Shantiniketan to delete "Satyam Shivam Sundaram" from its letter-head by threatening to stop governmental subsidies when he was education minister.
On second thoughts, we'll avoid this, as well. For, of course, we did not study much about Islam. We only thought about it a lot; we have been nurturing the idea in our mind for the last 27 years. We have been lonely all through our life. At nights, we used to sleep by embracing a pillow. We kept our desire a secret for long. We embraced it now, when we strongly felt the need for love and protection. NOT BY A YOUNG MUSIM LEAGUE LEADER! You have a filthy mind!
In any case, we do not bother about the reactions from people like you. Our secularist community has expressed happiness at our exercising our freedom. You know, secularists are good people: they fully support conversion from Hinduism. The only time they lose their cool is when fundamentalists begin reconversion drives. If you remember, in March, Congressman Sultan Ahmed, CPI-M's Robin Dey and nominated member Rosemary Gellian Hart raised the matter of the VHP's paraavartan yagna in the West Bengal assembly and condemned the extremists for their vile deed and demanded that the VHP be banned. Such is their mettle.
On the whole, the response has been very elating. At this stage of life, how else could we have collected so much goodwill and publicity? We profited from our Prophet. The only jarring note came from Bharatiya Vichara Kendram director, and thinker, P Parameswaran: "May the Lord save Islam."

AG Noorani's articles

2007-11-19T01:39:00.000-08:00

AG Noorani, Hindustan Times
November 07, 2007

Deve Gowda's MoU.

The JD(S) President, HD Deve Gowda's memorandum of understanding (MoU) of November 1 with its 12 conditions has no precedent in the annals of parliamentary government. We must be careful about setting bad precedents in the states. As BR Ambedkar told the Constituent Assembly on December 30, 1948, apropos conventions on the appointment of a government, "The position of the Governor is exactly the same as the position of the President".

The MoU acquires a more sinister hue when read in this context. A Congress-JD(S) coalition led by Dharam Singh assumed office in Karnataka on May 28, 2004, after the general elections to the state assembly. The JD(S) withdrew from the coalition on January 18, 2006, and took the BJP as its partner instead. JD(S) leader HD Kumaraswamy said they would discuss more than sharing of ministerial berths. "Other details such as the sharing of Boards and Corporations (PSUs) will also be finalised." Of the 70 such bodies, the BJP got 40, the JD(S) 30. This is what we have come to. The coalition would be led by Kumaraswamy in the first 20 months and by the BJP leader BS Yeddyurappa in the remaining 20 months of the assembly's tenure. Moreover, in the first phase, the Speaker would be nominated by the BJP, in the second by the JD(S).

The coalition took office on February 3, 2006. On October 3, 2007, he reneged on his promise and refused to yield the CM's chair to the BJP. Stung, the BJP withdrew from the coalition on October 7. The next day Kumaraswamy resigned as CM. On October 9, President's rule was imposed in Karnataka but the assembly was suspended, not dissolved.

Come October 24, HD Deve Gowda wrote to Governor Rameshwar Thakur, and to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, very properly urging dissolution of the assembly.

The JD(S) embraced the BJP once again to form a government.

On November 1, HD Deve Gowda sent his historic MoU to the BJP President, Rajnath Singh, stipulating 12 conditions which no political party with any self-respect would accept. It renders governance impossible and unconstitutional. It goes beyond the usual minimum common programme on matters of policy. "Important administrative postings and promotions in respect of high administrative offices which have an influence on the quality of administration shall be made by the chief minister in consultation with the political partner, the JD(S)." In effect, it stipulates consent. The same rule applies in the appointment of Advocate General and "other law officers". Finally, "in the event of any significant departure/deviation from the above understanding that impairs the ability of the coalition to provide highest standards of governance in the state, which remains unresolved through the mechanism of coordination committee, any of the partners shall be at liberty to withdraw from the coalition". This is a conveniently vague and sweeping condition.

This is no way to run any ministry. It is a Deed of Marriage with the divorce papers annexed for each to file at will. On November 4, Kumaraswamy said that while his support to the BJP was unconditional, "the rider is that the Dal (S) should not be blamed or held responsible for any untoward incident or unhealthy development that takes place during the regime of the BJP-led coalition government". This flouts Article 164 (2) of the Constitution which lays down "The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly of the State".

In the same vein Deve Gowda said on November 1 that the alliance was only a "temporary arrangement" till elections to Lok Sabha are announced. What of his letter written a week earlier urging dissolution of the assembly? "I maintain the same position despite the JD(S) entering into a fresh tie-up with the BJP. I have not written any fresh letter to the Governor or the President, which could possibly nullify the contents of the first letter", which warned against defections.

The BJP also favoured dissolution then. Parliament should take him at his word and ratify the proclamation imposing President's Rule. So should the Union Cabinet. It should dissolve the assembly thereafter.

The country has long suffered two obscenities. The constitutional one of abuse of the power to impose President's Rule has been taken care of by the Supreme Court's ruling in the Bommai case. The political one of coalitions promiscuous and unstable must be brought to an end also. It surfaced in 1967 in a big way.

At that time, the President appointed on November 26, 1970, a committee of governors "to study and formulate norms and conventions governing the role of governors under the Constitution". Its report is instructive. "We witness an assortment of parties with widely divergent programmes and policies — wherever such programmes and policies are publicly announced — combining themselves to form what are now called samyukta vidhayak dals (united legislature parties), the only agreement among them being the agreement to get into government. The two basic conditions which would ensure a stable government by such combinations are, first, that the different parties should enter the combination as a unit, and secondly, that they should remain faithful to the combination. Experience has shown that neither of these two conditions has existed in the states where we have had samyukta vidhayak dal governments."

Its censures on defections and the remedy it proposed apply to such alliances. "It may be considered whether in situation like this the proper course would not be a dissolution of the legislature and an appeal to the real political sovereign, namely the electorate as was done in Mysore." In a similar case of alliances broken and mended, the governor of Gujarat reported to the President, "The conditions prevailing in the state at this juncture are such that any party agreeing to form a ministry will have a tenuous majority and will not be able to provide a reasonably stable government to the state."

In Bihar, the Supreme Court rejected the governor's claim to decide whether majority was secured by bribery. But it accepted the test of stability in the very passage quoted by BJP supporters. "If a political party with the support of other political parties or other MLAs satisfied the governor about its majority to form a stable government, the governor cannot refuse formation of government because of his subjective assessment that the majority was cobbled by illegal and unethical means of horse-trading and allurements."

Rodney Brazier, an authority on constitutional law and practice, holds that in a House where no single party commands a majority, it would be prudent for the Queen "to tell the leaders that if she were to receive evidence… of a copper-bottomed agreement on a majority coalition, its leadership, proposed disposition of ministerial officers and agreed Queen's speech (on policy issues), together with an equally sound guarantee that the coalition government would not seek dissolution within a reasonable time, then she would appoint the person agreed upon to be Prime Minister".

Deve Gowda's MoU is not 'copper-bottomed'. It is full of holes. The Centre must not allow his MoU to make a mockery of the Constitution. In such a situation parades of fickle politicians are constitutionally irrelevant.

Vedas and unity

2007-11-16T19:57:00.000-08:00

By J.G. Arora

There is a misconception in some minds that Hinduscriptures sanction the caste system. Vedas, the proudpossession of mankind, are the foundation of Hinduism.Vedas are all-embracing, and treat the entire humanitywith the same respect and dignity. Vedas speak ofnobility of entire humanity (krinvanto vishvam aryam),and do not sanction any caste system or birth-basedcaste system. Mantra, numbered 10-13-1 in Rig Veda,addresses the entire humanity as divine children(shrunvantu vishve amrutsya putraha). Innumerablemantras in Vedas emphasise oneness, universalbrotherhood, harmony, happiness, affection, unity andcommonality of entire humanity. A few illustrationsare given here. Vide Mantra numbered 5-60-5 in RigVeda, the divine poet declares, “All men are brothers;no one is big, no one is small. All are equal.” Mantranumbered 16.15 in Yajur Veda reiterates that all menare brothers; no one is superior or inferior. Mantranumbered 10-191-2 in Rig Veda calls upon humanity tobe united to have a common speech and a common mind.Mantra numbered 3-30-1 in Atharva Veda enjoins uponall humans to be affectionate and to love one anotheras the cow loves her newly-born calf. Underliningunity and harmony still further, Mantra numbered3-30-6 in Atharva Veda commands humankind to dinetogether, and be as firmly united as the spokesattached to the hub of a chariot wheel. The BhagavadGita, which contains the essence of Vedas andUpanishads, has many shlokas that echo the Vedicdoctrine of oneness of humanity. In shloka numbered V(29), Lord Krishna declares that He is the friend ofall creatures (suhridam sarva bhutanam) whereas shlokanumbered IX (29) reiterates that the Lord has the sameaffection for all creatures, and whosoever remembersthe Lord, resides in the Lord, and the Lord resides inhim. Shloka numbered XVIII (61) declares that Godresides in every heart (ishwar sarva bhutanamhrudyeshe Arjun tishthti). Guna (Aptitude) and Karma(Actions) Hindu scriptures speak only about ‘varna’which means to ‘select’ (one’s profession, etc.) andwhich is not caste or birth-based. As per shlokanumbered IV (13) of the Bhagavad Gita, depending upona person’s guna (aptitude) and karma (actions), thereare four varnas. As per this shloka, a person’s varnais determined by his guna and karma, and not by hisbirth. Chapter XIV of the Bhagavad Gita specifiesthree gunas viz. satva (purity), rajas (passion andattachment) and tamas (ignorance). These three gunasare present in every human in different proportions,and determine the varna of every person. Accordingly,depending on one’s guna and karma, every individual isfree to select his own varna. Consequently, if theirgunas and karmas are different, even members of thesame family can belong to different varnas.Notwithstanding the differences in guna and karma ofdifferent individuals, Vedas treat the entire humanitywith the same respect and do not sanction any castesystem or birth-based caste system. Veda is theFoundation Hinduism is all-embracing and grants thesame respect to all humans, and anything to thecontrary anywhere is not sanctioned by the Vedas.Being divine revelation, the shrutis (Vedas) are theultimate authority on Dharma, and represent itseternal principles whereas being humanrecapitulations, smritis (recollections) can play onlya subordinate role. As per shloka numbered (6) ofChapter 2 in Manu Smriti, “Veda is the foundation ofentire Dharma.” Shloka numbered 2(13) of Manu Smritispecifies that whenever shruti (vedas) and smritisdiffer, stipulation of Vedas will prevail oversmritis. In view of this position, anythingdiscriminatory in Manu Smriti or anywhere else isanti-Veda, and therefore, is not sanctioned byHinduism and has subsequently been inserted withunholy intentions, and deserves to be weeded out.Besides, precise codification of Hinduism in one bookis indispensable to make Hinduism easier to beunderstood by a layman. For this codification,appropriate mantras of Vedas and Upanishads, andselected shlokas in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata(which also includes the Bhagavad Gita), etc. willprovide the basic material. Role of Media In order tousher in a casteless and harmonious society, theall-embracing and universal message of Vedas has to befollowed and spread. Both the print and electronicmedia play an important role in a country’s life. Theyshould contribute their mite to unite various sectionsof the society. But in India, most of the media areunwittingly strengthening caste and communaldivisions. By publishing divisive articles anddescribing political leaders and electorates,achievers and sports persons, and even wrong-doers andtheir victims as members of a particular caste orcommunity, the media is strengthening the divisionsinstead of unifying the society. The media should playa positive role so that there is amity all around. LetYour Hearts be One Anyone believing in the castesystem is violating the Vedic command of oneness ofentire humanity. Although the first known poem in theworld appeared as the first mantra in Rig Veda, andthough the Vedas and Upanishads contain the sublimestthoughts in the sublimest language, because of afaulty education system, most of the educated Indiansare ignorant of their rich heritage contained in theVedas and Upanishads. Most Indians do not knowSanskrit, the language of Vedic literature. Manypersons do not know even the meaning of their Sanskritnames. By learning Sanskrit one can read the Vedas,though even translated Vedic literature can bestudied. We have to ensure that we do not lose ourrich Vedic heritage as it would amount ot losing ouridentity. To ensure the survival of our Vedicheritage, and to bring about unity and harmony insociety, it is imperative that the all-embracingmessage of the Vedes is practised and propagated. (Theauthor is a former Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.

Objections raised by Shri Haran to "Committee of Eminent Persons"

2007-11-04T19:26:00.000-08:00

Objections Raised by Shri Haran to "COMMITTEE OF EMINENT PERSONS" -SSCP10/31/2007 4:14:40 PM To:The Secretary,The Committee of Eminent Persons onSethusamudram Shipping Channel Project,"Malligai"30/95. P.S.Kumarasamy Raja Road,Chennai – 600 028.SirSub: Objections and Suggestions on SSCP.Ref: Your Press Advertisements inviting for Objections & Suggestions.The Great Nationalist and Poet Subramania Barathiyar, being a believer and a staunch Hindu, probably motivated by the Great 'Ithihasa' Ramayana, had dreamt of a bridge connecting India and Srilanka, about which he had expressed in one of his immortal poems.The British rulers also studied and analyzed such a project and dropped the idea altogether, as it was not a viable one in many aspects. In independent India too, committees were constituted to study the viability of the project and lastly the A.Ramaswamy Mudaliar Committee had categorically said that, only a land-based canal could be built and that, the idea of demolishing "Rama Sethu" must be abandoned.Later, after almost four decades, the NDA Government laid the foundation and gave the green signal, and the present UPA Government had inaugurated the project in 2005.Since then, I have been closely following the development of the project and the relevant issues and their consequences.In a life full of uncertainties, many things might be conceived, but only a few are brought out. Many projects might be planned, but only a few are implemented or executed. There are many reasons for the non-implementation of projects. Some reasons are economical; a few are scientific; a few are environmental; a few are due to security concerns and a few are beyond our reasoning, which are attributed to GOD and Nature by the Religionists and the Atheists respectively. I strongly feel that, the SSCP belongs to the non-viable & non-implemental category because of all the above-said reasons and that is the 'unique aspect' of this project!I, as the Citizen of this Great Country, am deeply concerned with the "fall outs" (Economical, Environmental, Law & Order and National Security) of the implementation of a controversial project of this magnitude and hence I request you to kindly consider the "Objections & Suggestions", which I have enclosed along with necessary supportive materials as annexure.I hope and pray, that the Eminent Committee would recommend for a peaceful solution for the utmost satisfaction of all concerned.Thanking You Sir, Yours truly, B.R.Haran.OBJECTIONS* The "Rama Sethu" is a sacred and revered monument for the millions of Hindus and along with the "Himalayas", it plays a great role in integrating the people of this Great Nation. While Rameshwaram is a very important place of pilgrimage, the "Rama Sethu" is a place of worship for the Hindus. The Hindu religious and cultural organizations have requested only for the change of alignment without opposing the project as such, but certain quarters, with an intention of politicizing this issue, have given a communal colour by spreading a canard like "150 years dream of "Tamils" is being threatened by the "Hindus" in the name of Lord Rama and Rama Sethu", through the media, which is very unfortunate. The so-called rationalists have also indulged in hurting the religious sentiments of the Hindus by issuing statements and through press interviews. Such actions give a lot of room for anti-social & fanatic elements, which take law in to their hands and play havoc threatening peace & harmony. Since time immemorial, our Nation has been a land of Rishis, Munivars, Acharyas, Mahans, Gurus and Mahatmas and the people of our Nation have always revered and worshipped them. They have always been our permanent source of "strength". As all the Hindu Religious Gurus are opposed to the demolition of the Rama Sethu, we should heed their advices and accept them. Hence, the "Rama Sethu" must not be destructed at any cost, and the religious sentiments of Hindus must be respected.* Mr.S.R.Rao, Eminent Scientist and President of Society of Marine Archeology in India, who discovered the submerged "Dwaraka" off the coast of Gujarat and proved the historicity of Krishna & Mahabaratha, had categorically said that, a proper exploration and survey must be done to save & protect the Rama Sethu. He had said, "Rama Sethu is an ancient monument of national and international importance. Based on overwhelming archeological, epigraphical and scientific evidences, Rama Sethu should be declared and protected as a World Heritage Site". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be damaged and steps must be taken to implement the suggestion of Mr.S.R.rao.* Dr.S.Badrinarayanan, Eminbent Geologist and former Director, Geological Survey of India and Consultant, National Institute of Ocean Technology had said, "It is a well known fact that the coral reefs can only form in clean & unpolluted water and these being marine organisms require firm & compact formation as foundation. Geological & geophysical studies of Rama Sethu reveal the presence of loose marine sand below the coral layer clearly indicating the coral layer in the form of boulders are not natural and formed on their own, but have been transported by somebody and dumped there; thus clearly establishing the fact that Rama Sethu is very much manmade in the hoary past". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be damaged, but protected.* The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been done by NEERI much before the fatal attack of Tsunami on 26th of December 2004 and hence it becomes imperative to have a new study done by considering the impact of Tsunami and the effects of future Tsunamis. Prof. Tad S. Murthy, Vice President, The Tsunami Society, Ottawa, who is also a consultant for our central government for developing our own Tsunami Warning Systems, has said, "Execution of SSCP in its present form & alignment will lead to unprecedented disasters along the coast line of southern Tamil Nadu& Kerala during the next Tsunami". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be destroyed.* Prof. CSP Iyer, Executive Director, Center for Marine Analytical Reference and Standards, Trivandrum has said "The execution of SSCP would have an adverse impact on the sensitive ecosystem and the marine life in Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar, home and breeding ground to a large number of endangered marine life and species, viz, Dugong, Sea Turtles, Dolphins and Sea Horses thriving in the coral reefs that abound in this region". Hence the Rama Sethu must not be damaged, as the damage & dredging would prove detrimental to all the rare marine organisms.* Captain (Indian Navy) & Master Mariner H.Balakrishnan has studied the [project in detail and had presented his findings in the form of articles as "Mariner's Perspective", which have been widely published by the mainstream media in India. So far his findings have not been objected or contested by any of the functionaries associated with the project, which goes to prove that the project doesn't make any 'nautical sense'. He had analyzed the project taking in to consideration the important factors such as distance, fuel-need, time duration, pilot requirement & pilotage and tonnage of vessels, etc and arrived at a conclusion that the project is not viable at all. Captain Balakrishnan has said, "Considering the present global and geopolitical situation and insurgency & terrorists' threat perceptions, it is felt that the execution of SSCP would poise a grave danger to National Security". Hence the Project deserves to be shelved.* Dr.S.Kalyanaraman Ph D, Eminent Scientist & Director, Saraswathi Research Center who is in the forefront of saving & protecting the magnificent & wonderful world heritage monument Rama Sethu, hasd said, "The SSCP would lead to destruction of fish & marine life in the Palk Bay and Gulf of Mannar, resulting in loss of livelihood of thousands of fishermen and their families, along the southern coast of Tamil Nadu. The project does not include Tsunami protection measures". Hence the project must be shelved.* Apart from the expert opinions of the experts belonging to relevant fields, there are umpteen evidences to prove the historicity of Rama Sethu. Historical, Sculptural, Socio-Cultural, Literary, Numismatic, Cartographical, Epigraphical, Geological & Archeological evidences have been presented for the existence of the Rama Sethu for ages. Mr.V.Sundaram I.A.S. First Chairman of Tuticorin Port Trust, Scholar & Journalist, who had compiled all the above-said evidences in his masterpiece titled "Rama Sethu-Historic Facts vs Political Fiction" had said, "SSCP in its present form is scientifically inconsistent and technically indefensible". Hence, Rama Sethu must be protected and the SSCP must be shelved.* Mr.Ossie Fernandes, Environmentalist & Leader, Coastal Action Network, has been working tirelessly to save the livelihood of thousands of fishermen and their families and also to save the lives of thousands of rare marine species. He has been vociferously against the project since the beginning and he had said, "A spoilt environment would lead to the threat of livelihood of fishermen in the coastal districts of Tamil Nadu". The website www.earthdive.com has published a news item along with his interview in January 2007.* The famous journal "Current Science" has addressed the short term & long term implications of this project, raising relevant questions on the technical feasibility of the project.* Retired Army Officer Colonel S.S.Rajan, concerned with the implications of the SSCP, took a "Padha Yathra" from Chennai to Rameshwaram, covering a distance of 650 Kms for creating awareness on the importance of protecting Rama Sethu. Through this padha yathra, he had appealed to the government "To protect Rama Sethu for saving the livelihood of thousands of fishermen, to save the environment for the safety & well being of thousands of marine organisms & rare species, to respect the religious sentiments of millions of Hindus as that of Christians, Muslims and other Minorities, to secure the Nation from the threats of Terrorists". He also had the support of a great number of Army, Air force and Naval officers in person, as well as through correspondences, thereby upholding the secular fabric of the Armed Forces. Hence, this project must be shelved and the Rama Sethu must be protected.* The Tamil Nadu Tourism Department had rightly claimed that the Gulf of Mannar Marine National Park is a wild life sanctuary and a great Marine Biosphere running along the coasts of Ramanathapuram & Thoothukudi covering 21 Islands, 623 ha, full of Coral reefs, Dugong, Turtles, Dolphins and other Marine Species. The Department says that the Kurusadai Islands off Mandapam boasts of a vast expanse of shallow water. The presence of 'flora & fauna' here are in their virgin form.* The Honourable Shipping & Road Transport Minister Mr.T.R.Balu, when he was the Union minister for Environment & Forests during the NDA regime, had inaugurated The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Trust on the 16th of December 2000. During the function, he had given a scintillating speech delving at the concept & importance of Biosphere. He had said, "The Biosphere is a "Biologists' Paradise" and that it was established for attempting an integrated approach to resolving the adverse impact of human activities on the rich biodiversity of this ecologically fragile area". He had called upon the people, "Work with commitment & vigor for the cause of conservation of biological diversity". So, as per the contention of Mr.T.R.Balu, it becomes imperative for us to protect the ecologically fragile area and hence the project must be shelved.* In the event of implementation of this project after completion of dredging, there is a strong possibility of spillage of oils & chemicals, which would be devastating for the entire marine life in the area. In this context, we must recall the situation prevailing in the rivers & oceans of Europe, which are totally polluted and completely rid of marine organisms. Now the authorities there are finding it very difficult to repopulate the rivers & oceans with newly bred organisms like the "Salmon Fish", etc, which have become almost extinct. In the event of such a disaster, do we have a disaster management mechanism in place? D we have a disaster prevention mechanism in place? * The present committee constituted by the Central government does not have experts from the fields of Geology, Marine Archeology, Marine Industry, Coastal Security and Indian Navy, which are vitally relevant & important to assess the viability of the project. So, I feel the said committee must be reconstituted as experts from the above said fields have been missed out.* I feel the inclusion of Historians in the committee is irrelevant and doesn't make sense at all, as the central government had already accepted the historicity of Lord Rama, Ramayana and Rama Sethu. Despite the fact that the Existence of Rama Sethu for ages has been established with authentic facts & evidences, it is a matter of faith & belief of millions of Hindus, which cannot be questioned by any authority, as Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Worship have been enshrined in our Secular Constitution. Hence the inclusion of Historians in the committee is not necessary. SUGGESTIONSAs this unviable project is destined to be shelved, I, as a Tamilian, have a sincere suggestion for the development of the state, particularly the area under debate.* The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere can be developed as a prominent place in the map of International Tourism.* An Underwater Aquarium can be built, where the national & international tourist community could enjoy the sight of coral reefs and thousands of rare marine organisms.* A portion of Rama Sethu at "Sethukarai" near "Thirupullani" can be identified and promoted as a prominent tourist place.* A fresh Geological and Marine Archeological survey could be conducted and consequently the Rama Sethu could be declared and protected as a World Heritage Monument, which would help for a heavy inflow of international tourists.* Governments may come and go. But, the people, environment and the site remain forever. So, if the above suggestions are considered, the governments can have the satisfaction of spending the taxpayers' money in a useful and productive way.* In the event of implementation of the above steps, coastal areas would develop further; fishermen livelihood would not be affected; environment would be maintained & protected; marine organisms would flourish; revenue will keep on increasing due to tourism & pilgrimage. Last but not the least, all sections of people would live in peace & harmony without getting hurt, religiously or otherwise.ANNEXURES1. The statement of Dr.S.R.Rao, Founder, Society of Marine Archeology in India.2. The statements of Dr.S.Kalyanaraman,Ph D, Director, Sarswathi Research Centre.3. The statements of Prof CSP Iyer, Executive Director, Center for Marine Analytical Reference and Standards, Trivandrum.4. The papers presented by Captain H.Balakrishnan.5. The news published by www.earthdive.com6. The news published by "Current Science".7. The Tamil Nadu Tourism's Advertisement (Web Page)8. Text of Mr.T.R.Balu's speech, when he inaugurated the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Trust, in December 2000, when he was Union Minister for Environment & Forests, in the NDA government.9. "Rama Sethu – Historic Facts vs Political Fiction" – Compiled by Mr.V.Sundaram. I.A.S.10. "Sethu Bandhanam" – A compilation of Tamil Literary evidences by Shri.R.Subbarayulu.

‘In the Tulsidas Ramayan, Sita is not Ram’s wife but his sister. Only in the Valmiki Ramayan is she his wife’

2007-10-30T23:43:00.000-07:00

ON THE RECORD
M Karunanidhi, Tamil Nadu CM & DMK chief
Posted online: Monday, October 29, 2007 at 0000 hrs Print Email
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi’s recent statements on Lord Ram and the Sethusamudram project created a controversy. In this second part of an interview with The Indian Express Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta on NDTV 24x7’s Walk the Talk, he says there is no scope left for political negotiation on a new alignment for the Sethusamudram project. He also talks about how bitter politics in Tamil Nadu has become and why he thinks highly of Congress president Sonia Gandhi and former prime minister V.P. Singh
Related Stories
‘Whether you are democrat or dictator, on the left or right, exclusion will sooner or later destabilise you’‘Given the nature of competitive politics and fractured mandates... difficult for us to do what is manifestly obvious’‘We should neither proceed with n-deal nor dump it altogether... to avoid immediate elections’'It's possible for us to have military history written without carrying sensitive material''Unfortunately it took the Columbia disaster to remind people of the thrill of space flight. Otherwise, it had become a bit too routine'
• Do you think that, over the last 10-15 years, coalition politics has been the antidote to the poison of separatism?
Coalition is a temporary arrangement. It is not a permanent solution. We cannot say it is an antidote. But because of coalitions, we have been able to get some of our demands fulfilled. To that extent coalitions have been useful. Sethusamudram, the Salem steel plant, Neyveli Lignite Corporation — these are issues we raised in the past. But nobody bothered. They have begun to show concern now. We had asked for projects like the Bhakra Nangal dam here in the south. We wanted poverty to be eradicated here. Now we are able to get poverty-eradication schemes implemented here. Our aspirations are being fulfilled. Even the demand for classical language status for Tamil — which we never thought it would be given — has been conceded. When we are getting what we want, where is the need for separatism?
• So the cure is a federal government, which will require a new Constitution. You mentioned the Sethusamudram project. Were you surprised how big an issue it became?
Not merely surprised! Those who wanted it are the ones who are now opposing it. Atal Bihari Vajpayee of the BJP sanctioned the project when he was prime minister. Now the BJP is against the project.
• The BJP set the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal rolling too. Now it is opposing the deal.
Yes.
• So politics is like that. But this whole . . .
There should be no politics on certain issues. If someone politicises projects taken up in the national interest, he is a politician and not a statesman.
• But this is not just politics; this is also religion.
No, no. Where is religion in this?
• Well, because there’s a belief that Ram Sethu was the bridge built by Lord Ram.
I’m not a detractor of Ram. Let them keep Ram. I am no enemy of Ram. I have even written about this. Was the Ram issue raised when Vajpayee sanctioned the scheme? Or when three or four BJP ministers, in charge of surface transport, passed orders and chose the sixth alignment? It was not raised at that stage.
• You say Vajpayee approved it (the Sethusamudram channel project). But now it has become a religious issue because people will say that this bridge was constructed by Lord Ram. Lots of people believe in that; they think it’s sacrilege to cut through the bridge (for the Sethusamudram project).
It is not necessary to cut through this bridge. But let me ask: why can’t we cut the bridge even if it is named after Ram? Why can’t we cut through this bridge for the good of the people and build a new one? Jawaharlal Nehru did not accept Ram (as a divine being); he calls him a hero, not a god. C. Rajagopalachari wrote a book called Chakravarthi Thirumagan (The Emperor’s Blessed Son) that says Ram is a prince, not a god. It is not as if only the DMK is saying it.
• I understand that what you say is that Nehru called Ram a hero, not a god. Similarly, Rajagopalachari called him a great prince, not a god. But Nehru used to go to the Ramlila in New Delhi and fold his hands before (the idol).
That’s different. I am a chief minister. If there’s a festival in a Ram temple, do I stop it?
• But will you go to one of those festivals if invited?
Oh yes! (Laughs) Muslims invite us and we go. Christians invite us and we go. Why can’t we go when Hindus invite us? There’s nothing wrong.
• In one of your statements you asked that if this bridge (the Ram Sethu) was built by Lord Ram, then which engineering college did he go to.
It was said in lighter vein. Why make an issue of it.
• I’m not making an issue. All I’m saying is that what’s said in lighter vein is not taken in lighter vein because these are very sensitive issues.
They are using it deliberately for propaganda, as if I had hurt their sentiments. It is not true. In an election campaign, Periyar (founder of the Dravida movement) asked people in every street to beat Ram. I don’t want to elaborate, but what happened? He asked people to break idols of Pillayar (Lord Ganesh). But Anna said he would neither break Ganesh idols nor break coconuts in offering before gods. Recently, some 4,000 idols of Ganesh were immersed in the sea. Did we stop it? On the contrary, we provided police protection. In a sense, isn’t Ganesh considered greater than Ram?
• People in the Congress are not happy. They think you made a statement that the Valmiki Ramayan describes Lord Ram as a drunkard.
Yes, please read it. Even now I say that Valmiki has written that. What does Valmiki say? He says, ‘Hanuman tells Sita that because of being separated from her Ram has not touched any liquor.’ Tell me, does this not figure in Valmiki? I’ll show you Valmiki (Ramayan).
• Have you read the Valmiki Ramayan?
Yes. The Valmiki Ramayan and the Tulsidas Ramayan too. In fact, in the Tulsidas Ramayan, Sita is not Ram’s wife but his sister. Only in the Valmiki Ramayan is she his wife. In many versions of Ramayan, she is his sister.
• What will the solution to Sethusamudram problem be? Are you open to the idea of another alignment?
The matter is in the Supreme Court. We are waiting for that.
• Yes, but as a political negotiation, will you be open to the idea of a different alignment?
It’s not possible.
• The Congress has conveyed its concern to you about your Lord Ram statements, saying, ‘Look, in the south it’s okay . . .’
If you want to create a rift between us and the Congress, you will not succeed.•
Hasn’t the Congress told you that you have given the BJP something to talk about? No, I’m not saying anything about a rift. Parties can talk to each other.
No, I haven’t given the BJP any issue to raise. There’s no reason for me to do it. The BJP is talking on its own. The people of Tamil Nadu won’t accept what the BJP says. This the land of Periyar, of Anna.
• Yes, but at the same time, the Congress is worried that this will affect . . .
No, it’s not worried. Only you are worried (laughs).
• The Congress tells us it is worried. Do you see the situation getting defused in Supreme Court or do you see there’s room for political negotiation outside the Supreme Court on Sethusamudram?
It’s only for the Supreme Court to decide. There is nothing for us to say. We are waiting for the Supreme Court’s judgement.
• This is very interesting. You are placing so much faith in the Supreme Court. Just a few weeks back you had a brush with the Supreme Court (over the DMK protests and your fast on the Sethusamudram issue). A judge got very angry.
Once upon a time, there was an old lady who was very sick. There was a child who prayed to God every day. But she dies. Does it mean they will not pray any more? The Supreme Court is like that.
• You may not believe in God. But I like the way . . .
I believe in only one god.
• Which god do you believe in?
My conscience.
• It is fascinating that you nevertheless use that comparison (about God and praying and the Supreme Court). But what was your reaction to the Supreme Court’s strong remarks (about the DMK’s bandh call and yourprotest fast). Do you think you deserved those remarks or were they undeserved?
If I answer your question, it would mean what the court said about me is true.
• That’s very well said. You know, so many very senior politicians in the Congress and other parties told me that I would find that you have one of the sharpest minds in politics. I think they were so right.
(Laughs)
• There has been so much speculation, analysis, guesswork . . . tell me what happened in the case of Dayanidhi Maran?
I don’t want to speak about it.
• Tell me exactly what happened?
Nothing, nothing.
• He is your nephew. How painful was it for you?
I generally don’t discuss personal matters.
• But you think it is a forgotten chapter now?
I don’t consider anything a closed chapter.
• I see. Is there still hope for Dayanidhi Maran tomorrow if he did prayaschit or penance?
I am not ready to answer these questions now.
• What is the reason? You answer everything but avoid this.
It’s because there is scope for such unanswerable questions too.
• Why is Tamil Nadu politics so bitter? Why do people - you and Jayalalithaa, in this case, the two main parties - you are not even on talking terms. It is very bitter and very vicious. Why is it so? Was it so earlier?
In Tamil Nadu, things were all right till the time of MGR. He started a party against me, but we remained friends. Even though we were leaders of different parties, we were friends. However, after MGR, the party leadership began to hate us and abjured us. Kamaraj and I, Bhakthavatchalam (former Congress chief minister) and I were friends. R. Venkataraman and I are friends even today. So in Tamil Nadu, except for a party called the AIADMK, the others are all very friendly.
• And do you regret it?
Certainly. Not because that single person is unfriendly. But I regret that Tamil Nadu politics has come to this.
• Sir, you are the senior-most politician in India, not just in Tamil Nadu. Would you take the initiative someday to bring down this bitterness so that people can fight elections, fight in the Assembly, but have a decent relationship?
In 1967, there was a big (electoral) fight. We defeated Kamaraj. Bhakthavatchalam was defeated, R. Venkataraman was defeated. Anna became chief minister. All of us went to Kamaraj’s residence and took his blessings. We also went to Bhakthavatchalam’s house.
That was how we conducted ourselves. We showed no disdain towards the losers. But today people gloat over their victory. It is the AIADMK under Madam that has caused so much bitterness. She castigates me in her statements every day, calls me names. It would look very silly if I took up the initiative you suggest. But because you advise me, maybe I should go to her house and try to make up! When I, as chief minister, went to pay homage to Nedunchezhian (DMK stalwart who switched loyalties to the AIADMK), AIADMK members wielded broomsticks against us. Such is their culture.
• But would you appeal to her (Jayalalithaa)? Would you advise her that this is not the right thing. Would you appeal to her and say, ‘Let’s bring back some decency in our politics’?
There are several leaders here — Ramadoss (of the PMK), communist leaders, and even L. Ganesan of the BJP. Look how I treat them and how friendly they are to me. She is the only one (who is unfriendly). No, we cannot advise her.
• Before you go, let me ask you one thing. You dealt with many great political figures at the Centre. You shared power with Mr Vajpayee, and are now sharing power with Dr Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi. You knew Jawaharlal Nehru, you knew Rajiv Gandhi to some extent, and also Indira Gandhi. Tell us your impressions of the people you met at the Centre. Whom did you find really remarkable or great.
V.P. Singh.
• Why do you think so highly of V.P. Singh?
Social reforms, reservation, the Mandal Commission. Since then we are friends.
• What about Mr Vajpayee?
Vajpayee is a very good man.
• Will you tell us some story from Vajpayee’s times, some conversations that you had? I am told you are a great storyteller. You are the great Kalaignar, so you should tell us a story.
Once during a TESO (Tamil Eelam Supporters Organisation) conference in Madurai, Nedumaran, Dr Subramanian Swamy and all had gathered. On that occasion, Vajpayee spoke in support of the LTTE. After that, because of change in circumstances, he withdrew from it. On many occasions, Vajpayee has been very kind to me. One reason for my relationship with Vajpayee getting stronger was Murasoli Maran. Vajpayee had great regard for Maran when he was a cabinet minister. And therefore for me too.
• Mr Vajpayee spoke in support of the LTTE?
Yes. During the Emergency, we also addressed meetings together.
• Who do you rate as a better prime minister —- V.P. Singh, Deve Gowda, Manmohan Singh? How do you rank them?
All of them are good. When Vajpayee was prime minister, new rules were framed prohibiting construction on the coast. When we wanted to build a memorial to Kamaraj in Kanyakumari, permission was denied. However, when I told Vajpayee that the memorial was for Kamaraj, he sanctioned it. Even now you can see the building in Cape Comorin.
• What’s your view on Dr Manmohan Singh as a prime minister?
A very good man.
• And Sonia Gandhi as a politician? You did not know Rajiv Gandhi so well, and I think that with Indira Gandhi you had a hostile relationship. She (Sonia) is the first Gandhi you are friends with.
What impressed me most was when she gave up the prime minister’s post.
• But would she make a good prime minister?
If she becomes prime minister, she will be a good prime minister.
• You have no objections to her becoming prime minister?
No, no. Even then I had said she should be the prime minister.
• In the three years that you have known her, have you been surprised by her maturity, her understanding of politics?
She has developed well as a political leader. She is a good administrator. She is ensuring an honest government. She has the capacity to nurture a big party.
• Before I let you go, if you would say a word . . . if you can just give me a sense of what India, Tamil Nadu, and the world look like to you after seven decades in politics? Are you happy? Are you unhappy? Do you see a lot of work having been done or do you see a lot more work still to be done?
Even after a good night’s sleep, when you wake up at 6 a.m., you feel like sleeping a little more. That is how I feel (laughs).
• That’s a wonderful note to conclude this on. Sir, thank you very much. You have been very generous with you time. And you have been generous with your laughter, which is so wonderful.editor@expressindia.com

Dare to know

2007-10-30T22:56:00.000-07:00

2007/10/31
By Ali Sina
Hermit crab carries a shell on its back. This borrowed home provides shelter and protection from predators. When the crab feels threatened, it pulls into its shell to hide. Hermit crab does not leave its shell unless it no longer provides safety. Then it finds another shell to relocates.

We humans use faith for the same purpose that the hermit crab uses shell. Faith gives us security. We do not abandon our faith, unless we find something better. Very few people can live truly free from faith. Faiths come in all shapes and forms. Not all faiths are theistic. Materialism is also a faith. Communism, which is a “sect” of materialism, is an atheistic faith. The carnage that this faith did during the last century, in Soviet Union under Stalin; in China during the Cultural Revolution, and in Cambodia under Pol Pot, and virtually anywhere communists came to power or were striving to come to power, is only surpassed by the carnage of Islam.
Not all faiths are murderous, but all faiths are blind. In his first missile to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul says, “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.” (1 Corinthians 1:21). He then adds, “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness" (1 Corinthians 3:19) Imam a Ghazzali (1058 – 1111) also praised blind faith when he said: “Where the claims of reason come into conflict with revelation, reason must yield to revelation.” (Tahafut al-falasafa, the Incoherence of Philosophers)Do not think that those who have left religion are automatically faith-free. Many atheists are as blinded by their faith in materialism as religious people are with their "God delusion". Francium is said to be the least stable of the first 103 elements on the periodic table. Less than an ounce of it exists on the Earth at any one time. Free thinking is just as rare as Francium. Do not believe it, when atheists tell you that they are free thinkers. They have switched faith, but free thinkers they are not. They believe in materialism. I know many religious people who are far more free thinkers than many atheists. Atheism has nothing to do with free thinking. Not only most atheists oppose free thinking, they vehemently negate any innovative idea that challenges the materialistic view of the world and become vicious.
In the words of the physicist Max Planck, “science progresses funeral by funeral.” Socrates, who chose poison over silence, in his trial said, “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.” Socrates was charged with two crimes: He did not believe in the gods of the Athenians, and he “corrupted the young.” How did this alleged corruption happen? He went to the streets (a precursor of the Internet) and spoke of his maverick ideas to the young people who gathered to listen. He told them not to believe in the orthodoxy taught by the establishment, but to use their own intelligence and think. He taught them to use logic in lieu of faith. Although a gentle soul, Socrates was seen by the majority of the Athenians as a trouble maker, a revolutionary and a corrupter.
In the words of Australian biologist Jeremy Griffith, the director of Foundation for Humanity’s Adulthood “The Copernican model of our solar system, which showed that Earth was not the centre of the universe, was staunchly rejected by the scientific establishment and by religious zealots of Copernicus’ time. In fact Copernicus delayed publication of his theory until the last days of his life in 1543 because he feared persecution. Fifty seven years later Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake for teaching Copernican theory and when Galileo upheld the same belief some ten years after Bruno’s incineration he was also made to endure horrific persecution.” [1]
When Galileo advocated Copernican ideas, he was accused of putting ideas that were contrary to religious teaching, which claimed that the Earth was fixed and the center of the universe. He went to his friends for support. They showed him their shoulders. He was denounced to the Inquisition and despite his age and frail health; he was forced to travel to Rome to stand trial. In order to avoid being burnt on stake he recanted, but spent the last eight years of his life in confinement. The Copernican theory was declared “false and erroneous” and Galileo’s book was banned by decree.
Darwin so feared opposition that he did not publish his book for eight years. When he did, he was ‘greeted with violent and malicious criticism’ (The Origin of Species, title page, 1968 Penguin edn). He was even accused of being psychotic. He was so fiercely attacked that he wrote: ‘I have got fairly sick of hostile reviews…I can pretty plainly see that, if my view is ever to be generally adopted, it will be by young men growing up and replacing the old workers’ (Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin, 1902, p.244).
Darwin was mocked for his maverick ideas. During the famous debate at Oxford in 1860 about Darwin ’s idea of natural selection Bishop Wilberforce, said, “ Darwin ’s views are contrary to the revelations of God in the Scriptures’ (Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin, 1902, p.236). As a final crushing blow, he turned to Thomas Huxley, the young biologist and the champion of Darwinism who was among the audience and said: “Is the gentleman, related by his grandfather’s or grandmother’s side to an ape?” Springing to his feet, young Huxley retorted: “I would far rather be descended from a monkey on both my parents’ sides than from a man who uses his brilliant talents for arousing religious prejudice”. A roar of rage went up from the clergy, yells of delight from the Oxford students. The day was Huxley’s—and Darwin’s. (Reader’s Digest, Great Lives, Great Deeds, 1966, p.335, 336) To keep away from being abused by hostile academicians, Darwin lived a recluse life.
Griffith says, “Each of these giant strides in the journey of demystification met so much resistance that the insights were lucky to survive. Science historian Thomas Kuhn pointed out that there is no guarantee truth will survive prejudice when he wrote, ‘In science…ideas do not change simply because new facts win out over outmoded ones…Since the facts can’t speak for themselves, it is their human advocates who win or lose the day’ (Shirley C. Strum, Almost Human, 1987—Strum’s references are to Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, second edn, 1970). Similarly John Stuart Mill, in his essay On Liberty, emphasized that, ‘the dictum that truth always triumphs over persecution is one of those pleasant falsehoods which men repeat after one another till they pass into commonplaces, but which all experience refutes. History teems with instances of truth put down by persecution. If not suppressed for ever, it may be thrown back for centuries.”
These words should be engraved in gold. It is a lie to think that truth will automatically triumph over lies or that goodness will eventually win over evil on its own. This is a sweet lie that has no bases on reality and it serves to no purpose other than to lull us into inaction. Truth does not win unless someone promotes it and goodness will not triumph unless someone advance it.
Who will advance the truth? The orthodoxy will not tolerate innovative ideas that defy its paradigm. Kuhn also recognized that “revolutions in science are often initiated by an outsider—someone not locked into the current model, which hampers vision almost as much as blinders would’ (Shirley C. Strum, Almost Human, 1987, pp.164-165 of 294—Strum’s references are to Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, second edn, 1970).
Why an outsider? It is because an outsider does not know that it cannot be done. He has no idea that it is impossible. Because he is ignorant, i.e. ignorant of the conventional wisdom, he tries the “impossible,” and indulges in experiments that are deemed to be foolish. The pioneers of science and inventors are often outsiders. They are heretics, rejected by the priests of orthodoxy and barred from the tabernacle of the custodians of “knowledge.”
Not all learning is knowledge. Most people have learned a lot, but they do not know much. They are scholars, but not scouts.
Griffith says, “Even Charles Darwin was ‘a lone genius, working from his country home without any official academic position. (Geoffrey Miller, The Mating Mind, 2000, p.33 of 538). The danger of not being part of the establishment is that the ‘outsider’ is an easy, undefended target for those in the establishment who feel threatened by the outsider’s new ideas.
“The philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer summarized the journey that new ideas in science have historically had to undergo when he said that ‘the reception of any successful new scientific hypothesis goes through predictable phases before being accepted’. First, ‘it is ridiculed’ and ‘violently opposed’. Second, after support begins to accumulate ‘it is stated that it may be true but it’s not particularly relevant.’ Third, ‘after it has clearly influenced the field [including members of the establishment quickly remodeling/ plagiarizing the ideas as their own discoveries] it is admitted to be true and relevant but the same critics assert that the idea is not original.’ Finally, ‘it is accepted as being self-evident’ (compiled from two references to Schopenhauer’s quote—New Scientist, 15 Nov. 1984 and PlanetHood, Ferencz and Keyes, 1988). Note that each stage of recognition is achieved in a way that protects the ego of the onlookers. The extent of insecurity in the human make-up is very apparent. Because the ego or sense of self worth of each generation becomes attached to its view of the world, paradigm shifts typically have to be introduced by new generations.
“George Bernard Shaw warned of the true nature of progress when he said that, ‘All great truths begin as blasphemies’ (from his play Annajanska, 1919).” [2]
Many Muslims tell me that after reading my articles criticizing Islam, their faith in Islam has increased. How can one’s faith increase after reading that the man whom they had believed to be a prophet of God was a mass murderer, a looter, a pedophile, a rapist and an assassin? This defies logic. What actually is happening is that they feel threatened. Their faith is challenged, and as the result, they hide deeper in their shell. They will not venture out, until that shell is completely broken and it can no longer provide protection. To achieve that goal, we must pound on it with truth until it is smashed into pieces.
Muslims are not the only people hiding in their shells. The majority of mankind needs the protective armor of a faith. We want to make sense of the world. We are afraid of the unknown. We cling to our beliefs because they give us comfort. We fear the unknown. We fear freedom.
Not too long ago I received an email (I am sorry I could not find it to publish it here) from a Muslim who said, Ali, I agree with everything you say about Islam. But I can't leave Islam because it is everything that I have. Without it I don't know what to do.
Erick Fromm in, The Fear of Freedom, (Routledge 17 May 2001) upholds the idea that capitalism frees man from a society that reduces him to a single role, but at a price. The price is isolation. Man has to find or create his place in the world. This causes anxiety. Whilst fascism, Nazism, theocracies, and all forms of authoritarianisms, satisfy man’s psychological need to belong. They provide a simple "us vs. them" ethos which gives the adherent something bigger to be a part of. Through conformity man tries to beat the anxiety of separation. That means loss of freedom and loss of independence. By conforming you belong, but you give up your wholeness and become a part of something else.
The fear of being different, to be isolated, to become an outcast, is cause for anxiety and this is what makes us humans conform – conform with the norms and dictums of the society – with its values, its standards, its mores and its wisdom. We need to find something to belong. Our community, our country, our religion and ultimately our faith/ideology give us security and the sense of belonging. They are shells that we carry along to hide within and feel safe. Therefore, we are protective of them. That is why we become defensive if our beliefs are challenged. People can become abusive, aggressive and even violent when their faith is threatened. That is why Socrates was forced to drink poison, Jordano Bruno was burned, Galileo was imprisoned, Jesus was crucified, Joan of Arc was burned to ashes and Bab was executed. They died because they pioneered new ideas that threatened the faiths of the people.
We humans have not changed much psychologically. Technologically, we have advanced, but psychologically we are still cavemen. We have changed our beliefs. We have changed our shells, but we are the same hermit crab, with the same fears that haunted our ancestors thousands of years ago.
Today the Inquisition is performed in the academia. There are dogmas that are taboos and you must not violate or you will be assaulted with vicious ferocity, until you recoil and remain silent. If you don’t, you’ll pay the price, dearly. You may not be executed literally but you’ll be mocked, vilified, insulted, called lunatic and discredited.
Yet, only those who dare to know are enlightened. Daring to know does not mean just learning, but also discovering the unkno wn. It is daring to ask questions that are not allowed to be asked, delving into worlds that are taboo, and to borrow a phrase from the Star Trek movies, “to boldly go where no man has gone before.”
Answering the question of “What is Enlightenment?,” the German philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote:
“Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! [dare to know] ‘Have courage to use your own understanding!’--that is the motto of enlightenment.” [3]
According to Kant, “laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a proportion of men, … gladly remain in lifelong immaturity, and why it is so easy for others to establish themselves as their guardians. It is so easy to be immature. If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me.”
Kant compares the unthinking masses to sheep and domestic livestock and says, “Having first made their domestic livestock dumb, and having carefully made sure that these docile creatures will not take a single step without the go-cart to which they are harnessed, these guardians then show them the danger that threatens them, should they attempt to walk alone. Now this danger is not actually so great, for after falling a few times they would in the end certainly learn to walk; but an example of this kind makes men timid and usually frightens them out of all further attempts.”
Let us dare to know. Let us dare to ask questions that we are told not to ask. Let us take the road less traveled. Let us not be followers but prophets unto ourselves. Let us explore the unknown. The worst thing that can happen is that we find nothing. But we shall never know until we try.
I am ignorant, but not as ignorant as to not know that I am ignorant. I will continue wondering, exploring and daring to know.

Sethusamudram project — Trials and travails

2007-09-23T23:55:00.000-07:00

The Sethusamudram project was first conceived in 1860. After several reports and studies, it was only in 2000-01 that the Government allocated Rs 4.8 crore and an SPV was formed. The channel will cut short the sailing distance for ships to the extent of 425 nautical miles (780 km) and up to 30 hours of sailing time.
Raghu Dayal
Joining the Ivy league of the world’s best known maritime waterways (Panama Canal, Suez Canal, Malacca Strait), albeit not of their size or strategic significance, will soon be the Sethusamudram canal, across the Palk Straits between India and Sri Lanka, linking the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar, through Rameswaram island.
Currently, ships traversing between India’s east coast and west coast are obliged to circumnavigate Sri Lanka due to a sandstone reef, termed Adam’s Bridge (a chain of islets and shallows linking India with Sri Lanka) located southeast of Rameswaram, close to Pamban, which connects the Talaimannar coast of Sri Lanka. The depth of the sea here being only about 3 metres restricts ships to navigate.
The Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project (SSCP) constitutes the country’s first effort to dredge a navigation channel that is located 30-40 km offshore. It is also the longest sea bed dredging project ever to be taken up by India.
With two legs – one in the Adam’s Bridge, where the average depth is only about 3 metres, and the other leg in the Palk Strait where the depth averages 6-8 metres – the present Sethusamudram channel is over 20 km from the Shingle Island off the Gulf of Mannar near Dhanushkodi, running parallel to the India-Sri Lanka Medial Line, at a minimum distance of 3 km within India’s own territorial waters.
The length of the proposed channel is expected to be 167.57 km, with its southern leg at Adam’s Bridge area 34.92 km long, the northern leg in Palk Strait 54.33 km long, and the intervening Palk Bay stretches in the central portion 78.32 km long.
While the northern and southern legs, involving the shallow sea bed of the Palk Bay and Adam’s Bridge, will need to be dredged for a depth of 12 metre, the central leg requires no dredging. The SSCP, when completed, will be 167 km long, 12 metres deep and 300 metres wide at the bottom, and would enable ships to navigate through the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay, and enter the Bay of Bengal directly.Historical background
Cherished for long that the country should have a continuous navigable sea-lane within its own territorial waters, there were as many as nine proposals made between 1860 and 1922 for a ship channel to be carved across the narrow strip of land, linking the Gulf of Mannar and the Palk Bay for providing a short-cut for ocean-going vessels to navigate between the two coasts of India.
Initially proposed in 1860 by Commander A.D. Taylor of the Indian Marines, the proposal envisaged cutting a canal across the Tonitorai Peninsula at a place about 20 km west of the Pamban Pass.
At an initial estimated cost of about £90,000, subsequently revised to £1,500,000, the scheme was to excavate a deep cutting about 4.5 km in length through the dry land and deepen to five fathoms for about 5 km on each side to connect it to the harbour on the south and the deep waters on the north.
Another proposal a year later by Townshend, contemplating silting the canal through the Pamban Pass, was found to be impracticable.
Prior to various proposals individually submitted by Sir William Dennison, Acting Governor of Madras, in 1863, Stoddart in 1871, and Robertson, Harbour Engineer for India, in 1872, a Parliamentary Committee of Her Majesty’s Government recommended in 1862 an alignment situated some 3 km east of Pamban, crossing the island in a straight northerly direction.
After a 12-year interval, the South India Ship Canal Port and Coaling Station Ltd., UK, surveyed and considered the construction of a canal across the Rameswaram Island.
In fact, the Secretary of State for India granted this company a perpetual concession, but the Madras Government advised the Government of India in October 1890 to give up the scheme as the shoals at the Palk Strait between Pt. Calimere and Pt. Pedro would prevent the proposed canal being made use of by vessels of deep-sea draught.
The project languished for long until, in 1922, Sir Robert Bristow, Harbour Engineer of Madras, having studied all previous submissions, put forth his proposal for an alignment somewhat similar to that adopted by the South Indian Railway Company in 1903 across the Rameswaram Island. After Independence
Nothing tangible did, however, happen until the country’s Independence. In 1956, a committee under Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliar considered a 7.8-metre draught land canal crossing the main land at Mandapam at an estimated cost of Rs 1.8 crore. Some modifications were suggested by Capt H.R. Davis in 1959 by way of an alternative alignment across the main land maintaining the same draught.
In 1963, the State Port Officer, Madras, examined the feasibility of increasing the draught from 7.8 metres to 10.8 metres, entailing an estimated cost of Rs 21 crore.
In 1967, the Government appointed a committee under Dr Nagendra Singh, Secretary, Union Ministry of Shipping and Transport, and again, in 1981, constituted another committee under H.R. Laxminarayan, Development Adviser (Ports).
The former suggested an alignment in the Rameswaram Island Crossing called the DE alignment near Thankachemadam, while the latter proposed a new alignment across Dhanushkodi. The project cost was estimated at Rs 282 crore.
In 1996, yet another report came out – from Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Ltd, which was directed by the State Government to update the Laxminarayan Report.
The consultants proposed a number of infrastructural facilities in addition to the canal which, no doubt, constituted the major component of the project.SPV formed
At long last, the Government moved towards implementing the project, when the 2000-01 Union Budget included a provision of Rs 4.8 crore for its feasibility study. An SPV – Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd – has been entrusted with the responsibility to execute the project. A debt equity ratio of 1.5:1 is contemplated for its funding, with a contribution of Rs 495 crore by the Central Government, and partnership from the ports of Tuticorin, Chennai, Ennore, Visakhapatnam and Paradip, besides Shipping Corporation of India and Dredging Corporation of India.
Designated in February 1997, by the Union Ministry of Surface Transport, as the nodal agency for the project, Tuticorin Port Trust has been scaling up its business prospects of domestic transhipment containerised cargo. Sethusamudram Corporation Ltd has proposed a container transhipment hub to be constructed at Colachel, a minor port in southern Tamil Nadu.
Although the project at Colachel had been proposed by RITES in its Port Vision 2020, and a feasibility study was prepared in 1998 by the State Government, and updated in 2000 by a Malaysian enterprise for a greenfield port, a detailed project report has been contemplated afresh by the State Government.
The project is of strategic importance, as it will facilitate easier and quicker access between the country’s coasts for Indian Coast Guard and naval vessels.
The channel will cut short the sailing distance for ships to the extent of 425 nautical miles (780 km) and up to 30 hours of sailing time.
It will signify a shorter navigation route between Kanyakumari and Tuticorin and other east coast ports of Chennai, Ennore, Kakinada, Visakhapatnam, Paradip, Haldia and Kolkata, apart from Chittagong in Bangladesh. Domestic movement of cargo along the coast should likewise reap the benefit. (The author is a former Managing Director of Concor.)

The unsung hero of Buddhist revival in India

2007-09-18T21:45:00.000-07:00

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar is known as the messiah of the Scheduled Castes/Tribes. That sure he is. He led a mass conversion into Buddhism in 1956, and thus paved the way for Buddhist revival in India. But history should record the American-born Colonel Olcott and Anagarika Dharmapala as his fore-runners.
Col. Olcott started schools for the Dalits and the social rejects of those days, even before Dr. Ambedkar was born. At the same period, Dharmapala was the first to feel there was a great potential to win over the hearts of the untouchables in India, whom the caste Hindus persecuted. He pointed out the need for converting 65 million of untouchables into Buddhism. He had expressed his frustration thus: “I wish to start a propaganda to carry the Dhamma to the untouchables, but I am now very weak.”
Dr. Ambedkar, along with his followers, got converted to Buddhism on October 15, 1956. This is recorded as the first historic mass conversion to Buddhism. But 58 years earlier, there was a mass conversion of untouchables in Colombo, the majority of whom were Indians. On July 1, 1898, Col. Olcott, accompanied by Dharmapala led a delegation of the untouchables from the southern India (members of the Sakya Muni Society, and who left Madras for Colombo). Olcott and Dharmapala presented the large group of untouchables from India to the High Priest of Vidyodaya Pirivena. And they took Pancasila in Sri Lanka. Then a history was created, soon forgotten. Thus the contribution of Dharmapala and Col. Olcott to revival of Buddhism in India is remarkable.
Anagarika Dharmapala, who took to the religious ministry of Buddhism under Theosophical auspices, became the first missionary of the Buddhist revival in India in 1891 when he founded the Maha Bodhi Society in Chennai. He fought for the transfer of the Buddha-Gaya temple complex to Buddhist hands. He enlisted the cooperation of influential men in India and Asian countries those days for this effort and succeeded in establishing a strong Buddhist presence in India.
The Maha Bodhi journal, started by him as the organ of the Society, was patronised by Indian intellectuals such as Rabindranath Tagore, who contributed articles and poems to it; it evoked widespread enthusiasm among educated people for the Buddha and his religion.
Dharmapala’s signal achievement was the social base he built up for Buddhism to flourish again in India. He arranged to establish active centres of Buddhist worship.
Dharmapala spent in India 40 years of his life of 69. He worked day and night for the revival of Buddhism in India. Though Dharmapala was born in Sri Lanka and ceaselessly loved Sri Lanka, he was not keen to die and be buried in his own country. His desire was “to breathe my last after having entered the Buddhist order in the land of Buddha, purified by the tread of peace-loving Buddha’s feet.”
Realising that his end was near, Ven Sri Devamita Dharmapala, as he came to be called on his getting ordained, said: Don’t waste your money on buying medicine for me; use that money for Buddhist works. “This is final moment. Let me be reborn and help to promote the Buddha Sasana in India. I am prepared to be born 25 times over or more times so as to help spread the Dhamma of the Great Teacher, the Samma Sambuddha over all the world.” Mouthing that wish he breathed his last on April 29, 1933.
His is a big name in Sri Lanka. This great Sri Lankan, who is responsible for Buddhist revival in India, is a forgotten, unsung hero here.

The Pitfalls of calling Hinduism a "way of life"

2007-07-19T21:40:00.000-07:00

7/19/2007 1:33:36 AM B.N.Hebbar
It became hip and fashionable among some Hindus a few decades ago to say that Hinduism is a way of life and not a religion. And this has been parroted by many without thinking, ever since. Unfortunately, religions that do not wish the Hindus well have used this to its detriment by saying "So, Hinduism is a way of life. This means you Hindus don't have a religion. Your religion then can be our religion. Why don't you adopt ours. You may keep your way of life."

It is thus important to insist that Hinduism is a religion, philosophy and way of life, all rolled into one. These three are not mutually exclusive categories. A tradition can be all three at once as it is in the case of Taoism [Dao-de jiao as the Chinese call it] in China and Shintoism [Kami-no-michi as the Japanese call it] in Japan. Usually, nationally based religions tend to be all three at once than missionary religions.

Why are some Hindus hesitant to call Hinduism as a religion when it has all the elements that characterize a religion? Let's check each of these.

1. Deities: Hinduism has them.
2. Piety and worship: Hinduism has them.
3. Prayers and liturgy: Hinduism has them
4. Scriptures: Hinduism has them.
5. Doctrines: Hinduism has them.
6. Sacred Space: sanctified places of worship and pilgrimage. Hinduism has them.
7. Sacred Time: feasts and fasts. Hinduism has them.
8. Sacred Persons: priests and monastic. Hinduism has them.
9. Rituals: Hinduism has them.
10. Sacraments: sanctification of the important stages of life. Hinduism has them.
11. Miracles and Mysticism: Hinduism has it.
12. Code of Ethics: Hinduism has it.
13. Contemplative practices: Hinduism has them
14. Humanism: Hinduism has it.

The cultural part makes Hinduism more than a religion. It is here that it is also a way of life. One need not exclude the other. Hindus should [as the Taoists and Shintoists have] celebrate their faith as all three [religion, philosophy and way of life] rolled into one.

Hilaire Belloc: Defender of the Faith

2007-07-18T05:12:00.000-07:00

FREDERICK D. WILHELMSEN

Had we had ten Hilaire Bellocs in the English-speaking Catholic world in the past fifty years, we might have converted the whole kit-and-caboodle and avoided the mess we find ourselves in today. Hilaire Belloc, coupled in memory always with his great friend G. K. Chesterton, made the defence of the Faith the main business of his life. He wielded a mighty sword.
Hillaire Belloc(1870-1953)
With that impossible declaration behind me, I might better begin with a story told about him — he was a man who collected myths about his person, and I cannot verify the truth of this. Upon being honored with a papal decoration well into his old age, Belloc refused to put out the money needed to buy the medal and grumbled: “What would they say if I changed my mind?”
Hilaire Belloc was not built to fit any cloth fashioned by mortal man. Although he often groused about his own age (I do not mean his chronological age — he always complained about that! — but his moment in time), Belloc would have been impossible in any other age. Growing up as he did, in the twilight of the reign of Queen Victoria, blinking brilliantly in nonsense verse and radical politics in the time of King Edward VII, a child prodigy called by his aunt “Old Thunder”, Hilaire Belloc reposed upon a broad upper-middle-class English society that read him, first adored him, then good-naturedly put up with him, and finally isolated him. “I was once welcome in that house”, he commented wistfully when the automobile in which he was driving passed the home of an exceedingly rich man. His intransigent defense of all things Catholic first amused a literate and basically skeptical gentry looking for novelty; then offended; finally, it was considered intolerable.
A. N. Wilson in his biography of Belloc wrote: “If I created a character in a novel as Hilaire Belloc, people would not believe it.” Belloc was a paradox: a lyrical poet who never read any contemporary poetry; a rhymester whose high finks still charm children; an artilleryman on bivouac at Toul who smelled the Revolution as “France went by”; an aging monarchist who savored the last charge of Charles I at Naseby; the most versatile and certainly the finest English prose stylist in this and possibly any century, who grumbled from the liberty of his battered old boat, the Nona, “dear reader, read less and sail more” even as he lusted for bigger and better-paying audiences; the perpetual wanderer tramping Europe, burning for adventures even as he sang the praises of a rooted peasantry and a hearth steeped in seasonable traditions that “halted the cruelty of time”; the enemy of the rich and of capitalist greed, who once asked for a bucket of money as a birthday gift; the passionate advocate of Truth, who once groused, however, “that the truth always limps”; the drummer boy of an English-speaking Catholicism he helped make proud of itself.

At my last count, Hilaire Belloc wrote 153 books. The business has to do with vigor, an enormous lust for life, and a willingness to make mistakes. Belloc did not give a damn for what anybody thought of him. He wrote his life of King James II in a hotel on the edge of the Sahara in ten days: “It is full of howlers and is the fruit of liberty.” He walked to Rome as a young man, coming in upon the Appian Way on a mule drawn cart — but with his feet dragging on the road so his vow would not be broken.
His vigor was legendary, and I have mentioned as well his lust for life. Belloc — and this is a key to understanding his role as a Catholic apologist — was a man totally at home in this world, but one who knew it was an illusion to be so at home. There was not a trace of Manicheanism in him, and he called puritanism, in his biography of Louis XIV, an “evil out of the pit”, meaning the pit of hell. A mountain climber, he was even more a sailor. His Hills and the Sea and The Cruise of the Nona are classics. If The Path to Rome is the work of a young genius, rollicking and rolling his way over mountain and valley toward the Eternal City, The Four Men, on the contrary, called by its author “A Farrago”, was penned in solitude mixed with melancholy. Grizzlebeard, the Poet, and the Sailor are all extensions of Myself, and Myself is Belloc. Only when life is lived close to the senses, when the intelligence is engaged immediately on what is yielded to man through the body, is the paradox of sadness in created beauty brought home in all its delicacy and inexorableness. Page after page of Belloc’s writing is troubled by a deep and troubled gravity, heightened by his profound communion with the things of his world: English inns; old oak‑burnished and sturdy; rich Burgundy and other wines” that port of theirs” at the “George” drunk by the fire with which he began this book; the sea and ships that sail — but, please, “no abomination of an engine”; the smell of the tides. These loves run through Belloc’s essays, recurring themes testifying to a vision movingly poetic in its classic simplicity. His eyes are fixed on the primal things that always nourished the human spirit, on the things at hand. He wrote:
Every pleasure I know comes from an intimate union between my body and my very human mind, which last receives, confirms, revives, and can summon up again what my body has experienced. Of pleasures, however, in which my senses have no part, I know nothing.
It was this very man, rooted in this world and not in the next, who was to become the first defender of the Catholic Church in England during his lifetime. A key to his understanding of things spiritual was his vivid awareness that all things good pass, that life is filled with what Allan Tate called “rumors of mortality”. In an essay named “Harbour in the North”, Belloc brings his little cutter under a long seawall, and there meets another small vessel. The pilot declares that he is off to find a permanent refuge to the north in a harbor of whose fame he has heard. “In that place I shall discover again such full moments of content as I have known, and I shall preserve them without failing.” The stranger, of course, is Belloc’s Sailor; and Myself, Belloc himself, answers from his own boat — the Ship of Mortality — “You cannot make the harbour . . . . It is not of this world.”
An almost savage realism mixed with Belloc’s sensibility, and his meditations on death are the most moving in all English letters. Read of the execution of Danton, written in the fires of early youth; of the murder of King Charles I; of the deathbed conversion of King Charles II; and, finally, in his Elizabethan Commentary, one of his last books, Belloc reveals himself: “She felt that she was ceasing to be herself and that is what probably most of us will feel when the moment comes to reply to the summons of Azrael.” Belloc’s emotional skepticism is at its purest in an essay called “Cornetto of the Tarquins” in his Towns of Destiny. Speaking of those tombs which are of the origins of us all, he tells us of “the subterranean vision of death, the dusk of religion, which they imposed on Rome and from which we all inherit — then as I thought to myself, as I looked westward from the wall, how man might say of the life of all our race as of the life of one, that we know not whence it came, nor whither it goes”. Confessing himself to be of a skeptical mind, in a famous letter to Chesterton on the occasion of Chesterton’s conversion, Belloc’s skepticism was conquered by his faith, but the temptation to despair remained with him all his life. To me, this has always seemed strange because Heideggerian angst and dread before the specter of the Nothing seem the peculiar and often awful temptations of those with a metaphysical bent of mind — and Belloc had none at all. In The Cruise of the Nona, he wrote “of the metaphysic . . . who can see it and who can bite into it? It is of no use whatsoever.” Altogether without philosophical preoccupations, he was nonetheless haunted by the temptation that at bottom there is no answer to the riddle of human existence. His conquest of that aberration made his faith something hard, crystal clear, without compromise. Of religions other than the Catholic he had an Olympian contempt and an impatience only barely disguised and then imperfectly. He would not have fared well in these days of ecumenical tea parties, and the so‑called New Church would have bewildered him. Belloc frequently took pains to point out that tolerance is always of a lesser evil that cannot be vanquished at the moment, but vanquished it ought to be.
From whence, then, came his lyrical Catholicism, for which he was to sacrifice fame, all possibility of wealth — Belloc died a poor man — and every avenue — there were many of them — for a public career in politics? Born and baptized in the Church, a Catholic from childhood, his love and appreciation of the Faith came to him when young, but it came somewhat slowly. Of his inner life he tells us very little. French on his father’s side, Belloc — it must be remembered — did his military service in the French artillery, thus delaying his entrance into Oxford when he finally made up his mind to remain an Englishman. His spoken French remained that of a rough cannoneer. Latin European culture was the air he breathed in his youth and to which he returned whenever he could, even sailing across the channel to replenish his reserves of wine.
Were I to seek one scriptural passage which sums up Belloc’s vision of the Faith, it would be: “By their fruits ye shall know them” (Mt 6:30). Aided here by a powerful visual imagination which was brought to bear in his many military histories, Belloc could see the Church at work down the ages — and he adored what he saw. The Church made Europe and in so doing quickened the old Roman Order, in disrepair but by no means destroyed by the Germanic tribes from the north. All our typical Western institutions were either created by Catholic men from out of nothing or were inherited from our pagan forefathers and then quickened from within by the yeast of Christianity. Although the terms incarnational and eschatological were not current in Belloc’s lifetime, he is a prime instance of a man with an incarnational understanding of religious truth. Belloc looked for blessings everywhere, and the whole of Christendom was for him an immense network of actual graces.
Making his own the Thomistic insistence that grace perfects nature, the inheritance of classical antiquity, he maintained, was preserved and transfigured in the fires of Faith. In our world — at least as Belloc knew it in what might have been its twilight: the subject is foreign to my paper today — men achieved a free peasantry that marked the whole of Europe for centuries. In that ordo orbis, justice flourished and free men discovering thus their liberty exercised it through two millennia in the creation of a culture that Belloc once called “the standing grace of this world”. There we all experienced not only a free citizenry but the sacredness of marriage, the dignity of men, chivalry, the steady rejection of Manichean irresponsibility and of every pantheist negation, the sacramental universe. These are to be found in Catholic Europe and wherever else she has stamped her genius, and are to be found as corporate doctrines tending to actuality nowhere else on this earth.

Belloc understood a rooted life, close to nature, as being humanly superior to the massification produced by modern civilization. Give a man a farm, a small business, an artisan’s anvil, a boat to sail, wine to drink — suffuse all this with the love of Christ; center man’s life around liturgical rhythms; and that man — at least Man writ in the large and taken by the handful — is happier than his industrial counterpart. A Catholic culture tends — and tends is the operative word — toward this kind of life. Tempering greed and avarice, man is then more than himself. As A. N. Wilson notes, in his introduction to a new edition of The Four Men, Belloc knew that his ideal was doomed, and his only consolation was an unholy glee in letting everybody else know that the world was going to hell: “I told you so.”
Hilaire Belloc, spreading his many talents and his incredible energy through the essay, a respectable body of very good verse, military history, nonsense novels, biography and books of travel, studies on the road, political polemics, economic theory, concentrated it all into a center, into a synthesized focus: the apostolate of history. Credo in unam, sanctam, apostolicam eccelesiam, we all recite — but Belloc took the note of apostolicity seriously. I do not mean this in the sense that Belloc showed a lively interest in controversy concerning the apostolic succession. He took that as a settled issue: Roma locuta est, causa finita. I mean it rather in the sense that he understood himself to be a man called to be an apostle. Ronald Knox, in his panegyric at Belloc’s grave site, called him more a prophet than an apostle. Possibly both Knox and I are right because Hilaire Belloc was a missionary in Protestant England, and his principal weapon was history. I doubt that this was a conscious decision, a free act exercised at one crucial moment in his life. By temperament and talent, Belloc was an historian. He soon concluded, shortly after his disillusion with parliamentary politics (he served two terms, one as a Liberal and one as an Independent), that the English‑speaking world had been lied to about its past and about its present, that this lie was bound up with the Protestant establishment, which officially dates from 1689 but which in fact reached far deeper into the English past.
Agreeing with Cobbett (whom, however, he rarely cited and who apparently had little direct influence on him: the two men converged in their historical judgment) that the Protestant Reformation “was the rising of the rich against the poor”, Belloc unpacked layer after layer of “official history” and turned over its foundation, a Great Lie. The religious zealotry of a handful of heretics was used by the mercantile and landed classes of England, aided by the lust of Henry VIII, to abolish the old Catholic Order. If Belloc had any real enemy, it was the Whigs. Of the Earl of Shaftsbury, he wrote: “He is probably in hell.” William of Orange he called that “little pervert”and, of course, the man was just that! Although Belloc never quoted Samuel Johnson’s famous “The Devil was the first Whig”, the whole weight of Belloc’s historical writing yields the same conclusion. But although Belloc loathed the Whigs, he had little in common with the Tories. A populist Catholic radical, a burned‑out republican by middle age, a man chastened into royalism, he would have been out with Bonnie Prince Charlie in the ‘45.
Time prohibits my detailing Belloc’s revolution in English historical writing. Suffice it to say — and this is said formally and altogether without rhetorical emphasis — that one man, Hilaire Belloc, turned the whole writing of British history around. Since Belloc, nobody can get away with understanding the Reformation as the work of high‑minded souls bent on liberty and democracy, noble souls who brought England out of the darkness of Catholic superstition and medieval obscurantism. Others footnoted Belloc and traded on his vision. They did well in doing so, but the vision was his — as was the persecution of silence that followed on his work.
If by their fruits ye shall know them, then the fruits of the Revolt against Rome have been sufficiently documented; more important, they have so pained the bones of all of us that to know them well is to revolt against the Revolt. Men were cheapened in their dignity. They cringed Calvinistically under a cruel and implacable God who damned most of them from all eternity to hell, and who filled the barns of the saved. The beauty and grandeur, even languor, of an old order of things gave way to a severity and grimness of style and manner that choked off man’s natural response to the beauty of the world God had created. Belloc would have none of it, and he exposed the fraud. Behind the psalm‑singing fanatics, there reposes the weight of what he called The Money Power, the new Capitalism and Banking System, that enslaved Europe to its greed. Belloc detailed it all in lavish description in book after book — toward the end, he was repeating himself. If his prose never bored, his arguments often did. The modern world, built on money and heresy, has had and has as its enemy the Catholic Church and the Order she has created. Quite clearly, Mr. Belloc, as he was called in his old age, did not like the modern world — gray, anonymous, bereft of beauty, craftmanship ignorant of nobility, shorn of dignity. Yet, as already noted, the England of his own time was probably the only place he could have flourished as he did. Winston Churchill offered him a high honor, in the name of the king, in the twilight of Belloc’s life, when the bombs were bursting over Britain. Belloc turned him down courteously.
Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, in a piece about liturgy a short time ago, that the only apologetic the Church has for her truth are her saints and her art. Neither are to be found anywhere else within the broad sweep of man’s adventure through time as they are in the Church. Belloc, I think, would have agreed in part with the cardinal. How often did our author pause before tower and church, the easy grace of French and English villages unspoiled by industrialism, as they broke upon vision at dawn and then heightened and blessed the woods and hills surrounding them? How often did he not speak of the Cathedral of Seville as the first marvel of Western art — and this from a man French and not Spanish in temperament? And did he not write the finest panegyric to Saint Joan of Arc — none is better — and do it in an English that matched the French of her own time? No: if the Faith be not the answer to the human heart, then there is none. But Belloc would probably have added to Ratzinger’s saints and art the entire social order brought into being by men who sensed, often obscurely, that if Christ’ were not in the marketplace, he was nowhere. And this, I hasten to add, from a man who held that the center of existence was the tabernacle of the altar. Those close to him have witnessed to his deepening devotion to the Eucharist as the years bent him down. Indeed, Belloc insisted, it was the hatred for and attack on transubstantiation that formed the center of the bitterness moving the English reformers in the sixteenth century. Read Belloc on Cranmer. They turned all the altars around and made of them tables and thus first obscured and finally denied what it is that gave life to Catholic churches and left all others temples reminiscent of tombs.

Faith is to be fought for and, once won — if won only precariously — cherished and watered, but not watered down. So too with the civilization crafted into being for us by the Faith: it must be loved and defended. We might all read Belloc’s meditation “Wall of the City”: within, the busy commerce of decent men who go about the pots and pans of life and who worship God as he is carried through the streets in the monstrance — and without, the enemy! Belloc articulated that enemy for his own time. The enemy is the barbarian, but he always used the word analogically; and the older barbarian before the walls comes off better than his modern counterpart for Belloc. “The Barbarian” within is the man who laughs at the fixed convictions of our inheritance. He is the man with a perpetual sneer on his lips. He is above it all: he judges the poor believer in the street or in the church, some old woman huddled before a shrine of the Virgin mumbling her beads, and he judges her harshly. It is hard enough to come by belief and to live in it, but to throw it away for a cheap joke is despicable. Such are the Barbarians.
The Barbarian hopes — and that is the mark of him, that he can have his cake and eat it too. He will consume what civilization has slowly produced after generations of selection and effort, but he will not be at pains to replace such goods, nor indeed has he a comprehension of the virtue that has brought them into being. Discipline seems to him irrational, on which account he is ever marvelling that civilization, should have offended him with priests and soldiers .... In a word, the Barbarian is discoverable everywhere in this, that he cannot make: that he can befog and destroy but that he cannot sustain; and of every Barbarian in the decline or peril of every civilization exactly that has been true.
Belloc is describing just about everyone you met at your last cocktail party or faculty meeting. Barbarians are everywhere.
Listen to Belloc again in words written from the solitude of the Sahara as he pondered the ruins of Timgad:
We sit by and watch the Barbarian, we tolerate him; in the long stretches of peace we are not afraid. We are tickled by his irreverence, his comic inversion of our old certitudes and our fixed creeds refreshes us; we laugh. But as we laugh we are watched by large and awful faces from beyond: and on these faces there is no smile.
Of these men he added — and this too from the desert — “Their Faiths turn to legend, and at last they enter that shrine whose God has departed and whose Idol is quite blind.” When our Lord vanishes from the household shrines of the West, the drums are muted and men worship abstractions — as they do today — new idols. But behind them there is an awful power, and it is not of this world.

Possessed of a highly poetic and prophetic mind, Belloc possessed as well a sharply honed intelligence. His The Servile State is a prolonged syllogism with not a metaphor in the whole book. His general thesis, argued in 1909, that the West was moving toward neither pure socialism nor pure capitalism is today a commonplace. It happened. We can either mourn or delight in our consumerist society. I get the impression that Belloc did a little of both. Be that as it may, his “distributist society” lies outside the scope of this paper. His Survivals and New Arrivals is closer to my subject. Islam, he predicted, will return because Islam is a permanent menace to the Faith. Islam has returned. Bible Christianity or Bibliolatry could return but probably will not: Belloc was wrong. Fundamentalism is with us everywhere today in the United States: vulgar, as Belloc said it always was, primitive in thought, as Belloc pointed out; sophisticated in its use of an electronic technology which he could not have predicted. Arianism, the modern name of which is modernism, has come back with a vengeance in the Church. Belloc sketched that possibility as well. All of his predictions in this interesting book were closely reasoned, but such argumentation, he admitted it, is often mocked by the mystery of the future. His reasoning prowess truly came into its own in several controversies: one with Coupon on medieval Catholicism, where Coupon got the facts right but turned the picture upside down; one with H. G. Wells on the origin of man, where Belloc complained privately that the Church hampered him because it has swallowed “all that Hebrew folklore”; and, finally, one with Dean Inge, where Belloc nails his enemy to the wall.
After answering point by point Dean Inge’s objections to Catholicism — some of them were infantile: no man can be an Englishman and a Catholic; others were vicious: the Church is “ a bloody and treacherous association” and an “imposter” — Belloc concluded his open letter with the following peroration. I beg your leave to read it as he wrote it:
There wholly escapes you the character of the Catholic Church .... You are like one examining the windows of Chartres from within by candle‑light but we have the sun shining through . . . . For what is the Catholic Church? It is that which replies, co‑ordinates, establishes. It is that within which is right order; outside the puerilities and the despairs. It is the possession of perspective in the survey of the world .... Here alone is promise, and here alone is foundation. Those of us who boast so stable an endowment make no claim thereby to personal peace; we are not saved thereby alone .... But we are of so glorious a company that we receive support, and have communion. The Mother of God is also our own. Our dead are with us. Even in these our earthly miseries we always hear the distant something of an eternal music, and smell a native air. There is a standard set for us whereto our whole selves respond, which is that of an inherited and endless life, quite full, in our own country. You may say, “all that is rhetoric.” You would be wrong, for it is rather vision, recognition, and testimony. But take it for rhetoric. Have you any such? Be it but rhetoric, whence does that stream flow? Or what reserve is that which can fill even such a man as myself with fire? Can your opinion (or doubt or gymnastics) do the same? I think not! One thing in this world is different from all others. It has a personality and a force. It is recognized and (when recognized) most violently hated or loved. It is the Catholic Church. Within that household the human spirit has roof and hearth. Outside it is the night.
In haec urbe lux sollennis,Ver aeternum, pax perennis Et aeterna gaudia.
He once wrote that the French are blessed by the capacity to criticize themselves and to surmount their own criticism. Be that as it may, Hilaire Belloc rarely criticized the Church. He loved her altogether too much. He never answered personal attacks by fellow Catholics. It would have been, he said, a sin against his own body. Times change, and today a Catholic writer can make a good living attacking his own Mother. But Hilaire Belloc, coupled in memory always with his great friend G. K. Chesterton, made the defence of the Faith the main business of his life. He wielded a mighty sword. “Gigantes autem erant in terram in diebus illis.” “There were giants upon the earth in those days” (Gen 6:4). But the sword of Hilaire Belloc was buried with him. I gravely doubt whether we shall see his like again.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Wilhelmsen, Frederick D. “Hilaire Belloc: Defender of the Faith.” In The Catholic Writer: The Proceedings of the Wethersfield Institute 2 (1989): 83-95.
Reprinted by permission of The Wethersfield Institute.
THE AUTHOR
The late Dr. Frederick D. Wilhelmsen was professor of philosophy and politics at the University of Dallas, Irving, Texas. He wrote over 250 articles and fourteen books, among them Christianity and Political Philosophy, Citizen of Rome, and Being and Knowing. Just before his death in early 1996, he was at work on a collection of adventures and reflections of life and sailing the high seas entitled, Under Full Sail: Reflections and Tales.
Copyright © 1989 Ignatius Press

David Daiches

2007-07-17T08:41:00.000-07:00

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
David Daiches
Daiches on the cover of Two Worlds and Promised Lands
Born:
September 2, 1912Sunderland, England
Died:
July 15, 2005Edinburgh, Scotland
Occupation:
Literary critic, scholar,
Nationality:
Scottish
Writing period:
1935 - 1994
Subjects:
English and Scottish literature and culture
Debut works:
The Place of Meaning in Poetry
David Daiches (September 2, 1912 –July 15, 2005) was a Scottish literary historian and critic, scholar and writer. He wrote extensively on English and Scottish literature and Scottish culture.
Contents[hide]
1 Early life
2 Career
3 List of published works
4 References
//

[edit] Early life
He was born in Sunderland, England, in a Jewish family with a Lithuanian background. He moved to Edinburgh while still a young child, about the end of World War I, where his father, Rev. Dr. Salis Daiches became a prominent rabbi. He studied at George Watson's College and won a scholarship to University of Edinburgh where he won the Elliot prize, and went on to Balliol College, Oxford where he became the Elton exhibitioner.
Daiches is the father of Jenni Calder, also a Scottish literary historian. His brother was the prominent Edinburgh QC Lionel Daiches.

[edit] Career
During World War II, he worked for the British Embassy in Washington, DC, producing pamphlets for the British Information Service and drafting (and delivering) speeches on British institutions and foreign policy.
Daiches first published work was The Place of Meaning in Poetry, published in 1935. He was a prolific writer, producing works on English literature, Scottish literature, literary history and criticism as well as the broader role of literature in society and culture. His The Novel and the Modern World (1939) was well-received and his expertise on the modern period led to his co-editing The Norton Anthology of English Literature (1962). He also wrote the two-volume A Critical History of English Literature and edited the Penguin Companion to Literature - Britain and the Commonwealth (1971). He wrote biographical and critical works on Virginia Woolf, Robert Louis Stevenson, Robert Burns, D. H. Lawrence, John Milton, and Sir Walter Scott. He also wrote two autobiographical volumes, books on Scotch Whisky, the King James Bible, and the cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow, a biography of Bonnie Prince Charlie, and a volume of poetry.
Starting at the University of Edinburgh, he had a long and influential career teaching in the UK, the US and Canada. He taught or held visiting posts at Balliol College, The University of Chicago, Cornell University, Jesus College, Cambridge, Indiana University, The University of Minnesota, McMaster University in Canada, Wesleyan University in Ohio, and The University of California; besides setting up the English Department at the newly founded Sussex University. From 1980-86 he was Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities at Edinburgh University. Daiches chaired the panel of judges for the Booker Prize in 1980.

[edit] List of published works
The Place of Meaning in Poetry (1935)
New Literary Values; Studies in Modern Literature (1936)
Literature and Society (1938)
Poetry and the Modern World: A Study of Poetry in England Between 1900 and 1939 (1940)
Virginia Woolf (1942)
Robert Louis Stevenson (1947)
A Study Of Literature (For Readers And Critics) (1948)
Robert Burns (1950)
Stevenson and the Art of Fiction (1951)
A Century of the Essay: British and American (1951)
Willa Cather - A Critical Introduction (1951)
Two Worlds : A Jewish Childhood in Edinburgh (1956) (memoirs)
Literary Essays (1956)
Critical Approaches to Literature (1956)
The Present Age in British Literature (After 1920) (1958)
Two Studies: The Poetry of Dylan Thomas, Walt Whitman: Impressionist Prophet (1958)
Robert Louis Stevenson - a Laurel Reader (1959) editor
A Critical History of English Literature (1960) two volumes
The Novel and the Modern World (1960)
White Man in the Tropics: Two Moral Tales (1962)
D. H. Lawrence (1963)
George Eliot: Middlemarch (1963)
English Literature (1964)
Milton (1964)
The Idea of a New University. An Experiment in Sussex (1964) editor
The Paradox of Scottish Culture: The Eighteenth Century Experience (1964)
More Literary Essays (1968)
The King James Version of the English Bible (1968)
Scotch Whisky: Its Past and Present (1969)
Some Late Victorian Attitudes (1969) Ewing Lectures
A Third World (1971) (memoirs)
Penguin Companion to Literature - Britain and the Commonwealth (1971) editor
Sir Walter Scott and His World (1971)
Robert Burns and His World (1972)
Literature and Western Civilization (1972-6) editor with Anthony Thorlby, six volumes
Robert Louis Stevenson and His World (1973)
Bonnie Prince Charlie: The Life and Times of Charles Edward Stuart (1973)
Moses: Man in the Wilderness (1975) Moses: The Man and the Vision in the US
Was: A Pastime from Time Past (1975)
James Boswell and His World (1976)
Shakespeare: Julius Caesar (1976)
Glasgow (1977)
Scotland and the Union (1977)
Edinburgh (1978)
The Butterfly and the Cross (1978)
The Selected Poems of Robert Burns (1979)
Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun. Selected Political Writings and Speeches (1979) editor
Literary Landscapes of the British Isles. A Narrative Atlas (1979) with John Flower
A Companion to Scottish Culture (1981)
The Avenel Companion to English and American Literature (1981) editor
Literature and Gentility in Scotland (1982)
God and the Poets (1984) Gifford Lectures (1983)
A Hotbed of Genius: The Scottish Enlightenment, 1730–1790 (1986) editor with Jean Jones and Peter Jones
Let's Collect Scotch Whisky (Jarrold Collectors Series) (1988)
A Wee Dram: Drinking Scenes from Scottish Literature (1990)
A Weekly Scotsman And Other Poems (1994)

[edit] References
Calder, John. "Obituary: David Daiches", The Guardian, July 18, 2005. Retrieved on 2007-02-21. (in English)
Baker, William. "Professor David Daiches", The Independent, July 18, 2005. Retrieved on 2007-02-21. (in English)
"David Daiches", The Times, July 25, 2005. Retrieved on 2007-03-27. (in English)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Daiches"

Obituary
David DaichesProlific scholar and teacher whose works showed his mastery of literary criticism, history and culture John Calder Monday July 18, 2005The Guardian
As a small boy, the distinguished literary scholar and historian David Daiches, who has died aged 92, decided he would become the second Shakespeare, and his published writings certainly exceeded the bard's in length. At 11, he discovered that his father had, without telling him, given his poems to his school magazine, and the publication of one of them in a serious journal with no juvenile section attracted much attention.
But although he was to produce some creative literature of his own, it was as a teacher, critic, historian and scholar that Daiches was to make his mark. As director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities at Edinburgh University (1980-86), and earlier at Sussex University, where he was professor of English (1961-77) and dean of the School of English Studies (1961-68), he became one of the most prolific and respected academics of his time.

Article continues

Daiches was born in Sunderland, but moved, at the age of six, to Edinburgh, where his father became rabbi to the city's two synagogues and de facto chief rabbi of Scotland. Being brought up in an Orthodox Jewish family in Scotland after the first world war was an experience he entertainingly described in Two Worlds (1956), an account of his schooldays and a moving tribute to his father, a powerful speaker, campaigner and scholar, who did much to integrate Scottish Jewry into Scottish life, while preserving its distinctiveness.
The Daiches had come from Lithuania, and a long succession of rabbinical scholars. David was the middle child of three, his brother Lionel having a distinguished career at the Scottish bar, and he grew up as a normal, middle-class Edinburgh boy, unable only to take part in sports on Saturdays.
"Being a Jew," he told the Guardian three decades ago, "was not as paradoxical or difficult as might be imagined. Children accept the world into which they are born, and it seemed to us that there was the secular world outside and the internal closed Jewish world of festivals and synagogue services. We were equally at home in both."
At George Watson's school, Daiches excelled in English, languages and history, won a scholarship at 15, and left with many prizes and a further scholarship to Edinburgh University. He distinguished himself there, too, won the prestigious Elliot prize and went on to Balliol College, Oxford, where he was the Elton exhibitioner. He returned to Edinburgh in 1935 to start his academic career as assistant in English, and was made a fellow and lecturer at Balliol the following year.
His first book, The Place Of Meaning In Poetry, was published in 1935. This was followed by New Literary Values (1936), Literature And Society (1938), The Novel And The Modern World (1939) and Poetry And The Modern World in 1940.
In 1937, he had gone to Chicago University as assistant professor of English, and was asked to stay there during the war. His next book, The King James Bible: A Study Of Its Sources And Development (1941), was followed by Virginia Woolf (1942). He stayed at Chicago until 1943, simultaneously producing pamphlets for the British Information Service - they were models of their kind - and, in 1944, became second secretary at the British embassy in Washington.
The then ambassador, Lord Halifax, was a rather stiff figure, and the embassy's main functions were to give out information about Britain, curry favour with President Roosevelt and report back to London on American politics. Isaiah Berlin did the latter in a witty and concise weekly brief; he, Daiches and a few coopted British journalists had to fight to get anything done in the atmosphere of aristocratic, old-boy red tape.
Because Halifax and his senior diplomats were often not up to it, Daiches had to provide, and often make, important public speeches in Washington. He had become, like his father, an eloquent speaker, able to explain British foreign policy and institutions in uncomplicated language, and he was also in demand for addresses at Burns' nights, formal dinners and business, university and special interest clubs, where he could exhibit his wide knowledge of literature, the arts, history and folklore.
After a brief period in Britain at the end of the war, Daiches and his family went to Cornell University, in Ithaca, New York state, where he was professor of English from 1946 to 1951. There were more books too, Robert Louis Stevenson (1947), A Study Of Literature (1948), Robert Burns (1950) and, in 1951, Willa Cather: An Introduction. That same year he was was appointed as an English lecturer at Cambridge, becoming a fellow of Jesus College in 1957. He none the less returned frequently to America; he was visiting professor of criticism at Indiana University from 1956 to 1957.
During all this time, Daiches continued to turn out a stream of critical books and essays, and works on British and other authors. Critical Approaches To Literature and Literary Essays (both 1956) were followed by John Milton (1957), The Present Age (1958) and A Critical History Of English Literature in 1960.
Daiches had always been a liberal with a belief in wider educational opportunity, and this aspect of his enthusiam came into his own in the early 1960s. He threw in his lot with the expansion of higher education, inaugurated by the Conservatives. Six new universities were created and at Sussex, the first of them, he became professor and dean of English studies.
That move to Brighton had begun in Hyderabad, when, on a British Council tour, Daiches had met Asa Briggs, the man who was to become pro-vice chancellor at Sussex in 1961. As the two downed dry Martinis, Briggs became more and more eloquent about the new institution's prospects. "It was going to be the greatest thing since the foundation of the University of Bologna," Daiches recalled. "So I said, who is going to set up your English department, and he said something like, "You are, dear boy.'"
While at Sussex, Daiches also lectured at McMaster University, in Canada, at Wesleyan University, Ohio, and at the University of California. In 1966, he was a visiting professor at the University of Minnesota. He published George Eliot's Middlemarch in 1963 and, a year later, besides editing The Paradox Of Scottish Culture, documented some of his educational views in The Idea Of A New University.
In 1969, he published Scotch Whisky. Two years after that came A Third World, a second autobiographical volume, in which he voiced his reservations about the US and its educational failings. That year, too, there was Sir Walter Scott And His World, and the Penguin Companion To Literature: Britain And The Commonwealth. He was also joint editor of Robert Burns And His World. After the six volumes of Literature And Western Civilisation (1972-76), in 1977 came his social, economic and cultural history of Glasgow.
In 1980, two years after the appearance of his book on Edinburgh, Daiches moved back to the city. In the 1970s, he had recalled that, as a young man, he thought there were only two places he could root himself in - Jerusalem and the Scottish capital. He had always kept up his Scottish connections and knew everyone in literature there.
As he recalled: "My childhood memories, my feelings of growing up, of my holidays on the Fife coast, of walking on the Pentland hills - all that is most moving and vivid to me about a sense of place is of Scotland. I always wanted to return to Edinburgh."
In 1981, his Companion To Scottish Culture was published, and his last work, A Weekly Scotsman And Other Poems, appeared in 1994. But even in retirement, he never stopped writing.
He is survived by the two daughters and a son from his first marriage, to Isobel Mackay, who died in 1977. His second wife, Hazel Neville, whom he married in 1978, died in 1986.
· David Daiches, critic, historian, writer, born September 2 1912; died July 15 2005

IDEALISM IN AMERICA

2007-07-17T08:39:00.000-07:00

INTRODUCTION
Idealism: Idealism is the philosophical view that the mind or spirit constitutes the fundamental reality. It has taken several distinct but related forms. Objective idealism accepts common sense realism (the view that material objects exist) but rejects naturalism (according to which the mind and spiritual values have emerged from material things), whereas subjective idealism denies that material objects exist independently of human perception and thus stands opposed to both realism and naturalism. Plato is often considered the first idealist philosopher, chiefly because of his metaphysical doctrine of Forms. The 18th-century philosopher George Berkeley was one of the major exponents of idealism. He held that the object of knowledge is an idea and that ideas can exist only in the mind; therefore, objects can exist only as objects of consciousness.
Other well-known idealists are Immanuel Kant who held that it is impossible to gain knowledge of the world by either reason or sense experience alone, his successor Johann Gottlieb Fichte who postulated a creative Ego as the ultimate source of reality, which generates all change and all knowledge, Georg Hegel for whom reality is absolute Spirit or Reason, which manifests its development toward total self-consciousness in every aspect of experience from nature to human history, and the English Hegelian F. H. Bradley who argued that ordinary experience is fragmentary and contradictory and therefore appearance; reality, the Absolute, is a unified totality, which can be known only through a unique and absolute, perhaps mystical, experience. Idealism has never really been a popular philosophical position among American philosophers, the best known idealist perhaps being Josiah Royce.
Personalism: Personalism is a fairly loose term used to describe nearly any philosophy that emphasizes the person as the basic concept in the explanation of reality (metaphysical personalism) as well as the basic unit of value (ethical personalism). Although personalism did not develop as an explicit philosophy until the early 20th century, it has many historical antecedents in the views of philosophers who stressed the primacy of personal experience. Nearly all metaphysical personalists have some form of a God or godlike reality at the center of their philosophy. The ethical aspect of personalism stresses human rights and respect for persons and holds that wrongdoing is destructive of the personality of the wrongdoer. Explicit personalism has been developed in France by Charles Renouvier, in Germany by William Stern, and in the United States by Borden Parker Bowne.
Critical EssayThe Fallacy of Epistemological Idealism
Josiah Royce (1855-1916)
Josiah Royce (picture) was born in Grass Valley, California, on November 20, 1855. Grass Valley was a mining town which was about five years older than he was. Living among rough-handed pioneer people, the sensitive, timid boy who lacked physical strength and skill very early became aware of the value of an established social order because his environment was devoid of it.
When his sixtieth birthday was celebrated, Royce, reviewing his mental development, expressed his strong feeling that his deepest motives and problems had centered about the idea of a community, although this idea had come only gradually to his clear consciousness. A platonist vein in his mind caused him to base the idea of human community upon a theory of life and upon a conception of the nature of truth and reality.
Royce was the leader of the idealistic school in the United States. His idealism differed profoundly from Green and Bradley. The influence of evolution (Le Conte and Spencer), the utilitarianism of Mill, and close association with William James enabled Royce to maintain an empirical and naturalistic temper. He was predisposed to individualism and religion. He acquired a strong interest in symbolic logic and mathematics which became factors in his methodology. His studies of Lotze, Schopenhauer, Kant, and Schelling fed his idealistic interests. And Romanticism supported his interest in literature and music.
Royce became a leading proponent of philosophical idealism whose thought dominated American philosophy until World War I. He studied at the University of California at Berkeley where he began to attract his teachers' attention because of his seriousness, intelligence and abilities. It was at this time that Royce's interest turned from religion to which he always felt sincere devotion to a search of understanding, which resulted in the discovery of philosophy. Though the university curriculum included no instruction in philosophy whatsoever, Royce succeeded in getting some sympathetic help from his instructors in geology and literature. He received his B.A. degree in 1875 and the university was able to arrange for him an additional year of study in Goettingen, Germany, where he specialized in philosophy under Lotze, Wundt, and Windelband.
On his return from Germany, the president of John Hopkins University, who had previously been president of the University of California, offered Royce a fellowship to continue his graduate work. Two years later he was granted his doctor's degree. After receiving his doctorate from Johns Hopkins University (1878), he returned to the University of California as an instructor of English. But his heart was set on philosophy. While he was at John Hopkins, Royce had met William James who promised the young philosopher help in his ambition. A vacancy eventually occurred at Harvard and he was invited to teach at Harvard on a temporary basis. In 1885 he became a regular member of the philosophy department at Harvard, where he taught until his death on September 14, 1916.
During all these years Royce's life may have appeared monotonous to the outsiders, but actually it was characterized by an intense if not exciting development of his system of idealistic philosophy and by a long series of publications, among which The Religious Aspect of Philosophy (1885), his Gifford Lectures on The World and the Individual (1900-01), and The Philosophy of Loyalty (1908) are the most outstanding. Royce's idealism combined the rationalism of system building and proof of the Absolute with traits of American philosophy: the appeal to experience, voluntarism, and the focus on ideas as plans of action, not as purely cognitive entities. This combination led to the characterization of his position as a voluntaristic idealism. According to Royce, God is not just all-knower but is also cosmic purpose. To be an individual, then, is to embody purpose.
The infinity of mutually interpreting and intercommunicating selves constitutes the absolute self, the absolute community, which is, as the whole, a conscious unity of all the parts. Royce's idealism gave rise to important ideas for the philosophy of religion and ethics. He also exhibited a profound interest in logic, and his work in this area greatly influenced his overall philosophical position. Idealistic metaphysics was to him the guarantee not only for absolute certainty, but also for a rule over the whole life by right judgment, directed by the sense of absolute truth. Royce's theoretical thinking, however, was always connected with and supported by his experience of religious life. His mother had been his first teacher in philosophy and the Bible his first textbook. Although he could claim to be born nonconformist and to be without connection with "any visible religious body," it was religious problems that drove him as the foundation of human solidarity and social loyalty, as the binding element of a community.
While in Royce's Religious Aspects of Philosophy the influence of Hegel is prevalent, Royce later, in The World and the Individual came closer to Fichte and Schopenhauer, and shifted his emphasis from thought, which in the earlier work designates the processus of the Absolute, to will, calling himself "a voluntarist and empiricist who yet believes in the Absolute." To Royce, will, as the manifestation of the Absolute, seems fit to reconcile idealist metaphysics and human experience; to corroborate in man the cardinal virtues of courage, industry, loyalty, and solidarity; and above all to unite the religious conception of God with the philosophical idea of the Absolute.
While the Absolute had been conceived at first as the universal knower, as the unity of infinite thought, in Royce's later development the God of the idealist is presented as "no merely indifferent onlooker upon this our temporal world of warfare and dust and blood and sin and glory." Absolute reason is not abandoned by Royce but, according to him, does not exclude but rather implies absolute choice, and the divine unity of reason and will implies freedom of the individual which, in accordance with Kant, belongs not to the phenomenal and temporal world but to a higher order of which man is a part.
In his last years, Royce studied the works of Charles Sanders Peirce and, in The Problem of Christianity (1913), exposed a triple logic of perception, conception, and interpretation. Voluntarism became an integral factor in Royce's theory of knowledge. Knowing is characterized as an act. An idea, to become cognitive, must be part of a judgment or itself is a judgment. This change, however, confirms Royce's early conviction that all reality is reality because true judgments can be made about it. The decision as to which judgments are true and which are false is up to the infinite thought of the Absolute, Supreme Being.
For about thirty years, Royce and William James were intimate friends and staunch adversaries. James secured Royce's appointment as professor at Harvard University. While criticizing one another, they inevitably also influenced one another, be it by provoking contrasting ideas or by agreeing on certain views. Royce sometimes expressed his sadness about being forced to attack the philosophy of James to whom he felt himself obliged for practically everything he had written. James, whose criticism of Royce's books sometimes could be devastating, once exclaimed, "Two hundred and fifty years from now, Harvard will be known as the place where Josiah Royce once taught."
Royce starts with finite ideas and finds that they possess "internal" and "external" meaning. Reality is knowable as an intimate and all-inclusive consciousness or self, into which human selves enter to supply the content. Thought can know an object only in so far as idea and object have come within a single unity of consciousness where they can be compared. Royce bases his philosophy upon a theory of the relation of our ideas to reality. Our ideas are essentially purposes, or plans of action (internal meaning). All plans must materialize into action.
The ideal's fulfillment, plans that have met the requirements of action, represent external meaning. Thus purposes are incomplete without an external world in which purposes are realized. The external is therefore meaningless unless it is the fulfillment of some (internal) purpose. But whose purpose does the world fulfill? Royce answers -- the Absolute's. But what is the Absolute? Royce replies, unlike the English Neo-Hegelians, the Absolute is a kind of collection of persons. But how can a collection of persons entertain purposes? Royce finds an answer in the psychological analysis of the individual.
A person is an organization of activities about a central purpose. Life's problem is to harmonize desires and integrate them into a self, which is an achievement. The integration of individual purposes into a self creates a little Absolute. The integration of little Absolutes forms a larger self, the "beloved" community, whose purposes would stabilize the world.
Royce's ethics is presented in The Philosophy of Loyalty. He deduces the idealistic world-view from the basic moral principle: loyalty to loyalty, loyalty to a cause. Causes must form a system making universal loyalty possible. Loyalty implies faith in a universal cause which is the highest good (spiritual value). This principle implies a spiritual meaning, a unity of values revealing the eternal spiritual life upholding truth and goodness.
In The Radical Academy
Books by and about Josiah Royce
Essay: Immortality, by Josiah Royce
Essay: Metaphysical Idealism, by Josiah Royce
Elsewhere On the Internet
The Spirit of Modern Philosophy, by Josiah Royce

World's Fastest Broadband Connection at 40 Gbps

2007-07-16T11:03:00.000-07:00

Sunday, July 15, 2007
"A 75-year-old woman from Karlstad in central Sweden has been given a scorching 40 Gbps internet connection â€” the fastest residential connection anywhere in the world. Sigbritt LÃ¶thberg is the mother of Swedish internet guru Peter LÃ¶thberg, who is using his mother to prove that fiber networks can deliver a cost-effective, ultra-fast connection. Sigbritt, who has never owned a computer before, can now watch 1,500 HDTV channels simultaneously or download a whole high definition DVD in two seconds. Apparently 'the hardest part of the whole project was installing Windows on Sigbritt's PC.'" An article in Press Esc notes an analyst study of the increasing demand for fiber-to-the-home in Europe.
12:57:28 AM
Posted By Entertainment News Comments (0) News

Does adding more RAM to your computer make it faster?

2007-07-06T06:24:00.000-07:00

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Up to a point, adding RAM (random access memory) will normally cause your computer to feel faster on certain types of operations. RAM is important because of an operating system component called the virtual memory manager (VMM).
When you run a program such as a word processor or an Internet browser, the microprocessor in your computer pulls the executable file off the hard disk and loads it into RAM. In the case of a big program like Microsoft Word or Excel, the EXE consumes about 5 megabytes. The microprocessor also pulls in a number of shared DLLs (dynamic link libraries) -- shared pieces of code used by multiple applications. The DLLs might total 20 or 30 megabytes. Then the microprocessor loads in the data files you want to look at, which might total several megabytes if you are looking at several documents or browsing a page with a lot of graphics. So a normal application needs between 10 and 30 megabytes of RAM space to run. On my machine, at any given time I might have the following applications running:
A word processor
A spreadsheet
A DOS prompt
An e-mail program
A drawing program
Three or four browser windows
A fax program
A Telnet session Besides all of those applications, the operating system itself is taking up a good bit of space. Those programs together might need 100 to 150 megabytes of RAM, but my computer only has 64 megabytes of RAM installed.
The extra space is created by the virtual memory manager. The VMM looks at RAM and finds sections of RAM that are not currently needed. It puts these sections of RAM in a place called the swap file on the hard disk. For example, even though I have my e-mail program open, I haven't looked at e-mail in the last 45 minutes. So the VMM moves all of the bytes making up the e-mail program's EXE, DLLs and data out to the hard disk. That is called swapping out the program. The next time I click on the e-mail program, the VMM will swap in all of its bytes from the hard disk, and probably swap something else out in the process. Because the hard disk is slow relative to RAM, the act of swapping things in and out causes a noticeable delay.
If you have a very small amount of RAM (say, 16 megabytes), then the VMM is always swapping things in and out to get anything done. In that case, your computer feels like it is crawling. As you add more RAM, you get to a point where you only notice the swapping when you load a new program or change windows. If you were to put 256 megabytes of RAM in your computer, the VMM would have plenty of room and you would never see it swapping anything. That is as fast as things get. If you then added more RAM, it would have no effect.
Some applications (things like Photoshop, many compilers, most film editing and animation packages) need tons of RAM to do their job. If you run them on a machine with too little RAM, they swap constantly and run very slowly. You can get a huge speed boost by adding enough RAM to eliminate the swapping. Programs like these may run 10 to 50 times faster once they have enough RAM!
Here are some interesting links:
How RAM Works
How Virtual Memory Works
Check your virtual memory settings
About the Virtual Memory Manager
11:46:58 PM
Posted By Bhavesh Shah Comments (0) Computers

Today's Parasurama for the cause of Rama

2007-06-20T22:53:00.000-07:00

Setu6/19/2007 1:33:45 PM http://newstodaynet.com/2007sud/jun07/190607.htm
V SUNDARAM
More than 800 million Hindus in India and several millions of Hindus abroad are delighted by the following observation of the Madras High Court, while dealing with the two writ petitions filed by Dr Subramanian Swami, President Janata Party and Shri Ram Gopal, President of Hindu Munnani seeking Interim Injunction against the destruction of the Ram Setu Bridge: ‘Be it man- made or natural, the Ramar Setu should not be touched’. I had requested two very senior lawyers with established legal practice and reputation for several decades to watch the High Court proceedings yesterday relating to the petition filed by Dr. Subramanian Swami. Based upon their brilliant summary of rapier-like legal arguments and points presented by Dr Subramanian Swami, I would like to present below the main thrust of Dr Swami's arguments by way of information in order to give immediate emotional solace to the shattered and battered Hindus of India who have tragically become stateless refugees in their own mother-land.
Dr Subramanian Swami's arguments for the grant of an Interim Injunction (WP 18223-4) by the Madras High Court on 18 June, 2007 were as follows:
1. The main purpose in seeking an injunction is to preserve during it's pendency in the Honourable Madras High Court the subject matter of this Petition, namely the protection of the Rama Setu which is threatened by the clear and present danger of demolition by Setusamudram Canal Project Corporation (Respondent No5 .), which is the nodal agency for dredging [AIR 1983 Delhi 312, AIR 1971 Raj.293, AIR 1973 Mysore 799, and 1984 TNLJ 218].
2. As of 13 June, 2007, the Sethusamudram Canal Project Corporation [sethusamudram.gov. in/projectstatus.asp] has claimed that dredging work has been carried out to excavate 8.96 percent of the Rama Setu. See also Counter p.7, para 11. THERE MAY BE MALAFIDE INTENTION BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT IS LED BY ATHEISTS WHO REVEL IN DEMEANING SRI RAMA. They call the Setu as built by Sri Rama as mythical [p.5, para 8 of Counter]. So was Sarasvati River and Dwaraka city at one stage. After extensive archaeological surveys, it has been scientifically and categorically proved that they physically exist on Mother Earth. Likewise, Ram Setu is a physical fact which can be discovered through an organized underwater archaeological survey and exploration. Without undertaking such a survey, if it is viewed as mythical and fit for demolition, then why is it that the Setusamudram Canal Project Corporation is planning to construct a viewing gallery as a part of the SSCP [please see page 20 of the Counter]. The Supreme Court of India in several judgements have held that even mythical objects may be ancient monuments or sacred [AIR 1958 SC 1032 at para 7, p.1035 & AIR 1993 P&H 204 at paras 7, 8, 9, and 10]
Hence, it is alarming and lack of injunction will cause irreparable and irretrievable damage to the relief sought in this petition.
3. It is well settled by a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts[ AIR Manual, Civil and Criminal, 6th Edition by Manohar &Chitaley, 2004]that the essential ingredients for invoking the discretion of this Honourable Court to grant an Interim Injunction against the dredging work on or near the Rama Setu are primarily THREE:
[A] The existence of a prima facie case of the petitioner.
[B] The necessacity of the High Court's interference to protect the petitioner from irreparable injury to his legal right, in this case the protection of the Rama Setu, for which a clear and present imminent danger is apparent.
[C] The balance of convenience is weighted in favour of the petitioner.
4. These two Writ petitions in the nature of public interest litigation was heard on 14 May, 2007 by the Vacation Court Division Bench, and after arguments for establishing the prima facie case on behalf of Dr Subramanian Swami the petitioner, on grounds of arbitrariness, unreasonableness, and bias in the decision making process that called for judicial review[(2004) 4 SCC 714 para 24, 28, 30; AIR 1996 SC 11 at para 93, 94, 95, 113], besides the failure to perform the statutory duty calling for issue of writ of mandamus[ AIR 1988 SC 1037, Praga [Tools], and after hearing the respondents, the Honourable Court was pleased admit the said writ petitions and to issue notice two weeks returnable to the respondents/ counsels present, who accepted the said notice.
5. Hence, there is a good probability for the petitioner of being entitled to the relief prayed for in this petition.
6. Satellite imaging photography of the US agency, the NASA, and the Indian ISRO have admittedly shown the existence of a 32 kilometer long and 1.5 kilometer wide Setu-like or causeway-like formation of shoal stones between Dhanushkodi and Talaimanaar, and moreover that the Union Government's Earth Science Department has opined in March 2007 that it is a construction and not a natural formation which document [see Typeset] has not been denied by the respondents. Dr. Subramanian Swami sought the specific direction and permission of the Madras High Court to discover official records of these documents under Order 39 Rule 1[(1998) 2 Raj. LR 120]
7. Hence, it is imperative that the Ministry of Culture perform it's statutory duty and ascertain if the said formation is an ancient monument within the meaning of the Ancient Monument and Archeological Sites Act[1958] for which this petitioner has written to the Minister of Culture. THIS DUTY HOWEVER THE MINISTRY HAS FAILED TO PERFORM TO DATE, AND HENCE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS IS CALLED FOR [PRAGA TOOLS].
8. It is an urgent necessacity for this Honourable Court to take cognizance of the attempts of the Sethusamudram Canal Projection Corporation in dredging at the Rama Setu, when they have yet to dredge 167 kilometers of the proposed canal on either side of the Rama Setu. There will be no inconvenience for the Corporation to first dredge the canal length on either side of the canal, which will take two years from today, before coming to the Rama Setu site for dredging.
By then it is probable that this petition would have been decided by the Honourable Madras High Court. Hence the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting an injunction restraining for the time being, the Corporation from damaging the Rama Setu [AIR 1983 SC 742]. Immediate grant of an Interim Injunction will safeguard the ever-permanent public interest without in any way jeopardizing the interest of the respondents.
9. The local authorities are also obstructing religious Hindus from going to the Rama Setu to worship because of this dredging work, thus necessacitating under Order 39 Rule 17 the grant of an injunction till this petition is decided.
10. There is no other remedy available to this petitioner other than injunction to prevent the damage to Rama Setu before this petition is decided [AIR1976 SC 2621, AIR 1990 SC 867]. HENCE, THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO EXERCISE IT'S DISCRETION ON SOUND JUDICIAL PRINCIPLES AND GRANT INTERIM INJUNCTION PROHIBITING THE RESPONDENTS FROM DAMAGING THE RAMA SETU AND TAKING NECESSARY STEPS FOR IT'S PROTECTION.
After seeing the through manner in which Dr. Subramanian Swami presented his case in the Madras High Court yesterday, I am reminded of the following famous story which was narrated by Justice Felix Frankfurter, one of the greatest names in the history of law. To quote the words of this very great Judge: “A colleague of mine at the Harvard Law School with whom I got into a tangle about some question of law once chided me, indeed, closed a contentious argument between us by saying, 'you take law awfully seriously'.
I said, 'That is one accusation against which I plead guilty without reservation. I do take law very seriously, deeply seriously, because fragile as reason is and limited as law is as the expression of the institutionalized medium of reason, that is all we have standing between us and the tyranny of mere will and the cruelty of unbridled, undisciplined feeling'”. I have no doubt that Dr Subramanian Swami's legal work ethic would have met with the full academic and moral approval of Justice Felix Frankfurter.
Thanks to the policy of Anti-Hindu minority appeasement and Pseudo- secularism of the UPA Government in general and the Congress Party and the DMK Party in Particular, the Hindus of India are being denied freedom of thought and freedom of religion, which have been granted to the Muslims / Christians as a special favour. In this context I would like to invite the attention of our Courts of Law to the following observations of Justice William O Douglas in USA: ‘Freedom of thought, which includes freedom of religious belief, is basic in a society of free men.... It embraces the right to maintain theories of life and of death and of the hereafter which are rank heresy to followers of the orthodox faiths. Heresy trials are foreign to our Constitution. MEN MAY BELIEVE WHAT THEY CANNOT PROVE. THEY MAY NOT BE PUT TO THE PROOF OF THEIR RELIGIOUS DOCTRINES OR BELIEFS.’ Rank Anti-Hindu atheists like T R Baalu and Karunanidhi have the political audacity to subject the innocent and simple Hindus of India in majority to such a disgraceful state of dictatorial cross examination.
Dr Subramanian Swami has demonstrated that the profession of law is the only aristocratic element which can be amalgamated without violence with the natural elements of democracy and which can be advantageously and permanently combined with them. The Constitution of India is not a mere politician's document or a lawyer's document. It is a vehicle of life and the spirit is always the spirit of the Age.
(The writer is a retired IAS officer)

The real meaning and values of Islam

2007-06-12T10:47:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, June 12, 2007
The real meaning and values of islam
"Islam is a religion of peace". This is what our politically correct politicians keep telling us. But what is politically correct is not necessarily correct. The truth is that Islam is not a religion of peace. It is a religion of hate, of terror and of war. A thorough study of the Quran and Hadith reveal an Islam that is not being presented honestly by the Muslim propagandists and is not known to the majority of the people of the world including Muslim themselves. Islam, as it is taught in the Quran (Koran) and lived by Muhammad, as is reported in the Hadith (Biography and sayings of the Prophet) is a religion of Injustice, Intolerance, Cruelty, Absurdities, discrimination, Contradictions, and blind faith. Islam advocates killing the non-Muslims and abuses the human rights of minorities and women. Islam expanded mostly by Jihad (holy war) and forced its way by killing the non-believers. In Islam apostasy is the biggest crime punishable by death. Muhammad was a terrorist himself therefore terrorism cannot be separated from the true Islam. Islam means submission and it demands from its followers to submit their wills and thoughts to Muhammad and his imaginary Allah. Allah is a deity that despises reason, democracy, freedom of thought and freedom of expression.
I reject Islam a) because of Muhammad’s lack of moral and ethical fortitude and b) because of the absurdities in the Quran.
a) Muhammad lived a less than holy life. His lust for sex, his affairs with his maids and slave girls, his pedophilic relationship at age 54 with Aisha, a 9-year-old child, his killing sprees, his massacre and the genocide of the Jews, his slave making and trading, his assassination of his opponents, his raids and lootings of the merchant caravans and unarmed villagers, his burning of trees, his destroying the water wells, his cursing and invoking evil on his enemies, his revenge on his captured prisoners of war, his torturing of his captives to for greed and his hallucinations such as believing of having sex with his wives when he actually did not, disqualify him as a sane person let alone a messenger of God.
b) An unbiased study of the Quran shows that far from being a “miracle”, that book is a hoax. The Quran is replete with scientific heresies, historic blunders, mathematical mistakes, logical absurdities, grammatical errors and ethical fallacies. Could possibly the author of this Universe be as ignorant as it appears to be in the Quran?
Quran tells Muslims to kill the disbelievers wherever they find them (2:191), murder them and treat them harshly (9:123), slay them (9:5), fight with them (8:65 ), strive against them with great endeavor (25:52), be stern with them because they belong to hell (66:9) and strike off their heads; then after making a “wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives” for ransom (47:4).
This is how the pagans are to be treated. As for the Christians and the Jews, the order is to subdue them and impose on them a penalty tax, after humiliating them (9:29) and if they resist, kill them.
The Quran is alien to freedom of belief and recognizes no other religion but Islam (3:85). It condemns those who do not believe to hellfire (5:10), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (9:28), orders the Muslims to fight them until no other religion except Islam is left (2:193), slay or crucify or cut the hands and the feet of the unbelievers and to expel them from the land with disgrace.
It stresses that the disbelievers shall have a great punishment in the world hereafter (5:34) and figuratively depicts a horrendous chastisement for them stating that they will go to hell to drink boiling water (14:17), that they will be engulfed in smoke and flames like the wall and the roof of a tent and if they implore relief they will be granted water like melting brass that will scald their faces, (18:29) and that "garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods” (22:19).
It also prohibits Muslims to associate with their own brothers and fathers if they are non-believers (9:23), (3:28).
As for the women the book of Allah is emphatic that they are inferior to men and if they disobey their husbands the latter have the right to beat them (4:34). Their punishment for disobeying their husbands does not end there, because after they die they will go to hell (66:10). The Quran emphasizes the superiority of men by confirming that men have an advantage over the women (2:228). It not only denies women's equal right to their inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their testimony is not admissible in the court of law unless it is accompanied with the testimony of a man (2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Muhammad allowed the Muslim men to marry up to four wives (although he himself had a score of them) and gave them license to enjoy their "right-hand possessions" (women captured in wars), as many as they can capture or afford to buy (4:3), even if the woman is married before being captured (4:24).
The man who called himself the holy Prophet and a "mercy of God for all beings" did just that. Jawairiyah, Rayhanah and Safiyah were beautiful young girls who were captured when he raided the tribes of Banu al-Mustaliq, Qurayza and Nadir. The prophet slew their husbands, fathers and their male relatives and let his men rape them while he kept the prettiest for himself and raped her in the same day while they were still in the shock of the loss of their loved ones.
This book scrutinizes Islam with Rational Thinking. It rejects time-honored beliefs that cannot stand the probing of reason. It asks questions and encourages independent thinking. It promotes unity of humankind, equality between men and women, abolition of prejudices and freedom from dogmatism and blind faith.
In a world that has become technologically so advanced that even some poor nations that cannot feed themselves boast having nuclear and biological weapons, small misunderstandings can have catastrophic results. Religion has always been a major source of misunderstandings among mankind. For religion, many people are ready to die, kill and destroy everything. Islam encourages that aggressive spirit explicitly. Only a Muslim can believe that he would go to paradise if he kills other human beings. Only a Muslim has no regard for lives that he destroys because their faith is not right.
In the last few decades, and thanks to the newfound wealth of the oil rich Islamic countries and massive immigration to the West, Islamic fundamentalism has been on the rise and the dormant spirit of Jihadism has been rekindled once again. This fervor has been translated into terrorism, revolutions, and upheavals, and world peace has been put in jeopardy. Millions of lives are now in danger.
Quran tells Muslims to slay the unbelievers wherever they find them (2:191), do not befriend them (3:28), fight them and show them harshness (9:123), and smite their heads (47:4).
Let us pause for a moment and take a second look at Islam. Can these really be the words of God? Was Muhammad really a messenger of God or was he a crazy man, like Hitler, who used the religious sentiment of the gullible to conquer, to dominate and to have an endless supply for his narcissistic cravings?
Islam is a cult created by a psychopath. It cannot be reformed. It must be eradicated. Islam must be eradicated not because the Quran says Earth is flat or the shooting stars are missiles that Allah fires at the Jinns who climb the heaven to eavesdrop on the conversation of the exalted assembly. These stupid tales could even amuse us. Islam must go because it teaches hate, it orders killing of non-Muslims, it denigrates women and it violates the human rights. Islam must go not because it is false but because it is destructive, because it is dangerous; a threat to peace and security of humankind. With the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in Islamic countries, Islam has become a serious and a real threat to the survival of our civilization.
In order for you to appreciate the evilness of Islam, let us choose a few verses of the Quran and switch the words "Muslim" and "non-Muslims" and see how they look:
We will cast terror into the hearts of Muslims. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them. 8:12Let not the non-Muslims take for friends or helpers the Muslims. 3:28,Rouse the non-Muslims to the fight against Muslims. 8:65,Then fight and slay the Muslims wherever ye find them, 9:5,Fight the Muslims, and God will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame. 9:14,O ye the non-Muslims take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love Islam.9:23,O ye the non-Muslims! Truly the Muslims are unclean. 9:28,O ye non-Muslims! fight the Muslims who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you. 9:123,Therefore, when ye meet the Muslims, smite at their necks; At length. 47:4,
Can these satanic verses be from God?
We don't have to face another world war. We can stop this madness by eradicating Islam. We can love each other like members of one family and celebrate our diversity. We can build a better world for our children. We can sing the songs of unity together. We can make this world a paradise but we have to remove the false doctrines that divide mankind into “us” versus “them” and believers versus disbelievers first.
You and I are humans. We are part of the Humanity. We are members of one family: the family of Humankind. God created us all because he loved us all. Do not destroy what God has made. Muhammad was insane. Like Hitler he was a brilliant and manipulative psychopath. Please read the Quran and the original history of Muhammad. Not the history written by today's unscrupulous apologists of Islam but the history written by the early historians. Read the book of Al Waqidi, Ibn Ishaq and Al Tabari's. Read the Hadith and see for yourself that what I say is the truth. We are a billion or more people, following an insane man. This is a colossal tragedy. No wonder Islamic world is sunk in utter misery, abundant poverty and abject ignorance. Our forefathers were forced to convert to Islam and our fathers did not have the chance to question it. But now we have that chance. Isn't it time that we look into our faith to at least know what is it that we believe in?
This site reveals the bitter truth about Islam. It proves that it is not a religion of God. If you disagree with me, prove me wrong and I promise to remove this site. I challenge the apologists of Islam to prove me wrong or stop misleading the world with half truths and misinformation. But if no one can disprove me, as many Muslims have tried and failed, then I invite you to learn about the dark side of the Quran and the Hadith by reading the articles written by numerous authors (mostly ex-Muslims) and transcripts of debates that I have had with Muslim apologists who have tried to explain away the absurdities of Islam. I invite you to read the facts that I have quoted from the Quran and the Hadith that lead me to my conclusions. Above all, I invite you to put yourself in the position of the victims of Islam to appreciate the evilness of this so called religion. I want you to ask yourself whether you would like to be treated by non-Muslims as Islam and Muslims have treated and continue to treat the non-Muslims wherever they are the majority. Finally, I invite you to reject Islam and join us, the apostates, to save the world from “Islamic doom."
Let us save the world from its certain destruction. We don't have to face another world war. We can stop this madness now. We can love each other like members of one family and celebrate our diversity like flowers of one garden. We can build a better world for our children. We can sing the songs of joy together. We can make a difference. Let not a psychopath liar fool you. Do not become an instrument of hate. Muhammad lied. This site is the proof: www.faithfreedom.org
7:06:10 PM
Posted By Osama Allah Comments (1) Uncategorized
Comments
khalid Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:29:38 PM
wow,eureka man-simply brilliant,discovery of the century dude ,last twelve hundred years no one has been able to see the true face of islam,1.6 billion dumb muslims in the world follow this religion blindly.please guide them dude.Its the fastest growing religion in the world since 35 years.please show those converts the truth man.Keep on doing ur reseacrh dude,keep spreading the hatred.

What is diabetes?

2007-05-20T23:34:00.000-07:00

Saturday, May 19, 2007
What is diabetes?
Diabetes is a disorder of metabolism—the way our bodies use digested food for energy. Most of the food we eat is broken down into glucose, the form of sugar in the blood. Glucose is the body’s main source of fuel.
After digestion, glucose enters the bloodstream. Then glucose goes to cells throughout the body where it is used for energy. However, a hormone called insulin must be present to allow glucose to enter the cells. Insulin is a hormone produced by the pancreas, a large gland behind the stomach.
In people who do not have diabetes, the pancreas automatically produces the right amount of insulin to move glucose from blood into the cells. However, diabetes develops when the pancreas does not make enough insulin, or the cells in the muscles, liver, and fat do not use insulin properly, or both. As a result, the amount of glucose in the blood increases while the cells are starved of energy.
Over time, high blood glucose levels damage nerves and blood vessels, leading to complications such as heart disease and stroke, the leading causes of death among people with diabetes. Uncontrolled diabetes can eventually lead to other health problems as well, such as vision loss, kidney failure, and amputations.
2:02:33 AM
Posted By RAJAYE_HIND PRASHER Comments (0) Health

Mother Teresa

2007-04-30T06:11:00.000-07:00

INTRODUCTION
Mother Teresa once made me cry. The year was 1988 - I was on one of my frequent holidays or visits to Calcutta from Britain, where I had moved to in 1985. I was standing by the kerb-side in Gariahat Morr, munching on a famous 'mutton roll'. I was looking at scenes I had grown up with - pavements almost obliterated by shops, people having to weave their way through hawkers peddling their fares; buses tilted to one side by the sheer weight of passengers and belching out black diesel smoke, trams waiting for a manual change of tracks before they could turn, the familiar neon sign of an astrologer.
In the midst of all this I remembered the 'Calcutta' of the West - Calcutta the metaphor, not the city. In my three years in the West I had come to realise that the city had become synonymous with the worst of human suffering and degradation in the eyes of the world. I read and heard again and again that Calcutta contained an endless number of 'sewers and gutters' where an endless number of dead and dying people lay - but not for long - as 'roving angels' in the shape of the followers of a certain nun would come along looking for them. Then they would whisk them away in their smart ambulances. As in my twenty-seven years in Calcutta I had never seen such a scene, (and neither have I met a Calcuttan who has), it hurt me deeply that such a wrong stereotype had become permanently ingrained in world psyche. I felt suddenly overwhelmingly sad that a city, indeed an entire culture should be continuously insulted in this way.
I am Calcuttan born and bred, and our family has lived in the city for as long as can be traced. I know Calcutta well, and many people who matter there, and many more who do not. I do not have Calcutta 'in my blood', but the place has definitely made me what I am, warts and all. My mother tongue is Bengali, the language of Calcutta, but I speak Hindi passably, which is spoken by a large number of the destitutes of Calcutta.
I had no interest whatsoever in Mother Teresa before I came to England. Difficult it may seem to a Westerner to comprehend, but she was not a significant entity in Calcutta in her lifetime; paradoxically posthumously her image has risen significantly there - primarily because of the Indian need to emulate the West in many unimportant matters.
I had had some interest in the destitutes of Calcutta during my college days, when I dabbled in leftist politics for a while. I also took a keen interest in human rights issues. Never in the course of my (modest) interaction with the very poor of Calcutta, did I cross paths with Mother Teresa's organisation - indeed, I cannot ever recall her name being uttered.
After living for some time in the West, I (slowly) realised what Mother Teresa and Calcutta meant to the world. It shocked and saddened me. In India itself, to say you come from Calcutta is considered trendy, as Calcuttans are considered, wrongly, 'brainy and dangerous'. The Bombayite Gokhle is still widely quoted, 'What Bengal [Calcutta's state] thinks today, that India thinks tomorrow.' In India, Calcutta is - not entirely wrongly - stereotyped as a seat of effete culture and anarchic politics. There is an Indian saying that goes thus: 'If you have one Calcuttan you have a poet; with two you have a political party, and with three you have two political parties.'
The Calcutta stereotype in the West did not irk me as much as did the firmly held notion that Mother Teresa had chosen to live there as its saviour. I was astonished that she had become a figure of speech, and that her name was invoked to qualify the extreme superlative of a positive kind; you can criticise God, but you cannot criticise Mother Teresa - in common parlance, doing the unthinkable is qualified as 'like criticising Mother Teresa'. The number of times I have heard expressions such as 'So and so would try the patience of Mother Teresa', I have lost count. Such expressions would cause amazement and curiosity in Calcutta, even amongst Mother Teresa's most ardent admirers.
Why I decided to do 'something about it' I cannot easily tell. As a person I am flawed enough to understand lies and deceit. Why certain people, themselves no pillars of rectitude, decide to make a stand against untruth and injustice is a very complex issue. Also, my wife, brought up (a Roman Catholic) in Ireland on Teresa mythology, felt angry and cheated when she went to Calcutta and saw how the reality compared with the fairy tale; she has encouraged me in my endeavours.
In February 1994, I rang, without any introduction, Vanya Del Borgo at the television production company Bandung Productions in London. She listened to my anguished outpourings and, to cut a long story short, eventually Channel 4 decided to undertake Hell's Angel (shown on Britain's Channel 4 television on 8 November 1994), the very first attempt to challenge the Teresa myth on television. Ms Del Borgo chose Christopher Hitchens as the presenter, knowing him as she did from their days together at The Nation in the United States. I am not happy with how Hell's Angel turned out, especially its sensationalist approach, such as Mr Hitchens's calling Mother Teresa 'a presumed virgin'. The film however caused some ripple, in Britain and also internationally.
Mother Teresa, one could argue in her favour, is dead and therefore would be unable to defend herself against my charges. Criticisms of her however peaked during her lifetime; apart from the November 1994 documentary, there was a stringent (and quite detailed) attack on conditions in her orphanages in India that was published in The Guardian of London (14 October 1996) - charges of gross neglect and physical and emotional abuse were made. The article alleged her own complicity and knowledge in the unacceptable practices that went (go) on in her homes. During January 1997, a documentary - entitled Mother Teresa: Time for Change? - critical of her working methods and accusing her of neglect, was shown on various European television channels.
It was up to Mother Teresa to have defended herself against such criticisms during her lifetime. She did not. Her supporters (and others) would of course say that she was like Jesus; that she would not demean herself by protesting against muck raking - she would merely turn the other cheek. Notwithstanding her image, she was a robust protester whenever she had a case. Shortly before she died she got involved in legal wrangles with a Tennessee bakery over the marketing of a bun; and more seriously, with her one time close friend and ally, the author Dominique Lapierre, over the script of a film on her life.
On both occasions her Miami based solicitor got properly involved. And then, there is that well-known letter of protest she wrote to Judge Lance Ito protesting at the prosecution (she perceived it as persecution) of her friend Charles Keating, the biggest fraudster in US history.
After her death, her order continues with the litigious tradition - less than a year after her death it was involved in a court case with the Mother Teresa Memorial Committee, a Calcutta based organisation.
The German magazine Stern (10 September 1998) published a devastating critique of Mother Teresa's work on the first anniversary of her death. The article, entitled 'Mother Teresa, Where Are Your Millions?', which took a year's research in three continents, concluded that her organisation is essentially a religious order that does not deserve to be called a charitable foundation. No protest has been forthcoming from her order.
To the charges of neglect of residents, indifference to suffering, massaging of figures, manipulation of the media and knowingly handling millions of dollars of stolen cash, Mother Teresa never protested. Her responses were 'Why did they do it?', 'It was all for publicity.' She was perturbed by the criticisms - so much so that after the 1994 documentary she cancelled a religious mission to the Far East.
During her lifetime I wrote to Mother Teresa numerous times asking for a formal interview with either her or one of her senior deputies. I had agreed to meet her in Calcutta, or at the Vatican - mindful her frequent trips there - or indeed, at any other place in the world. Despite her image - carefully nurtured by her own self - of one who shunned the media and publicity, she had always bent over backwards to give interviews to sympathetic world media (in other words, all the world's media). In 1994 she spent a whole day talking to Hello! magazine; the same magazine ran a lengthy interview with her successor in 1998. She however never even acknowledged any of my many requests for an interview. I had met her briefly on occasions in the company of a roomful of worshipful admirers, but I did not feel that was the time or the place to ask uncomfortable questions.
After two years of trying, when I failed to elicit any response from her or her order, I contacted her official biographers to ask whether they would answer some of the serious question marks hanging over her operations. All of them, bar one, replied, but only to turn me down. All of this happened while Mother Teresa was alive.
Many people tell me that Mother Teresa should be left alone because she did 'something' for the underprivileged. I do not deny that she did. However her reputation, which was to a good extent carefully built up by herself, was not on a 'something' scale. More importantly, that 'something', at least in Calcutta, was quite little, as my book will show. Even more importantly, she had turned away many many more than she had helped - although she had claimed throughout her life that she was doing everything for everybody. My brief against her is not that she did not address the root or causes of suffering and I am not for a moment suggesting that she ought to have done so, as I understand the particular religious tradition she came from - I am saying that there was a stupendous discrepancy between her image and her work, between her words and her deeds; that she, helped by others of course, engaged in a culture of deception.
On a superficial level, I need to tell the truth about Teresa because I feel humiliated to be associated with a place that is wrongly imagined to exist on Western charity. Perhaps the main reason why I want to tell this story is because, I believe, each of us has a duty to stand up and protest when history is in danger of being distorted. In a few years' time Mother Teresa will be up there, glittering in the same galaxy as Mozart and Leonardo.
I wish to convey my thanks to the some of the world's most powerful publishing firms who put up obstacle after obstacle in the path of this book. Indeed, the British arm of a multinational publishing house signed me up and then cancelled the contract nine months later by sending me a half-page fax. My resolve to get the book published grew all the more stronger by such obstacles.
I know I cannot change 'history' as pre-ordained by the powerful world media, but I can attempt to put a footnote therein.
I would disapprove of my book being called 'controversial', as I see it as a book of hard facts, albeit disturbing sometimes.
Calcutta has recently been renamed Kolkata by its rulers and a section of its citizens. The new name, which is politically correct and is closer to the vernacular pronunciation, has caught on faster than expected. In this book, I have exclusively used 'Calcutta', partly because to me it makes more historical sense, and also because to tell the story of Mother Teresa, 'Calcutta' to me seems more appropriate.
Aroup Chatterjee
London and Calcutta, 1996-2002
PREFACE
by Joe Winter
Calcutta has recently renamed itself Kolkata, in line with the Bengali pronunciation and with a renaming in the case of two other Indian metropolises. The touch of colonialism, still felt after its death, is shaken off a little by the gesture, many would say, shrugged free of; but it is only a gesture. The battle for internal independence for India is a deadlier business, the touch of the past still a dead weight, and a new nationalism beginning to take a very ugly form. Kolkata's acquiescence as a passive player in the charity charade, the part it continues to take in the Mother Teresa phenomenon, makes a mockery of the symbol of self-determination in the change of name. It is only too clear to a resident that the city is thrilled by the approaching sainthood. Its victimhood itself is to be canonised. It is a form of Western recognition, that elusive holy grail of the Indian psyche. By comparison, Asian recognition is a non-starter. It is in this perspective that Dr Chatterjee's illuminating analysis appears. Here are the hard facts behind the phenomenon. What did Mother Teresa really achieve?
A lot less than she said, that much is clear. But does it do any harm for her memory to be cherished, this indomitable old lady bent with devotion? Bengal has its saints - Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Rabindranath. Why not a woman too, in the capital of mother worship, the great spiritual home of the goddess Durga? Why not indeed? - but in the marketplace of values to be set on display for the eyes of later generations, let not an affinity for purity, that so charges the popular mind, blind its gaze to the mixing-in of a baser metal. There was something wonderful in Mother Teresa - and something not so wonderful.
Princess Diana died a few days before her, to an extraordinary if short-lived global reaction. The world it seems needs fairy tales. The came the Mother's death and a myth was sealed. We need our myths too and not only in literature; but where there are facts to be stated alongside them they must surely be stated. There is a syndrome in the West's thinking about the less economically developed world; one might call it the sincerity syndrome. It relies on not looking too closely at whatever myths and legends are spun by those with a vested interest.
How much 'conscience money' has been paid out, in the last hundred years, by the affluent in their blind sincerity, to what used to be known as the Third World! Yet there is an alternative to misty-eyed shelling out, and it is not to turn one's back. First and foremost let us open our eyes. There is a story behind the popular version of Mother Teresa's life - the story of facts - from which we can all learn.
(Joe Winter is an English poet who lives in Calcutta)

Shivaji and James Lain's book

2007-04-30T05:56:00.000-07:00

The Mother Principle - By Balbir PunjAn evangelist is Calcutta's mascot, even though more authentic figures abound.
Naqvi Bhaumik's is lavish in its adulation of Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity for 'Indianisation of Christianity'. Not caring much for rationality and its precepts, it eulogises Pope John Paul II's 50th 'miraculous' canonisation ceremony and his concerted effort to repackage Christianity for Asia. All that she says is completely true but not the complete truth. She does not quote the chief pontiff's November 1999 call in New Delhi for the "evangelisation of Asia in the 3rd millennium AD, on the lines of Europe in the 1st and Americas in the 2nd". Bhaumik's contention that the spread of Christianity in India can't be linked to the British also doesn't hold water. Elizabeth Susan Alexander, in her The Attitude of British Protestant Missionaries Towards Nationalism in India, says: "The evangelical revival of Christianity that swept Britain from the last decades of 18th century changed the situation completely. The Company had to cede entry rights to British missionaries in its controversial Charter Act 1813, paving the way for intensive activities by British Protestant missionaries."Historian R. C. Mazumdar, while dwelling on the pre-1857 period in his History and Culture of Indian People, Vol. IX, observes: "Some schools, mainly supported by the government, were actually run by clergymen on a strictly Christian basis. About the modus operandi of conversion through these schools, it's sufficient to note that the pupils were asked such questions as 'Who's your God?' and 'Who's your redeemer?'. The inevitable reply, as a result of regular coaching was, of course, Jesus Christ."The Church uses "miracles" to impress and draw innocents to its fold. But why should the media, with claims to secularism and rationality, glorify them?
I can, in fact, give instances of three born Catholics—David Frawley from the US, Koenrad Elst from Belgium and Francois Gautier from France—who are truly immersed in this spirit of Indophilia. These lovers of India are working silently with no reward or hype, the kind which attends the Teresa myth. Is it because they are enamoured with the soul of India and thoroughly oppose evangelisation? Even in Calcutta, leave alone India, never was she the only philanthropist. One can, without reflection, name the Ramakrishna Mission, Bharat Seva Ashram Sangha, Chinmaya Mission, Satya Sai Baba Trust among the organisations engaged in doing hands-on social work. But thanks to figures like Malcolm Muggeridge and Dominique Lapierre, in the western consciousness Calcutta is synonymous with Mother Teresa.
What a tragedy this, for a city that is regarded as the cultural capital of India! Calcutta has produced many luminaries who could claim its brand ambassadorship better than Mother Teresa—Raja Ram Mohun Roy, Swami Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, Sir J.C. Bose, Nirad C. Chaudhuri and Satyajit Ray—to name a few.
Should Calcutta be associated with them or Mother Teresa, who portrayed the city as an overgrown slum?Does the name Sister Nivedita, aka Margaret Noble, ring a bell in the historical memory of Indians fawning over Agnes Bojaxhiu, better known to them as Mother Teresa?
Nobel, an Irish, belonged to a family of Catholic priests. Her father Samuel Nobel had returned from preaching in India and had told little Margaret: "India, my little one, is seeking her destiny. She called me once and will perhaps call you, too, some day. Always be ready for her call." The national destiny that the priest was referring to was perhaps no different from the one envisaged by Pope John Paul II. Margaret did adhere to her father's word, but very differently. Her meeting with Swami Vivekananda in 1895 in Dublin had a strong impact on her. She came to Calcutta the following year and the Swami consecrated her to the nation as Nivedita (the dedicated one). Unlike Teresa, who spent 50 years in this country, Nivedita mastered Bengali and Sanskrit. Braving the hostilities of an orthodox Hindu society, she started her first school for girls in 1898. When a plague epidemic broke out in Calcutta in 1899, Nivedita set an example by cleaning the roads and scavenging garbage around the clock. She had the physical characteristics of a Celt, but the soul of an Indian. She accompanied Vivekananda on his 1899 America tour, preaching about India's rich contribution to world civilization and human thought.But the Church functions like a multinational company for souls and continues to repackage itself for target consumers. Adoption of Hindu symbols is a similar acculturation strategy on its part. We, on our part, have to decide on our role model: Mother Teresa or Sister Nivedita?
(source: The Mother Principle - By Balbir Punj - outlookindia.com - December 1, 2003.

Who is a Hindu?

2007-04-29T21:58:00.000-07:00

dattadokfode.rediffiland.com/
Monday 30 April, 2007
09:21 15/Apr/2007 2 Comment(s)
Who is a Hindu
Due to the wide diversity in the beliefs, practices and traditions encompassed by Hinduism, there is no universally accepted answer to the question, "Who is a Hindu?", or even agreement on whether Hinduism represents is a religious, cultural or socio-political entity. In 1995, Chief Justice P. B. Gajendragadkar was quoted in an Indian Supreme Court ruling:[4]When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it. Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.Thus some scholars argue that the Hinduism is not a religion per se but rather a reification of a diverse set of traditions and practices by scholars who constituted a unified system and arbitrarily labeled it Hinduism.[5] The usage may also have been necessitated by the desire to distinguish between "Hindus" and followers of other religions during the periodic census undertaken by the colonial British government in India. Other scholars, while seeing Hinduism as a 19th century construct, view Hinduism as a response to British colonialism by Indian nationalists who forged a unified tradition centered on oral and written Sanskrit texts adopted as scriptures.[6]A commonly held view, though, is that while Hinduism contains both "uniting and dispersing tendencies", it has a common central thread of philosophical concepts (including dharma, moksha and samsara), practices (puja, bhakti etc) and cultural traditions.[7] These common elements originating (or being codyfied within) the Vedic, Upanishad and Puranic scriptures and epics. Thus a Hindu could :* follow any of the Hindu schools of philosophy, such as Advaita (non-dualism), Dvaita (dualism), Dvaitadvaita (dualism with non-dualism), etc.[8][9]* follow a tradition centered on any particular form of the Divine, such as Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism, etc.[10]* practice bhakti (devotion) or any of the other yoga systems in order to achieve moksha.In 1995, while considering the question "who are Hindus and what are the broad features of Hindu religion", the Supreme Court of India highlighted Bal Gangadhar Tilak's formulation of Hinduism's defining features:[4]Acceptance of the Vedas with reverence; recognition of the fact that the means or ways to salvation are diverse; and the realization of the truth that the number of gods to be worshipped is large, that indeed is the distinguishing feature of Hindu religion.Some thinkers distinguish between the concept of Hinduism as a religion, and Hindu as a member of a nationalist or socio-political class. Veer savarkar in his book Hindutva considered geographical unity, common culture and common race to be the defining qualities of Hindus; thus Hindu was a person who saw India "as his Fatherland as well as his Holyland, that is, the cradle land of his religion".[11] This conceptualization of Hinduism, has led to establishment of Hindutva as political movement in the last century.[12][edit] Origins of the word HinduSee also: Etymology of the names of IndiaRiver Sindhu, Ladakh This image has an uncertain copyright status and is pending deletion. You can comment on the removal.River Sindhu, Ladakh This image has an uncertain copyright status and is pending deletion. You can comment on the removal.Hindu is derived from the Persian pronunciation of the Sanskrit word Sindhu (Sanskrit: सिन्धु, the name for the Indus River), located in what is now Pakistan.[13] The Persians, using the word "Hindu" for "Sindhu", referred to the people who lived near or across the Sindhu River as "Hindus", and their religion later became known as "Hinduism." The religion had previously been known as Sanātana dharma (the eternal law), Vaidika dharma (law of the Vedas), Arya dharma (the noble religion), or Mānava dharma (the religion of mankind). Eventually the word "Hindu" came into common use among Hindus themselves,[2] and was adopted into Greek as Indos and Indikos ("Indian"), into Latin as Indianus.[14] and into Sanskrit, as Hindu, appearing in some early medieval texts (e.g. Bhaviṣya Purāṇa, Kālikā Purāṇa, Rāmakośa, Hemantakavikośa and Adbhutarūpakośa)[15]
Permalink

Pope's speech on Islam

2007-04-10T21:35:00.000-07:00

APOSTOLIC JOURNEY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI TO MÜNCHEN, ALTÖTTING AND REGENSBURG (SEPTEMBER 9-14, 2006)
MEETING WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF SCIENCE
LECTURE OF THE HOLY FATHER
Aula Magna of the University of RegensburgTuesday, 12 September 2006

Faith, Reason and the UniversityMemories and Reflections

Your Eminences, Your Magnificences, Your Excellencies,Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a moving experience for me to be back again in the university and to be able once again to give a lecture at this podium. I think back to those years when, after a pleasant period at the Freisinger Hochschule, I began teaching at the University of Bonn. That was in 1959, in the days of the old university made up of ordinary professors. The various chairs had neither assistants nor secretaries, but in recompense there was much direct contact with students and in particular among the professors themselves. We would meet before and after lessons in the rooms of the teaching staff. There was a lively exchange with historians, philosophers, philologists and, naturally, between the two theological faculties. Once a semester there was a dies academicus, when professors from every faculty appeared before the students of the entire university, making possible a genuine experience of universitas - something that you too, Magnificent Rector, just mentioned - the experience, in other words, of the fact that despite our specializations which at times make it difficult to communicate with each other, we made up a whole, working in everything on the basis of a single rationality with its various aspects and sharing responsibility for the right use of reason - this reality became a lived experience. The university was also very proud of its two theological faculties. It was clear that, by inquiring about the reasonableness of faith, they too carried out a work which is necessarily part of the "whole" of the universitas scientiarum, even if not everyone could share the faith which theologians seek to correlate with reason as a whole. This profound sense of coherence within the universe of reason was not troubled, even when it was once reported that a colleague had said there was something odd about our university: it had two faculties devoted to something that did not exist: God. That even in the face of such radical scepticism it is still necessary and reasonable to raise the question of God through the use of reason, and to do so in the context of the tradition of the Christian faith: this, within the university as a whole, was accepted without question.
I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) of part of the dialogue carried on - perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara - by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.[1] It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than those of his Persian interlocutor.[2] The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur'an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship between - as they were called - three "Laws" or "rules of life": the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Qur'an. It is not my intention to discuss this question in the present lecture; here I would like to discuss only one point - itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole - which, in the context of the issue of "faith and reason", I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.
In the seventh conversation (διάλεξις - controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to some of the experts, this is probably one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness that we find unacceptable, on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”[3] The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God", he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably (σὺν λόγω) is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...".[4]
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature.[5] The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.[6] Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazm went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.[7]
At this point, as far as understanding of God and thus the concrete practice of religion is concerned, we are faced with an unavoidable dilemma. Is the conviction that acting unreasonably contradicts God's nature merely a Greek idea, or is it always and intrinsically true? I believe that here we can see the profound harmony between what is Greek in the best sense of the word and the biblical understanding of faith in God. Modifying the first verse of the Book of Genesis, the first verse of the whole Bible, John began the prologue of his Gospel with the words: "In the beginning was the λόγος". This is the very word used by the emperor: God acts, σὺν λόγω, with logos. Logos means both reason and word - a reason which is creative and capable of self-communication, precisely as reason. John thus spoke the final word on the biblical concept of God, and in this word all the often toilsome and tortuous threads of biblical faith find their culmination and synthesis. In the beginning was the logos, and the logos is God, says the Evangelist. The encounter between the Biblical message and Greek thought did not happen by chance. The vision of Saint Paul, who saw the roads to Asia barred and in a dream saw a Macedonian man plead with him: "Come over to Macedonia and help us!" (cf. Acts 16:6-10) - this vision can be interpreted as a "distillation" of the intrinsic necessity of a rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek inquiry.
In point of fact, this rapprochement had been going on for some time. The mysterious name of God, revealed from the burning bush, a name which separates this God from all other divinities with their many names and simply asserts being, "I am", already presents a challenge to the notion of myth, to which Socrates' attempt to vanquish and transcend myth stands in close analogy.[8] Within the Old Testament, the process which started at the burning bush came to new maturity at the time of the Exile, when the God of Israel, an Israel now deprived of its land and worship, was proclaimed as the God of heaven and earth and described in a simple formula which echoes the words uttered at the burning bush: "I am". This new understanding of God is accompanied by a kind of enlightenment, which finds stark expression in the mockery of gods who are merely the work of human hands (cf. Ps 115). Thus, despite the bitter conflict with those Hellenistic rulers who sought to accommodate it forcibly to the customs and idolatrous cult of the Greeks, biblical faith, in the Hellenistic period, encountered the best of Greek thought at a deep level, resulting in a mutual enrichment evident especially in the later wisdom literature. Today we know that the Greek translation of the Old Testament produced at Alexandria - the Septuagint - is more than a simple (and in that sense really less than satisfactory) translation of the Hebrew text: it is an independent textual witness and a distinct and important step in the history of revelation, one which brought about this encounter in a way that was decisive for the birth and spread of Christianity.[9] A profound encounter of faith and reason is taking place here, an encounter between genuine enlightenment and religion. From the very heart of Christian faith and, at the same time, the heart of Greek thought now joined to faith, Manuel II was able to say: Not to act "with logos" is contrary to God's nature.
In all honesty, one must observe that in the late Middle Ages we find trends in theology which would sunder this synthesis between the Greek spirit and the Christian spirit. In contrast with the so-called intellectualism of Augustine and Thomas, there arose with Duns Scotus a voluntarism which, in its later developments, led to the claim that we can only know God's voluntas ordinata. Beyond this is the realm of God's freedom, in virtue of which he could have done the opposite of everything he has actually done. This gives rise to positions which clearly approach those of Ibn Hazm and might even lead to the image of a capricious God, who is not even bound to truth and goodness. God's transcendence and otherness are so exalted that our reason, our sense of the true and good, are no longer an authentic mirror of God, whose deepest possibilities remain eternally unattainable and hidden behind his actual decisions. As opposed to this, the faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which - as the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 stated - unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language. God does not become more divine when we push him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. Certainly, love, as Saint Paul says, "transcends" knowledge and is thereby capable of perceiving more than thought alone (cf. Eph 3:19); nonetheless it continues to be love of the God who is Logos. Consequently, Christian worship is, again to quote Paul - "λογικη λατρεία", worship in harmony with the eternal Word and with our reason (cf. Rom 12:1).[10]
This inner rapprochement between Biblical faith and Greek philosophical inquiry was an event of decisive importance not only from the standpoint of the history of religions, but also from that of world history - it is an event which concerns us even today. Given this convergence, it is not surprising that Christianity, despite its origins and some significant developments in the East, finally took on its historically decisive character in Europe. We can also express this the other way around: this convergence, with the subsequent addition of the Roman heritage, created Europe and remains the foundation of what can rightly be called Europe.
The thesis that the critically purified Greek heritage forms an integral part of Christian faith has been countered by the call for a dehellenization of Christianity - a call which has more and more dominated theological discussions since the beginning of the modern age. Viewed more closely, three stages can be observed in the programme of dehellenization: although interconnected, they are clearly distinct from one another in their motivations and objectives.[11]
Dehellenization first emerges in connection with the postulates of the Reformation in the sixteenth century. Looking at the tradition of scholastic theology, the Reformers thought they were confronted with a faith system totally conditioned by philosophy, that is to say an articulation of the faith based on an alien system of thought. As a result, faith no longer appeared as a living historical Word but as one element of an overarching philosophical system. The principle of sola scriptura, on the other hand, sought faith in its pure, primordial form, as originally found in the biblical Word. Metaphysics appeared as a premise derived from another source, from which faith had to be liberated in order to become once more fully itself. When Kant stated that he needed to set thinking aside in order to make room for faith, he carried this programme forward with a radicalism that the Reformers could never have foreseen. He thus anchored faith exclusively in practical reason, denying it access to reality as a whole.
The liberal theology of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries ushered in a second stage in the process of dehellenization, with Adolf von Harnack as its outstanding representative. When I was a student, and in the early years of my teaching, this programme was highly influential in Catholic theology too. It took as its point of departure Pascal's distinction between the God of the philosophers and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In my inaugural lecture at Bonn in 1959, I tried to address the issue,[12] and I do not intend to repeat here what I said on that occasion, but I would like to describe at least briefly what was new about this second stage of dehellenization. Harnack's central idea was to return simply to the man Jesus and to his simple message, underneath the accretions of theology and indeed of hellenization: this simple message was seen as the culmination of the religious development of humanity. Jesus was said to have put an end to worship in favour of morality. In the end he was presented as the father of a humanitarian moral message. Fundamentally, Harnack's goal was to bring Christianity back into harmony with modern reason, liberating it, that is to say, from seemingly philosophical and theological elements, such as faith in Christ's divinity and the triune God. In this sense, historical-critical exegesis of the New Testament, as he saw it, restored to theology its place within the university: theology, for Harnack, is something essentially historical and therefore strictly scientific. What it is able to say critically about Jesus is, so to speak, an expression of practical reason and consequently it can take its rightful place within the university. Behind this thinking lies the modern self-limitation of reason, classically expressed in Kant's "Critiques", but in the meantime further radicalized by the impact of the natural sciences. This modern concept of reason is based, to put it briefly, on a synthesis between Platonism (Cartesianism) and empiricism, a synthesis confirmed by the success of technology. On the one hand it presupposes the mathematical structure of matter, its intrinsic rationality, which makes it possible to understand how matter works and use it efficiently: this basic premise is, so to speak, the Platonic element in the modern understanding of nature. On the other hand, there is nature's capacity to be exploited for our purposes, and here only the possibility of verification or falsification through experimentation can yield decisive certainty. The weight between the two poles can, depending on the circumstances, shift from one side to the other. As strongly positivistic a thinker as J. Monod has declared himself a convinced Platonist/Cartesian.
This gives rise to two principles which are crucial for the issue we have raised. First, only the kind of certainty resulting from the interplay of mathematical and empirical elements can be considered scientific. Anything that would claim to be science must be measured against this criterion. Hence the human sciences, such as history, psychology, sociology and philosophy, attempt to conform themselves to this canon of scientificity. A second point, which is important for our reflections, is that by its very nature this method excludes the question of God, making it appear an unscientific or pre-scientific question. Consequently, we are faced with a reduction of the radius of science and reason, one which needs to be questioned.
I will return to this problem later. In the meantime, it must be observed that from this standpoint any attempt to maintain theology's claim to be "scientific" would end up reducing Christianity to a mere fragment of its former self. But we must say more: if science as a whole is this and this alone, then it is man himself who ends up being reduced, for the specifically human questions about our origin and destiny, the questions raised by religion and ethics, then have no place within the purview of collective reason as defined by "science", so understood, and must thus be relegated to the realm of the subjective. The subject then decides, on the basis of his experiences, what he considers tenable in matters of religion, and the subjective "conscience" becomes the sole arbiter of what is ethical. In this way, though, ethics and religion lose their power to create a community and become a completely personal matter. This is a dangerous state of affairs for humanity, as we see from the disturbing pathologies of religion and reason which necessarily erupt when reason is so reduced that questions of religion and ethics no longer concern it. Attempts to construct an ethic from the rules of evolution or from psychology and sociology, end up being simply inadequate.
Before I draw the conclusions to which all this has been leading, I must briefly refer to the third stage of dehellenization, which is now in progress. In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism, it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was an initial inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures. The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux. This thesis is not simply false, but it is coarse and lacking in precision. The New Testament was written in Greek and bears the imprint of the Greek spirit, which had already come to maturity as the Old Testament developed. True, there are elements in the evolution of the early Church which do not have to be integrated into all cultures. Nonetheless, the fundamental decisions made about the relationship between faith and the use of human reason are part of the faith itself; they are developments consonant with the nature of faith itself.
And so I come to my conclusion. This attempt, painted with broad strokes, at a critique of modern reason from within has nothing to do with putting the clock back to the time before the Enlightenment and rejecting the insights of the modern age. The positive aspects of modernity are to be acknowledged unreservedly: we are all grateful for the marvellous possibilities that it has opened up for mankind and for the progress in humanity that has been granted to us. The scientific ethos, moreover, is - as you yourself mentioned, Magnificent Rector - the will to be obedient to the truth, and, as such, it embodies an attitude which belongs to the essential decisions of the Christian spirit. The intention here is not one of retrenchment or negative criticism, but of broadening our concept of reason and its application. While we rejoice in the new possibilities open to humanity, we also see the dangers arising from these possibilities and we must ask ourselves how we can overcome them. We will succeed in doing so only if reason and faith come together in a new way, if we overcome the self-imposed limitation of reason to the empirically falsifiable, and if we once more disclose its vast horizons. In this sense theology rightly belongs in the university and within the wide-ranging dialogue of sciences, not merely as a historical discipline and one of the human sciences, but precisely as theology, as inquiry into the rationality of faith.
Only thus do we become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today. In the Western world it is widely held that only positivistic reason and the forms of philosophy based on it are universally valid. Yet the world's profoundly religious cultures see this exclusion of the divine from the universality of reason as an attack on their most profound convictions. A reason which is deaf to the divine and which relegates religion into the realm of subcultures is incapable of entering into the dialogue of cultures. At the same time, as I have attempted to show, modern scientific reason with its intrinsically Platonic element bears within itself a question which points beyond itself and beyond the possibilities of its methodology. Modern scientific reason quite simply has to accept the rational structure of matter and the correspondence between our spirit and the prevailing rational structures of nature as a given, on which its methodology has to be based. Yet the question why this has to be so is a real question, and one which has to be remanded by the natural sciences to other modes and planes of thought - to philosophy and theology. For philosophy and, albeit in a different way, for theology, listening to the great experiences and insights of the religious traditions of humanity, and those of the Christian faith in particular, is a source of knowledge, and to ignore it would be an unacceptable restriction of our listening and responding. Here I am reminded of something Socrates said to Phaedo. In their earlier conversations, many false philosophical opinions had been raised, and so Socrates says: "It would be easily understandable if someone became so annoyed at all these false notions that for the rest of his life he despised and mocked all talk about being - but in this way he would be deprived of the truth of existence and would suffer a great loss".[13] The West has long been endangered by this aversion to the questions which underlie its rationality, and can only suffer great harm thereby. The courage to engage the whole breadth of reason, and not the denial of its grandeur - this is the programme with which a theology grounded in Biblical faith enters into the debates of our time. "Not to act reasonably, not to act with logos, is contrary to the nature of God", said Manuel II, according to his Christian understanding of God, in response to his Persian interlocutor. It is to this great logos, to this breadth of reason, that we invite our partners in the dialogue of cultures. To rediscover it constantly is the great task of the university.
[1] Of the total number of 26 conversations (διάλεξις – Khoury translates this as “controversy”) in the dialogue (“Entretien”), T. Khoury published the 7th “controversy” with footnotes and an extensive introduction on the origin of the text, on the manuscript tradition and on the structure of the dialogue, together with brief summaries of the “controversies” not included in the edition; the Greek text is accompanied by a French translation: “Manuel II Paléologue, Entretiens avec un Musulman. 7e Controverse”, Sources Chrétiennes n. 115, Paris 1966. In the meantime, Karl Förstel published in Corpus Islamico-Christianum (Series Graeca ed. A. T. Khoury and R. Glei) an edition of the text in Greek and German with commentary: “Manuel II. Palaiologus, Dialoge mit einem Muslim”, 3 vols., Würzburg-Altenberge 1993-1996. As early as 1966, E. Trapp had published the Greek text with an introduction as vol. II of Wiener byzantinische Studien. I shall be quoting from Khoury’s edition.
[2] On the origin and redaction of the dialogue, cf. Khoury, pp. 22-29; extensive comments in this regard can also be found in the editions of Förstel and Trapp.
[3] Controversy VII, 2 c: Khoury, pp. 142-143; Förstel, vol. I, VII. Dialog 1.5, pp. 240-241. In the Muslim world, this quotation has unfortunately been taken as an expression of my personal position, thus arousing understandable indignation. I hope that the reader of my text can see immediately that this sentence does not express my personal view of the Qur’an, for which I have the respect due to the holy book of a great religion. In quoting the text of the Emperor Manuel II, I intended solely to draw out the essential relationship between faith and reason. On this point I am in agreement with Manuel II, but without endorsing his polemic.
[4] Controversy VII, 3 b–c: Khoury, pp. 144-145; Förstel vol. I, VII. Dialog 1.6, pp. 240-243.
[5] It was purely for the sake of this statement that I quoted the dialogue between Manuel and his Persian interlocutor. In this statement the theme of my subsequent reflections emerges.
[6] Cf. Khoury, p. 144, n. 1.
[7] R. Arnaldez, Grammaire et théologie chez Ibn Hazm de Cordoue, Paris 1956, p. 13; cf. Khoury, p. 144. The fact that comparable positions exist in the theology of the late Middle Ages will appear later in my discourse.
[8] Regarding the widely discussed interpretation of the episode of the burning bush, I refer to my book Introduction to Christianity, London 1969, pp. 77-93 (originally published in German as Einführung in das Christentum, Munich 1968; N.B. the pages quoted refer to the entire chapter entitled “The Biblical Belief in God”). I think that my statements in that book, despite later developments in the discussion, remain valid today.
[9] Cf. A. Schenker, “L’Écriture sainte subsiste en plusieurs formes canoniques simultanées”, in L’Interpretazione della Bibbia nella Chiesa. Atti del Simposio promosso dalla Congregazione per la Dottrina della Fede, Vatican City 2001, pp. 178-186.
[10] On this matter I expressed myself in greater detail in my book The Spirit of the Liturgy, San Francisco 2000, pp. 44-50.
[11] Of the vast literature on the theme of dehellenization, I would like to mention above all: A. Grillmeier, “Hellenisierung-Judaisierung des Christentums als Deuteprinzipien der Geschichte des kirchlichen Dogmas”, in idem, Mit ihm und in ihm. Christologische Forschungen und Perspektiven, Freiburg 1975, pp. 423-488.
[12] Newly published with commentary by Heino Sonnemans (ed.): Joseph Ratzinger-Benedikt XVI, Der Gott des Glaubens und der Gott der Philosophen. Ein Beitrag zum Problem der theologia naturalis, Johannes-Verlag Leutesdorf, 2nd revised edition, 2005.
[13] Cf. 90 c-d. For this text, cf. also R. Guardini, Der Tod des Sokrates, 5th edition, Mainz-Paderborn 1987, pp. 218-221.

© Copyright 2006 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

Plain Speaking : A Sudra's Story

2007-04-01T22:42:00.000-07:00

BOOKS: New book - "Plain Speaking: A Sudra's Story"
Uttara Natarajan, a senior lecturer at Goldsmiths College, University of London has edited a new book that sheds light on the struggles for equality among the lower castes in southern India. The book, "Plain Speaking: A Sudra’s Story - Memoirs and Lectures of A.N. Sattanathan (1905-1990)," is described thus:
Sattanathan’s autobiographical fragment is a unique record of non-Brahmin low-caste life in rural South India, where the presence of poverty and caste prejudice is the more powerful for being understated. As the experience – sparsely and beautifully rendered – of the low-caste but not stereotypically ‘untouchable’ villager, it is, quite simply, revelatory, and will make an impact as such on the English-educated reader, to whom that experience has been so far unavailable.
See below for the publicist's contact for review copy and interview info. Tell 'em SAJA sent you. Post your reax in the comments section.
[Press release]PR contact: Kartik S. Natarajan, 860-561-2971, kartik.natarajan@gmail.com.
Plain Speaking: A Sudra’s Story Memoirs and Lectures of A.N. Sattanathan (1905-1990)edited by Uttara NatarajanDelhi, Permanent Black, 2007, x, 238 p., ISBN 81-7824-181-1.
The book
The memoirs and lectures of A.N. Sattanathan (1905-1990), presented here in a fully annotated edition, with a critical introduction, constitute a key literary-historical document of the caste struggle. Sattanathan’s autobiographical fragment is a unique record of non-Brahmin low-caste life in rural South India, where the presence of poverty and caste prejudice is the more powerful for being understated. As the experience – sparsely and beautifully rendered – of the low-caste but not stereotypically ‘untouchable’ villager, it is, quite simply, revelatory, and will make an impact as such on the English-educated reader, to whom that experience has been so far unavailable. In a complementary narrative, Sattanathan's lectures – on ‘The Rise and Spread of the Non-Brahmin Movement’ as ‘the most outstanding event in South Indian History in the twentieth century’ – offer a lucid summary of the cultural and historical conditions that find more personal and immediate expression in the memoirs.
The receptionPlain Speaking was launched at the British Council in Chennai on 5 January 2007. The launch was attended by the Chief Minister of Tamilnadu, Dr. M. Karunanidhi, and the Union Minister, Mr. Mani Shankar Aiyar. In the Deccan Chronicle (29-12-06), Dr. Karunanidhi commented, ‘Of all the books I read this year, what touched my heart the most was A.N. Sattanathan’s Plain Speaking: A Sudra's Story […]The author has vividly brought out all the pains and realities of being born a Sudra in a caste-dominated rural Tamil Nadu. The book moved me very much.’ Other responses have been equally laudatory: ‘Plain Speaking is the powerful, moving account of one man’s struggle for a better life and a more equal society’ (Uma Mahadevan-Dasgupta in The Indian Express, 14-1=07); ‘This is one of the most moving and riveting books I have read in recent times’ (Sushila Ravindranath in New Indian Express on Sunday, 21-1-07); ‘its spartan prose […] is free of rancour […] his “aham” (interior/mindscape) and his “puram” (exterior/political space) constantly exchange places to bring out the living conditions of the majority of the people during the larger part of the last millennium’ (A.S. Paneerselvan in The Hindu, 6-2-07).
The authorA.N. Sattanathan had a distinguished career in the all-India services. He was Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Calcutta, and in later life wrote and published widely on politics and economics in India. In 1969 he was appointed Chairman of the first Tamilnadu Backward Classes Commission and made a lasting impact on the state's policy of affirmative action towards lower castes
The editorUttara Natarajan is Senior Lecturer in English at Goldsmiths College, University of London, where she teaches and researches in nineteenth-century English literature. Her publications include Hazlitt and the Reach of Sense (Oxford University Press, 1998) and The Romantic Poets: A Guide to Criticism (Blackwell, 2007). Uttara expects to visit the United States in the summer of 2007. She can be contacted at u.natarajan@gold.ac.uk.
Availability; PRPR contact: Kartik S. Natarajan, 860-561-2971, kartik.natarajan@gmail.com.
The book is available in all of the leading bookshops in India, and can also be ordered from a number of online booksellers, including http://www.vedamsbooks.com/, http://www.bagchee.com/ http://www.aggarwaloverseas.com/, http://www.bibliaimpex.com/.
Posted by Sree Sreenivasan at 05:51 PM in Books Permalink

TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/16060862
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference BOOKS: New book - "Plain Speaking: A Sudra's Story":

Comments

I have not read "Plain Speaking," but from the synopsis given above, I think Deepa Mehta may want to turn this book into another heartrending movie. Stories of struggles of a mass group of people should not be forgotten, especially since the caste system still prevails in India. When we expose the weaknesses of a society, we are ready to have discussions on the subject until we finally come up with answers to solve deep societal problems. Sometimes we forget, rich or poor, in God's eyes we are all equal.
For example, I have appealed to the Sindhis (my community) worldwide to eliminate the medieval "dowry system" because it brings with it a lot of evils, and have also suggested that they lift the status of women and ensure they are well educated.
That does not mean these social issues will be resolved overnight, but at least we will have brought more awareness to them, and not have swept them under the rug.
Jaya Kamlani
Posted by: Jaya Kamlani February 12, 2007 at 01:20 PM
Reflecting on my last comment, I wanted to accurately quote what I had learned/recall from my convent school days in Bombay: “Rich or poor, great or small, in the eyes of the Lord we are all equal.”
In other words, the Sudras should be treated with as much respect and human dignity as we afford the upper caste. That can never happen you may say. Yet, what we desperately need in India are human rights and social reforms. If not, in time we will see social chaos. I believe India is going through its "Great Gatsby" days now: the rich are making all the hay, while the poor and the low-caste are forgotten. I feel strongly about this issue, more so today, since I recently visited the Carter Center in Atlanta. President Jimmy Carter and his wife, Rosalynn Carter have spent tireless years in promoting human rights all over the world.
Jaya Kamlani
Posted by: Jaya Kamlani February 12, 2007 at 02:16 PM
hostName = '.sajaforum.org';

Post a comment
checkLocal();

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In
You are currently signed in as (nobody). Sign Out
Name:

Plain Speaking : A Sudra's Story/A.N. Sattanathan. Edited by Uttara Natarajan. Delhi, Permanent Black, 2007, x, 238 p., $22. ISBN 81-7824-181-1.
Contents: Acknowledgements. Introduction. I. An exercise in biography (1958): 1. A house of women. 2. My father. 3. Experiments with schools. 4. A school escapade. 5. Three years in English school. 6. Change of name and school. 7. A year without school. 8. Two years in high school. 9. I feel my way. 10. I graduate. 11. Searching for employment: Madura. 12. Some more job-hunting: history repeats itself in Trichy. II. The Dravidian Movement in Tamil Nadu and its legacy (1981) : Three lectures delivered at the University of Madras: Preface. Lectures: i. The Dravidian Movement in Tamil Nadu and its emergence as a political force. ii. The Varying political phases of the Dravidian Movement. 3. Castes as pressure groups. Explanatory notes.
"The memoirs and lectures of A.N. Sattanathan (1905-1991), presented here in a fully annotated edition, with a critical introduction, constitute a key literary-historical document of the caste struggle. Sattanathan's autobiographical fragment is a unique record of non-Brahmin low-caste life in rural South India, where the presence of poverty and caste prejudice is the more powerful for being understated.
As the experience--sparsely and beautifully rendered--of the low-caste but not stereotypically 'untouchable' villager, it is, quite simply, revelatory, and will make an impact as such on the English-educated reader, to whom that experience has been so far unavailable.
In a complementary narrative, Sattnathan's lectures--on 'The Rise and Spread of the Non-Brahmin Movement' as 'The most outstanding event in South Indian History in the twentieth century'--offer a lucid summary of the cultural and historical conditions that find more personal and immediate expression in the memoirs." (jacket)
Return to Anthropology

Death Ends Fun
I'm not leftist, I'm not rightist, I'm a typist
January 04, 2007

Plain Speaking
And here I am, back again where I was born: Chennai where sari-clad ladies look down fetchingly from billboards, for the formal release of Plain Speaking: A Sudra's Story (Permanent Black, 2007). The book is by my grandfather, A.N. Sattanathan, and was edited and annotated by my cousin, Uttara Natarajan. The release (scroll down to second item) is at the British Council in Chennai, 6pm on Friday January 5. Maybe you'll be there too.
11:53 PM permalink
Comments:
On January 05, 2007 12:36 AM, Rahul wrote: Doubt I can make it, but I'll certainly look out for the book, or order it online. Next time you're in town we should meet, or maybe I'll show up in Mumbai before that...

An open letter to a converted Christian

2007-03-25T21:19:00.000-07:00

An Open Letter to a Converted Christian3/24/2007 7:34:55 PM B.Subramaniam GP.Srinivasan
Foreword

This is in response to a letter from Mr.Srinath, sent to a Tamil religious monthly, Panchajanyam, being published from Srirangam.

Srinath claims, though he was born as Hindu, a Vadakalai iyengar,whose origins were, Srirangam.

He confesses, he has been under the spell of missionaries, and would like to convert to Christianity. In his long letter to the editor, running into three pages, in Tamil, he has expressed his displeasure against Hindus and Hinduism, for its caste practices. He claims that Christianity and Islam do not have these “evil practices", and hence better religions. He asks”why there are so many Gods in Hinduism"? and has borrowed all the missionary criticism of Hinduism. He himself has no knowledge of Hinduism and does not know the abc of Hinduism. Toward the end of his rambling that turns into a political assault. He asserts that Hinduism will be wiped out by Christianity and Islam.He suggests,the editor of Panchajanyam should "read Bible' and reply to him. Our purpose, is to educate Hindus first, hence this detailed writeup.We are not interested in educating Christians. Hindus themselves do not know their wealth of their heritage is the pitiable state of affairs. Hence this reply.Sincerely,B.Subramaniam GP.Srinivasan-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dear Mr.Srinath,YOU MAY GET TEMPORARY BENEFITS BUT NOT PERMANENT SOULTIONS BY CONVERTING TO XTIANITYThis is with reference to your letter to PANCHAJANYAM. I feel very sorry for the state of despair shown by you in your letter. I pray the ubiquitous Almighty to remove all the problems that you are facing.Now the following points to clear your doubts : We all (including you) follow Sanaathana Dharma. i.e living structure which can be followed by all. Before the advent of religions generated in the west viz. Christianity and Islam, our religion was followed by all on the earth with slight variations in different sects. Our place (which you call India), was called as Bhaarath Varsha – a tribute to a sage Bharath Muni.

Monotheism and Polytheism

We also have a single God (Almighty) – Brahman. It is neither HE (as in case of Christianity or Islam) or SHE. (In Christianity & Islam,the male domination is very prevalent, but not in our religion). It is just IT. IT is shape less, size less, genderless and beyond normal human comprehension. Though IT (Almighty) has formed several dimensions, IT is in zero dimension.

Siva purana says the Almighty has formed 64 dimensions. And a jeevaatmaa has to start its journey from 64 th dimension, and on better performance will be elevated to next lower dimension. We in 3 dimension will be elevated to 2 dimension on doing good physical deeds or thrown down to 4 dimension for doing bad deeds. The 2 dimension is of Swarga (Heaven) and 4 dimension – Naraga (Hell). 1 dimension is the place of Gods and Demigods whereas 0 dimension is the place of Almighty.

In KathaUpanishad, the Almighty is referred to as Anoraniaan, Mahathomahiyaan- Smaller than an atom but bigger than the biggest. The Almighty made this universe out of its own thoughts and is present in every place and in every living organism and hence called Sarvaantharyami (Omnipresent, Ubiquitous).
Just like an office having different departments, IT manifests itself into three functionaries viz. Brahma – God of Generation, Vishnu – God of Organizing and Shiva – God of Destruction. (Para Brahman Almighty) as GOD –Generator, Organizer and Destroyer. Hence irrespective of the religion, the maker is the same. Since we need to have staff to perform duties in every department, we have 33 Crore Devas who are there to perform individual duties, governed by Indra. Again in Katha Upanishad, Yama says that he is in the post of Yama due to performing a special type of Yagna called Nachiketha Yagna. Once the effect of the good deed is over, he will again thrown in to normal birth and death cycle. Hence Yama, Agni, Varuna, Vaayu, Indra are only posts and any one can be elevated to that level temporarily. On completion of their period they will again be put in to normal birth and death cycle.

Facts about Caste System
Around estimated 16000 thousand years ago, Swaayambu who ruled before the present Vaivaswatha Manu, created class among the mass for ease in civilization structure.

Brahmin : Brahmasya Gyaajuhu Braamanaha – The one knows or tries to know the Brahman is a Brahmin, he can engage in religious and teaching matters.

Kshaya Athra Veeryaha : Kshathriyaha – The one who has limitless body and mind power is Kshathriya – He can guard the kingdom and the people of the kingdom from enemies

Vishyasya Sooryaha : Vaishyaha – The one is bright like sun in finance matter of the society is a Vaishya;

Sha –Adhra : Shoodrha – One who can not be categorised in the first three classes belongs to this class.

During Shukla Yajuveda period i.e during Rama's period, i.e around 12000 years ago, in a single family, persons interested in spending more time in matters pertaining to Almighty will become a Brahmin, able bodied persons who were interested in physical fights became Kshathriyas; persons who liked to get involved in business became Vaishyas and who did not have any such above cited capabilities became Shoodras doing minial works in the society. Thus the classes were only on the basis of ability and profession and not on the basis of birth.
This went on for several thousand years, but boys born to a Brahmin father liked to spend their time in matters pertaining to Almighty like their fathers, boys born to Kshthriya father liked to get themselves involved in fighting and using arms like their fathers, boys born to Vaishyaas liked to get themselves involved in financial or business matters like their fathers and boys born to Shoodhra father liked themselves to be involved in doing physical works like their fathers. Thus a classification which was started on the basis of ability slowly changed in to classification on the basis of birth.

Hence the Classes were though basically formed on the basis of ability later changed in to classification on the basis of birth. This is the negative side of the classification.

The positive side is that since father and son belonged to the same working group, improvement in all the fields were visibly noted since father will teach his sons the nuances of work. Hence outcome in all walks of life was beyond compare.

Missionary Propaganda against Brahmins
Merely calling Brahmins as root cause for the deprived state of the 4th Class – is ridiculous. Brahmins themselves were only few in number and lived due to the generosity of the ruling class Kshathriyaas and business class Vaishyaas. Kshathriyaas fought wars and Protected. Traders amassed wealth due to their inherent tendency to do business.Therewere not many Brahmins who were rich and had landed property. Moreover Brahmins had the inherent tendency to help the poor.

The root cause of the deprivation of the all the classes were due to 1300 years of Invasions and Foreign rule imposed on Indians. In fact there was hardly any deprivation at all in the first place. There was a prosperous and Rich Society, that was perhaps rich even upto 1800 .The combined effects of Islamic invasions and Christian British resulted in the deprivation of entire Bharat. People were well off and productive. Food, Medicine, Water and Education were never sold in Pre British Times.You cannot offer the manager and peon of the company the same salary and other benefits. The Manager invariably gets better paid than the peon. This can not be attributed as deprivation by the Manager. Similarly the living conditions invariably differed between the 4 classes.

Compare it Vatican- all the top cardinals are Italian born Roman catholics, who run the show.It may surprisisng to many that the dalit christians feel cheated by the Church. They have conducted protest meet in New Delhi in 1999 when the Pope John Paul II came to India. The missionary of Charities of Theresa bojeaux of Calcutta, is run by Sister Nirmala, who happend to be Nepali Brahmin. The Vatican church has declared the abused varnaashrama, as recognised divisions, by council of diamper (udayamperroor). Though the Constitution of India by law has made untouchability, an offence, within the Hindu system, these divisions are still retained by the Roman Catholic order, in India.

The varnaashrama is based on human types .What is called personality traits, and suitability for occupation. Even in modern organisations these four types can be found. Even in NASA or Microsoft, the hierarchy is visible. There the board and the Chairman, followed by Top Management, next to are Management staff, and wokers. Even Biill Gates organisation employees are divided into categories, that will resemble the old hindu order. There are security guards even in Vatican and there are janitor whose job is clean the toilet of the Pope.

During the British rule, since Brahmins were picked up and sought after by the British to serve as translators in English, the British translated Sanskrit literature into European languages. Brahmins were offered jobs in British Indian Government. The combined fiscal policy, dismantling of the existing agararian system, trade,commerce, and handicrafts resulted in tremendous poverty.Longlasting famines resulted as result of these colonial policies by military adminstrators.
India was exporting upto 30 percent of its manufactured goods even in 1800.This made the Christian British jealous, and they robbed the country. Missionaries invaded the country and established bible schools. On the one hand they destroyed the existing system. "They virutually broke the back , and made the people crippled, and provided balm with the help of missionaries, who followed the invaders. Adding insult to injury they put the blame on Hinduism, Hindu Culture and blamed Brahmins for allthese. This was taught adnauseum in all missionary publications, and taught by every school and college. Every school going child was taught to hate their ancestors and become ashamed of its culture and heritage. Craftily the British further augumented this divison by creating, developing, supporting,institutions like the Justice party and made people of other castes go against Brahmins, that gave rise to Dravidar Kazhagam in Tamilnadu, by the famous Kannadiga E.V.Ramasamy Naickar (Periyaar).Hence Brahmins were easily made scapegoats as root cause for the deprivation of the 4th class. The missionaries were trying to develop Brahmin hatred in India, as they had done to Jews in West, that culminated in the World War II, where millions of Jews and others were slaughtered. You must know that Hitler himself was a Roman catholic, and his name has not been removed, from the Church. The Vatican Church tacitly encouraged Hitler.

Casteism in Chistianity In fact it has been openly seen in converted Christians that the class and subclass of their Hindu generation in the past is taken into consideration before finalizing marriages. A naadaar Christian will not have any nuptial relation with a mudaliaar Christian and vice versa. Similarly classifications do exist in Christianity and Islam also. Roman Catholic,Protestants, Catholic Syrians, Pentacoste, Jehovaa's Witnesses do not even see eye to eye with each other and go only in their way. A marriage between RC Christian and Protestant is next to impossible in reality. Each of them does not even consider the other sect as part of Christianity at all in the first place. We know how Martin Luther fought for forming the Protestant Lutheran church and he butchered thousands of people to form Lutheran church. Read history. Do not waste your time in reading the foolish, useless bible. There are many variants of bible and each say that it was the first to be released. No word in the bible belongs to Jesus Christ. The Bible and Christianity itself came into existence only after 300 years of Christ's crucifixion. In places like Bangalore there is the language problems between nativa kannadigas, who want the mass only to be conducted in Kannada, and Tamilians should their mass seperately.

Christmas- A Festival based on Lie
The birth date of Jesus as 25th December does not exist in any form of bible. Read real history. In fact there was Mithra civilization (sun worshippers and hence a sect of Sanaathana Dharma) which existed in the middle east at the time of Jesus's existence. They had the practice of starting their year from Winter solstice which falls on 25thDecember. Christians took the cue from them and arranged the birth date of Christ as 25th December and then started their new year from 6 days later. This was improved by Pope Gregory and hence we call English calendar as Gregorian calendar.

Whereas we people of Sanaathana Dharma start our new year from Vernal Equinox i.e from the day when sun is parallel to the equator and rising upwards which falls on 14th April. Read real history.

Divisions in Islam

Similarly Muslim Sunnis and Shiaas do not see eye to eye with each other and the battle is going on for several hundred years after the demise of Mohammed (Prophet?). A marriage between a Sunni boy and Shiaa girl in next to impossible. The Iran – Iraq war is a classic example of Shiaa – Sunni fight. It is unending. Mohammed only prophesied hatred among his own people and he ordered that all non muslims (kafirs) should be slaughtered, and they do not have the right to live. Read real history. Do not read Koran. It only preaches hatred.

Beauty of Sanathana Dharma

There is full fledged philosophy in Sanaathana Dharma which is absolutely lacking in Islam & Christianity. We call it Thathvam : Thath and Thvam – You. i.e. you are IT, and IT is invariably you.

Only Sanaathana Dharma equates the maker Paramaathmaa (Almighty) with the made Jeevaathmaa. That is that essence of Sanaathana Dharma. The maker itself is running as a deer and is hunting as a tiger. The hunter and hunted and the process of hunting are the same Almighty. This is called Adhvaitham.

In Naaraayana Suktham it says

'thasyaahaa shikhaayaa madhye paramaathmaa vyavasthithaha;
sa-bhrmma, sa-shiva, sa-hari, sa-indra, sa-akshara, paramaswaraat'

At the peak of the real heart (at the solar plexus) of each person, exists the paramaathmaa, IT is Brahma, IT is Shiva, IT is Hari, IT is Indra, IT is undivisible Supreme Almighty.

Maandukya Upanishad says 'Sarvam Hyethath Brahma, Ayamaathmaa Brahma' -
All we perceive are Brahman,My Athman (Soul) is also Brahman.

Bharath’s Contributions

We were the forebears in many fields of science and other departments. We had great mathematicians and we donated the concept of zero to the world.
We have developed Vaanashaasthra – Astronomy which was unequalled in the world at that time, and had many well known astronomers like Bhaskara, Aryabhatta. We were the first to educate the world that we have seven planets viz. Mercury – Bhudan, Venus – Sukran, Earth – Bhoomi, Mars - Ankaarakan, Jupitor – Guru and Saturn – Sani which are rotating around the sun in the same plane in the above cited order. (Uranus, Neptune & Pluto were known only after the invention of telescope). We were also the first to come out with two imaginary planets – Chaayaa Graham – Rahu and Ketu which were formed out of the difference in the orbital plane of moon with respect to earth, and they we responsible for solar and lunar eclipses. We were the first to develop astronomy as well as astrology thus trying to find out the future.

We had very highly developed Yuddha Shaasthra – The rules pertaining to wars and battles. It says a war has to be done on a one man to one man to basis only, and should be fought on a barren land outside the civilization, only by males, from sunrise to sunset. In the wars one should not be attacked by many or one should not get hit on the back. The womenfolk and children were never involved in the wars. The warring groups will fight it out on a pre decided open barren land outside the civilization and the winner of the war will take over the kingdom of the loser in a very smooth manner. Only in the invasions of Muslims and then Christians we found warring on civilizations killing womenfolk and children and muslims were the first to use weapons of mass destruction like guns and mortars from far away place killing hundreds of people. The war by people of Bharath was fought only from sunrise to sunset and on sunset both the warring groups will eat and go to sleep and resume war only the next morning only both the sides are ready. We had a sense of responsibility and reliability in all walks of life which was missing in the muslim and Christian invaders.
We were the first to develop high banking and lending system. In the west banks – banca: bench started very lately. We were of high caliber in business and financial systems.
Jewels like gold and silver and diamonds were discovered by us only and were then taken from us to the west. The importance of jewels were fist discovered by us. We were the first in the world to have a mine at Panna for Diamonds and Kimberly at South Africa came much later.
Gory History of Christianity and Islam
On formation of religions Christianity 2000 years ago,and Islam about 1300 years ago in the Palestine, (both Christianity & Islam have a very bloody history. (Crusades and Jihads)

Christians raised a thousand year war (crusade) and killed lakhs of people and set fire to the famous library of Alexandria so as to destroy the history of west before Jesus Christ. Muslims also had to wage several wars – Prophet Mohammed himself has a very bad history – he was working as a house hold worker in one house, surreptitiously made the mistress of the house Khatija Begum to fall in love with him and was thrown out of the place itself and ran to Madina, where he is said to have heard the message of allah? God, and then gathered an army and invaded Mecca and killed several thousands in the battle.He waged 52 invasions in his life time. Muslims have the shariyat law by which a male can marry 4 females and beget children from them itself clearly Proves that there was a need of men folk for fighting and women were considered only (animals unequal to men) for bearing children. Since there were many battles going on, they had to beget more males. Even today in many muslim families women have to wear bhurka and can not freely talk to men not belonging to their family. Muslim Kings viz. Ghori and Gazni invaded India from West. Then came the Christians in 1600 AD. And since our country is on the other side of Sindu (Indus) river, the westerners started calling us as Hindu and this place as Hindusthan. Muslims may be as you said be the largest number of humans on the earth as a male can cohabit with 4 women and procreate any number of children. Similarly if he wants he can simply say Talak Talak Talak and divorce his wife permanently and get rid of her. Wait and see what happens to Islam and Christianity in the future.

'The wonder that was India'

The history of our Bharath (which you now call as India) was a wonder. Please read 'The wonder that was India' written by Mr.A.L.Basham, an Indologist working in Canberra University. He only calls this wonder existed before the invasion of Muslims and Christians to Bharath.

Foreign Invasion

In those days Bharath which comprised of 56 independent nations was supposed to be the richest place in the earth, and every one thronged to come here. Even Alexander who was the king of Macedonia (now part of Greece) came to this place only in an ambition to plunder but was forced to return as he was totally defeated by Pururavas in a war which was fought at the base of Himalayas. He went back to Macedonia in his late twenties and died there. Mohammad of Gazni, Mohammed of Ghori, Timur Lang (Forefather of Akbar) came only to plunder Bhaarath. Though they could do a little harm, they were forced to return back as they lost in wars with valiant Bhaarath kings. Babar could invade Bhaarath and permanently settle and spread islam here. In early 16 th century, Europians wanted to come to Bhaarath only with an ambition to do business and slowly plunder.

First Christopher Columbus from Spain left Europe with a ship full of warriors. Fortunately for us, he instead of turning left, turned right and reached islands (which we now call carribeans) and saw reddish people there. He thought that he has reached India, and called those people Red Indians and called those islands as Isles of the West Indies. But there was nothing to plunder as they were nomadic aborigin tribe and very uncivilized. Hence he understood his mistake and returned to his home land in dejected state. Within some years one by name Amerigo Carlucci from Spain invaded that place and landed in the mainland. He saw the same red Indian tribe there and butchered them in millions. The spaniards started occupying the place and named the main land in honor of him as America (AMErigo CArlucci). Then the Britishers followed suit and drove the settled Spaniards down south, who went to the continent of South America and butchered and eliminated from the face of earth, three great civilizations the Mayan, the Inca and the Aztec civilizations all of who were sun worshippers and hence were variant sects of Sanaathana Dharma..
The countries in South America viz. Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Peru etc.have people speaking languages of Spanish origin. The original people who belonged to that place the so called Red Indians have become minorities and third rated citizens in their own land. Hence your so called Christians did not win the world by love and amity as you think but butchered people and usurped their land and belongings.
In late 16th century Vasco Da Gama from Portugal left for Bharath in ambition to do business and slowly plunder since Bhaarath was said then seen to be the domain of wealth. He came and landed near Kozhikode and slowly occupied that place by butchering the local inhabitants and occupied the costal place up to Goa. His tribe was very famous for butchering the locals, and they also engaged in converting people forcefully. One of them by name Francis Xavier who was a pirate, has a record of Inquistions; organised killing of Brahmins and molesting their wives. For is such good deeds he was deified as Saint Francis Xavier. Then came the British and formed East India Company and started slowly usurping land in the name of business. As a custom the local kings gave them all help to do business in their kingdoms without knowing their bad intentions. The Britishers slowly usurped land and started infighting among local kings. They would tell a king to invade the territory of a nearby kingdom and support him with their arms. On the loss of the other king, they will kill the losing king and also kill the king whom they originally supported and annex both the kingdoms. This was their practice. Slowly they usurped the whole of Indian subcontinent and became outright rulers of Bhaarath. They also engaged themselves in converting local Hindus by offering a job in British Sarkar. This was their game play. They had Bhaarath in their control for bloody full 350 years and called Bhaarath as the Jewel in the Crown of British kingdom. They plundered Bhaarath right and left and took several hundreds of ship loads of jewels from Bhaarath and only because of their plunder Bhaarath became one of the poor nations in the world.

Perverts or Pastors?
You said about sexual exigencies found in Shankaracharya. Though Nakkeeran (of Dravidar Kazhagam which is anti Brahmin) released such lousy stories, SHankaraachaaryas follow total celibacy and it impossible to even dream of sexual malpractices. Even many of your popes and bishops were said to have illicit sexual experiences in Vatican with the nuns. We do not bother to question them because we are not interested in others' perversions.

Chritianity’s hatred to Jews

The Vatican is said to be the wealthiest place in the world. History says that since judas was the chief cause of jesus's crucifixion, Christians considered Jews (Judas and even jesus was jew) as eliminable. There was unending fight going on between jews and Christians which was Crusade. History says the Hitler (a devout Roman Catholic Christian) started killing jews only at the behest of Vatican and since Jews were thriving in Europe, he killed millions of Jews in gas chambers and usurped their properties and donated to Vatican. The Jews had a religious habit of circumcision, which Muslims copied, and by this only Hitler could pinpoint Jews and butcher them. Thus Vatican became the richest place in the world. Many jews (the famous Albert Einstein was one of them) had to flee to America surreptitiously leaving all their properties in Europe, which were easily annexed by Hitler. This mass destruction of jews became the cause of II World War, and forced the Jews to form their own home land of Israel (Isara El – Abode of god). The then President of U.S.A – Harry Truman (a jew) wanted to drop the atom bomb on Germany, but he was stopped by Britain and France who were America's allies in II World War, since they feared nuclear rainfall on their countries will destroy many people & properties. Hence the 2 atom bombs (little boy and fat man) were dropped in Japan at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. This is the real bloody history of Christianity. Read real history.

Why no to Conversions
Though conversions are rampant in Christianity and Islam, it does not prevail in Sanaathana Dharma. This is because just the way we don't choose our parents, or our children, we can not choose our religion also. We are born the way we are, and the way is given to us by the Almighty. We have no say in that. I may call some one other than my father as father and someone other than my mother as mother. But my body which is made out the blood of my father & mother and the span of 9 months and 9 days I stayed in the womb of my mother can not be altered by me. I genetically resemble my real parents. Similarly I have no right to change my religion.
This is because we people of Sanaathana Dharma believe that the Almighty is the same for everybody, only the way you perceive IT and call IT differs.You can call IT as Eashwara, or God or etc. Kena Upanishad says

Ekam Sath;Viprah Bahudhaa Vadhanthi -Truth is only one; various people call it differently

Hence we do not believe in converting people of other religions to ours and similarly do not believe or like conversion of people of our religion to other religions. We are the only to believe in poorva (past) janma (existence) and next Janma. The birth and death sequence is absent in desert religions. Also they have only heaven and hell where one enjoys or suffers. Only we talk of Moksha – Remerging with the Almighty and ending the birth and death cycle.
Our Dhasaavathaara is the best example. It shows the path of evolution from Mathsya - Aquatic, Koorma – Amphibian, Varaha – small earth dwelling animal (pig), Narasimha – Lion – Man combination, Vaamana, Raama & Krishna – evolution in humans, and final Kalki – The begetter of pralaya and restarter of new evolution cycle. This reflects the biological findings also.

Your problems in your life are not because of religion. They should be because of your deeds in the previous birth or this birth itself.Please read Tirumoolar's Thirumandiram. It says

Thaane thanakku pagaivanum nattaanum
Thaane thanakku marumaiyum maiyum
Thaane thaan seidha munvinai thuppaanum
Thaane thanakku thalaivanumaame

You are your own enemy and friend, you are your own past and present, you are bearing the fruits of your past deeds, and you are your own master.

For the problems you are facing, sit down and think in a very detached way to get a solution and you will definitely get a solution. Converting to Christianity for money or for permanent solution of the problem is foolish. You may get temporary benefits but not permanent solutions. If that is so all the Christians in the world will be the happiest people on this earth. This is what we can say. Ultimately it is you who should decide. Definitely our religion Sanaathana Dharma will never die and will emerge as the only religion on this earth someday, because the Semitic religions are born out of falsehood and hatred, and hence will soon come to an end. Only our Sanaathana Dharma which teaches about perennial love will exist ad infinitum.

Dear Subramaniamji &Srinivasanji,I got higly enlightened by your look back on history, which is getting distorted or hidden by the semitic religions and marxists and prevented from reaching the common man. It is high time we educated our brothers on the greatness of our religion. In the meantime the complacent attitude even in the midst of misery shown by Sri. Purushottamji needs correction. Our scriptures do not teach us to bear all injustices. After failing all avenues for compromises the Mahabharatha war had to be fought. So there is a limit to which our tolerance can go. Otherwise there will not be anyone when you look back with your tolerance. Srinaths are already getting misled and ready to climb on the cross. He does not need your large heartedness, but you on the cross beside him .

A very well written article. As I always believe - lack of proper education is the down fall of The Great Culture and it is high time Hindus start educating form the lower level itself.

Dear sir, Do not abuse any one and followers of any religion. The only draw back with Christians may be they believe in conversion. But apart from that we Hindus have several things to learn from . We speak about Gau Seva but we Indians and in particular Hindus make her as political capital. We believe in building temples but not spending huge money for health and educational services. Now a days some Hindu organisations have stated to lead Hindus to medieval age. Hindus should introspect as to why Hinduism is sinking in India? Thanks to Indian Hundis that they don't believe in Fatva business otherwise Gundas would have ruled over Hindus. Hindus should work for unity of India. They may and have right to oppose policy of appeasement of governments and should also oppose about minority status of few cases as it is against the Charter of UNO but remember that Hindus are Indians first and then Hindus. This is our culture and maintain it. P>V>Namjoshi.1,Adarsh Nagar,Indore.

Sliding towards Civil War

2007-03-22T22:09:00.000-07:00

Sliding Towards Civil War
March 15th, 2007 madhesi-->
Sliding Towards Civil War
March 14, 2007: The Hindus (Mahadhesis) of southern Nepal, make up about a third of the population, are poor, and want to get something out of all the changes that are coming. But the Maoists consider the Mahadhesis to be opportunists, trying to grab a share of power after the Maoists did all the work. Joining the Mahadhesis are the tribal peoples (of which the Ghurkas and Sherpas are the most famous), who also want to see some changes in their own situation. Leaders of these ethnic factions are competing with each other for followers. They do this up making bigger demands, and more threats of violence. There is also much anger against the Maoists by the majority of the population. The Maoists are led by upper caste Hindus, as are the political parties. The Maoists are seen by the tribes, and lower caste Hindus (like the Mahadhesi) as violent and untrustworthy. The political parties are seen as corrupt. The king is no prize either, but is seen more as a symbol of national unity, than anything else. The king, after all, is just another upper-caste Hindu. The caste system (there are four castes, plus about a fifth of Hindus who have no caste and are “untouchable”) is illegal in India, but still a major factor in social relations, and politics. Same deal in Nepal. March 13, 2007: Now both the political parties and the Maoists are calling for the monarchy to be eliminated. But many Nepalis want to keep the monarchy. Will they fight to keep the monarchy. No one knows. March 12, 2007: In the south, pro-Maoist students clashed with Mahadhesi protestors, leaving nearly 40 injured. March 10, 2007: The government agreed to give more parliament seats to the Mahadhesi people in the south. Violence continues in the south, with at least one dead, and several dozen wounded in the last few days. In some parts of the south, police have imposed curfews. March 9, 2007: Kidnapping for ransom is becoming more common in the capital, with at least twenty known cases of it in the last few months. Criminal activity, in general, has increased since the peace deal with the Maoists. That’s because police and army forces have been busy with the Maoist disarmament and increasing ethnic violence. March 4, 2007: A Maoist faction, Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (JTMM), has threatened violence if the government doesn’t come up with money and other benefits for Maoists and their families. JTMM is based in southern Nepal.
March 2, 2007: The army is pushing for an investigation into the low number of weapons the Maoists surrendered. Many army officers believe the Maoists have hidden most of their weapons, in violation of the peace deal. The UN says it will look into it.
March 1, 2007: Now there’s an armed separatist group in the south, the Mahadhesi Tiger (MT) , who are kidnapping and threatening people who oppose their plan for a separate Mahadhesi state in southern Nepal. The Maoists oppose this, as do many Mahadhesi. There are other, similar, groups like Tarai People’s Liberation Front.
February 28, 2007: Mahadhesis have set up more roadblocks. For Nepal, the roads in the south are the main connection to the outside world. The resulting violence with Maoists left one dead and nearly 30 injured. Meanwhile, a coalition of tribes in eastern Nepal, representing about ten percent of the population, are also demanding to be heard. The Maoists are not too happy about this either.
February 27, 2007: Some Hindus (Mahadhesis) of southern Nepal, following the Malist example, have organized into armed groups, and are trying to support themselves by extorting businesses and wealthy individuals.
February 26, 2007: The government came up with more money for food and housing at the Maoist camps, and the fighters who had left are returning. The government will also provide the Maoists in the camps a dollar a day for spending money.
source::http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/nepal/articles/20070314.aspx
Entry Filed under: Articles
4 Comments Add your own
1. mithila putra March 15th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
parmendra ji,what happened to madhesh.com, did it stop working due to pahadia pressure or technical,please reply in this same comment line of your web page if u or anybody come to read it.
cheers
2. kalyan March 16th, 2007 at 7:32 am
That is closed by government…
3. Pushkar March 16th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Hello, Kalyan Ji, I have checked the things that you wrote, Could say which government closed when? is there specific reasons? or you shifted somewhere else in another server? let me know.Thanks
4. SURENDRA MADHESHI March 20th, 2007 at 6:42 am
“This insight, which expresses itself by what is called Imagination, is a very high sort of seeing”Hello my dear friends,It’s a great pleasure on my behalf to announce the successful launch of “All India Madhesi Student Association”.Ah now its first ever time in my life that m so much energized even after doing such a laborious job. Energized to see rising madhesis, to see madhesis sharing equal status, living with dignity and I cant stop listing……….Yes am talking about upliftment of madhesis community with our main aim of providing every madhesi with “UDISE”. AIMSA is first ever association of its kind which is fighting for madhesis right at its root level. Students are considered building blocks of the society and provides support from within , without any selfishness.So come on our young, brave hearted and power boosted young generation to show a dream come true , to show our madhesh rising , to secure a better place in the community.This is a humble request from me and my community to all madhesi students to go through our mission’s information brochure and give a thought to its contents. I will be highly thankful to all of you for your support , cooperation and participation in this mission.” Lack of will power has caused more failureThan lack of intelligence or ability.”
Our information brochure is available on web. You can connect to us at: aimsaindia@yahoo.co.in , aimsamadheshi@yahoo.com .Your views and ideas will be highly appreciated.“JAI MADHESH….JAI MADHESHI”
“We are made wise not by the recollection of our past, but by the responsibility for our future”
With best regards,
SURENDRA MADHESI( FOUNDER MEMBER ANDACTING PRESIDENT , AIMSA)
CONTACTS:E mail at: susha_suren@yahoo.co.inMobile : +91-9886015017Tele : +91-820429780

The truth about Aurngzeb

2007-03-17T05:43:00.000-07:00

The truth about Aurangzeb
Francois Gautier
');}
else
{
document.write ('');}
//-->
Top Emailed Features
• The truth about Aurangzeb• 'UK Muslims converting girls'• Abandoned by their own, the law will not help them
Tell us• Ask a question
Advertisements• Want to switch ur job?• Pay ZERO Brokerage• New age IT career

Get news updates:
What's this?

");
}
else
{
da(336, 280, 'Middle3');
}
//-->
Advertisement

For real time quotes, Nse & Bse.
Equities & DerivativesWide Choice of Stock, Charts...Open An Account with investmentz.com @ Rs.400.
And win free gift.
Master the art of Film-Making.
India?s finest and foremost Film &Media School promoted by Subhash Ghai.Admissions now open for July 2007.
5Rediff P4C Classifieds
February 16, 2007
FACT, the Trust which I head, is holding an exhibition on 'Aurangzeb as he was according to Mughal documents', from February 16 to 20 at New Delhi's Habitat Center, the Palm Court Gallery, from 10 am to 9 pm.
Why an exhibition on Aurangzeb, some may ask. Firstly, I have been a close student of Indian history, and one of its most controversial figures has been Aurangzeb (1658-1707). It is true that under him the Mughal empire reached its zenith, but Aurangzeb was also a very cruel ruler � some might even say monstrous.
What are the facts? Aurangzeb did not just build an isolated mosque on a destroyed temple, he ordered all temples destroyed, among them the Kashi Vishwanath temple, one of the most sacred places of Hinduism, and had mosques built on a number of cleared temple sites. Other Hindu sacred places within his reach equally suffered destruction, with mosques built on them. A few examples: Krishna's birth temple in Mathura; the rebuilt Somnath temple on the coast of Gujarat; the Vishnu temple replaced with the Alamgir mosque now overlooking Benares; and the Treta-ka-Thakur temple in Ayodhya. The number of temples destroyed by Aurangzeb is counted in four, if not five figures. Aurangzeb did not stop at destroying temples, their users were also wiped out; even his own brother Dara Shikoh was executed for taking an interest in Hindu religion; Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded because he objected to Aurangzeb's forced conversions.
Yet, Percival Spear, co-author with Romila Thapar of the prestigious A History of India (Penguin), writes: 'Aurangzeb's supposed intolerance is little more than a hostile legend based on isolated acts such as the erection of a mosque on a temple site in Benares.' L'histoire de l'Inde moderne (Fayard), the French equivalent of Percival Spear's history of India, praises Aurangzeb and says, 'He has been maligned by Hindu fundamentalists'. Even Indian politicians are ignorant of Aurangzeb's evil deeds. Nehru might have known about them, but for his own reasons he chose to keep quiet and instructed his historians to downplay Aurangzeb's destructive drive and instead praise him as a benefactor of arts.
Since then six generations of Marxist historians have done the same and betrayed their allegiance to truth. Very few people know for instance that Aurangzeb banned any kind of music and that painters had to flee his wrath and take refuge with some of Rajasthan's friendly maharajahs.
Thus, we thought we should get at the root of the matter. History (like journalism) is about documentation and first-hand experience. We decided to show Aurangzeb according to his own documents. There are an incredible number of farhans, original edicts of Aurangzeb hand-written in Persian, in India's museums, particularly in Rajasthan, such as the Bikaner archives. It was not always easy to scan them, we encountered resistance, sometimes downright hostility and we had to go once to the chief minister to get permission. Indeed, the director of Bikaner archives told us that in 50 years we were the first ones asking for the farhans dealing with Aurangzeb's destructive deeds. Then we asked painters from Rajasthan to reproduce in the ancient Mughal style some of the edicts: the destruction of Somnath temple; the trampling of Hindus protesting jaziya tax by Aurangzeb's elephants; or the order from Aurangzeb prohibiting Hindus to ride horses and palanquins; or the beheading of Teg Bahadur and Dara Shikoh.
People might say: 'OK, this is all true, Aurangzeb was indeed a monster, but why rake up the past, when we have tensions between Muslims and Hindus today?' There are two reasons for this exhibition. The first is that no nation can move forward unless its children are taught to look squarely at their own history, the good and the bad, the evil and the pure. The French, for instance, have many dark periods in their history, more recently some of the deeds they did during colonisation in North Africa or how they collaborated with the Nazis during the Second World War and handed over French Jews who died in concentration camps (the French are only now coming to terms with it).
The argument that looking at one's history will pit a community against the other does not hold either: French Catholics and Protestants, who share a very similar religion, fought each other bitterly. Catholics brutally murdered thousands of Protestants in the 18th century; yet today they live peacefully next to each other. France fought three wars with Germany in the last 150 years, yet they are great friends today.
Let Hindus and Muslims then come to terms with what happened under Aurangzeb, because Muslims suffered as much as Hindus. It was not only Shah Jahan or Dara Shikoh who were murdered, but also the forefathers of today's Indian Muslims who have been converted at 90 per cent. Aurangzeb was the Hitler, the asura of medieval India. No street is named after Hitler in the West, yet in New Delhi we have Aurangzeb Road, a constant reminder of the horrors Aurangzeb perpetrated against Indians, including his own people.
Finally, Aurangzeb is very relevant today because he thought that Sunni Islam was the purest form of his religion and he sought to impose it with ruthless efficiency -- even against those of his own faith, such as his brother. Aurangzeb clamped down on the more syncretic, more tolerant Islam, of the Sufi kind, which then existed in India. But he did not fully succeed. Four centuries later, is he going to have the last word? I remember, when I started covering Kashmir in the late '70s, that Islam had a much more open face. The Kashmir Muslim, who is also a descendant of converted Hindus, might have thought that Allah was the only true God, but he accepted his Kashmiri Pandit neighbour, went to his or her marriage, ate in his or her house and the Hindu in turn went to the mosque. Women used to walk with open faces, watch TV, films.
Then the shadow of Aurangzeb fell on Kashmir and the hardline Sunnis came from Pakistan and Afghanistan: cinemas were banned, the burqa imposed, 400,000 Kashmiri Pandits were chased out of Kashmir through violence and became refugees in their own land and the last Sufi shrine of Sharar-e-Sharif was burnt to the ground (I was there). Today the Shariat has been voted in Kashmir, a state of democratic, secular India, UP's Muslims have applauded, and the entire Indian media which went up in flames when the government wanted Vande Mataram to be sung, kept quiet. The spirit of Aurangzeb seems to triumph.
But what we need today in India -- and indeed in the world -- is a Dara Shikoh, who reintroduces an Islam which, while believing in the supremacy of its Prophet, not only accepts other faiths, but is also able to see the good in each religion, study them, maybe create a synthesis. Islam needs to adapt its scriptures which were created nearly 15 centuries ago for the people and customs of these times, but which are not necessarily relevant in some of their injunctions today. Kabir, Dara Shikoh and some of the Sufi saints attempted this task, but failed. Aurangzeb knew what he was doing when he had his own brother beheaded. And we know what we are saying when we say that this exhibition is very relevant to today's India.
May the Spirit of Dara Shikoh come back to India and bring back Islam to a more tolerant human face.Francois Gautier
Email this Article Print this Article

Discussion Board
");
}
-->
Logout
document.domain="rediff.com";
var service_name = '';
gboardid='news2007feb16francois';

Write a message

Showing 1-10 of total 1377 messages
Pages 1 2 3 4 5 > >>

THE GREAT EMPEROR ''AURANGZEB''by Mike Gandhi on Mar 17, 2007 05:34 PM Hide replies Hide-->
Fortunately, in recent years quite a few Hindu historians have come out in the open disputing those allegations. For example, historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many Hindus compared to Muslims, despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a thousand years. Banerjee challenged the Hindu hypothesis that Aurangzeb was anti-Hindu by reasoning that if the latter were truly guilty of such bigotry, how could he appoint a Hindu as his military commander-in-chief? Surely, he could have afforded to appoint a competent Muslim general in that position. Banerjee further stated: "No one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The Emperor refuted that by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic Law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions." During Aurangzeb's long reign of fifty years, many Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, held very high administrative positions. Two of the highest ranked generals in Aurangzeb's administration, Jaswant Singh and Jaya Singh, were Hindus. Other notable Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand soldiers were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji and Arjuji. One wonders if Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he position all these Hindus to high positions of authority, especially in the military, who could have mutinied against him and removed him from his throne? Forward Report abuse

THE GREAT EMPEROR ''AURANGZEB''by Mike Gandhi on Mar 17, 2007 05:33 PM Hide replies Hide-->
Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb: Bad Ruler or Bad History? By Dr. Habib Siddiqui Posted: 9 Jamad-ul-awwal 1427, 5 June 2006 Of all the Muslim rulers who ruled vast territories of India from 712 to 1857 CE, probably no one has received as much condemnation from Western and Hindu writers as Aurangzeb. He has been castigated as a religious Muslim who was anti-Hindu, who taxed them, who tried to convert them, who discriminated against them in awarding high administrative positions, and who interfered in their religious matters. This view has been heavily promoted in the government approved textbooks in schools and colleges across post-partition India (i.e., after 1947). These are fabrications against one of the best rulers of India who was pious, scholarly, saintly, un-biased, liberal, magnanimous, tolerant, competent, and far-sighted Forward Report abuse

WE ARE ALL COUSINSby Mike Gandhi on Mar 17, 2007 05:32 PM Hide replies Hide-->
RAFI IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. AS PER THE ISLAMIC BELIEF "EVERY HUMAN BEING BORNED AS MUSLIM". THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT CHANGED THEM TO THD DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AND SECT. I AM PROUD SAY NOT ONLY MY, BROTHERS KALYAN MITRA, CHATANYA KUMAR AND OTHERS' ANCESTORS WERE MUSLIM. WE ARE ALL COUSINS. Forward Report abuse
RE:WE ARE ALL COUSINSby pranat on Mar 17, 2007 06:03 PMcan we say that we are all born to serve humanity before religion consumes us Forward Report abuse

Reply to Mr. Rama Anand Rao - This is the few sayings of books of your culture. which is practised mostly.by rafiuddin farooqui on Mar 17, 2007 04:44 PM Hide replies Hide-->
Read few for your reading. Lust, anger, greed, pride etc., constitute the most powerful army of Ignorance. But among them all the fiercest and the most troublesome is that incarnation of Maya called woman. Yudhishthira said: O best of Bharatas, I wish to hear thee discourse on the disposition of women. Women are said to be the root of all evil. They are all regarded as exceedingly frail. There is nothing else that is more sinful than women. Verily, women are the root of all faults. That is certainly known to thee, O Narada! Women, even when possessed of husbands having fame and wealth, of handsome features and completely obedient to them, are prepared to disregard them if they get the opportunity. Listen, O sage: the Puranas, the Vedas and the saints declare that woman is like the vernal season to the forest of ignorance. Nay, like the hot season she dries up all the ponds and lakes of Japa (repetition of mantras or the Lord%u2019s name), austerity and religious observances. Again, lust, anger, pride, and jealousy are so many frogs as it were; like the rainy season woman is the only agency that gladdens them all Ayodhya Kanda, 39-21, 39-23 "It is also characteristic of faithless women to lead a false life, do acts unworthy of them, possess a heart ever unfathomable, be inclined to do sinful acts and in a trice cease to be affectionate." Aranya Kanda, 45.29 "It is the nature of women all over the world to be vicious, fickle, and sharp-tongued and to sow seeds of dissension A true wife thinks not of God when she rises in the morning. She offers her worship to the husband and that is enough. Even the clouds will obey and pour the rain at her command. Ansuya (Rishi Atri's wife) said to Sita: "A woman is impure by her very birth; but she attains a happy state by serving her lord (husband)". Fom the Bhagavad Gita, Ch.9, Verse 32: "For, taking refuge in Me, they also who, O Arjuna, may be of sinful birth--women, vaisyas as well as sudras--attain the Supreme Goal." Commentary by Swami Shivananda, Rishikesh: "........Women and Sudras are debarred by social rules from the study of the Vedas. ...." The practice still popular that when woman in Mensuration does not allow to enter inside home, stay aloof, do not touch to eating utensils, can not wear good clothes. The woman her husband died in the young age does not allow to marry, does not allow to wear colourful clothes and wearing jewellary. these are the common practices. Sati as per your holy books still valid. Even India many times it was forcefully practiced. Woman and Islam I posted already article about. Go check and compare and then tell. What is the truth. You want more blockbusters tell me. Forward Report abuse
RE:Reply to Mr. Rama Anand Rao - This is the few sayings of books of your culture. which is practised mostly.by pranat on Mar 17, 2007 05:09 PMShri. Rafiuddin farooqui from Hindustan, Every religion has its share of old outdated rituals and practices that dont hold any place now. These practices include say beating your self and bleeding yourself on moharram, treating women as un-equal and not allowing them to work, child marriage, social inequality and perhaps all the things that you have mentioned. So to an extent these are present in all religions. But progressive religions move ahead and assimilate things that are good and reject things that are bad. I dont see this is Islamic countries barring UAE/Bahrain etc. I see that radical elements in Islam become stronger than the state and all that they like is radical Islam and sharia law. Education , hospitals, development all can do to the dogs then. All women can just stay at home and serve their lords and the lords( husbands) can go ahead tortting their AK-47/hand held granades and start coverting/killing kafirs/shia/sunni/journalists/americans/jews/cristians/burning libraries. I dont think that you and your family want to live in that society governed by the strict interpretation of the sharia laws ( as done by Taliban)..do you? I am sure you dont, i would like to hear you views. Forward Report abuse

Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by rafiuddin farooqui on Mar 17, 2007 04:16 PM Hide replies Hide-->
The poor Hindus doesnt know what their Culture said. quote The woman in the West is dazzled by the glamorous rush and speed of the modern age. She does not like to do her household duties. You can find her now in the house of parliament or at the typewriter. She is a telephone operator, a pilot, a film star and a shop assistant. She compliments herself in the thought that she is sharing and lessening the work of man. She vies with him in his field and tries to oust and replace him. She has asserted her rights and broken the four walls of her home. She works in the war zones and industries. She thinks that she lives a glorious life but it is not so. She is not really peaceful and happy. Women can no more do the work of men in the world than men can do that of women. %u2026 If they withdraw from their homes, the result will be disastrous. There will be subversion of domestic discipline and family order, and social decay will set in. Children will grow up uneducated and sorely neglected. Unquote What I found on the Net Educated illeterate. Taleem hasil karke bhi Jahel raha Nadan ko ulta palta to bhi nadan raha. Forward Report abuse
RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by chaitanya kumar on Mar 17, 2007 04:23 PMwith more guys like you, women will realize that their real threat is from Islam who wish to limit their presence to kitchen and bedroom. I hope the Burkha dutts and Arundhati Roys are listening. Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by rafiuddin farooqui on Mar 17, 2007 04:56 PMHi Chaitanya I love you are again. We never against women to get knowledge and become super human but with modesty and chastity. We do not want women to become flesh Market. Our prophet said the getting of the education is the right of men and woman. They must get education. This is todays need. But Moral values should be maintain. Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by Secular Indian on Mar 17, 2007 05:09 PMIs that why in Islam it's OK for the men to rape their female slaves Forward Report abuse
RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by KALYAN MITRA on Mar 17, 2007 04:25 PMAre you sure your ancestors are not Hindus? Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by rafiuddin farooqui on Mar 17, 2007 04:51 PMIslam teaches that every born in fitra means born Muslims and we adopt what ever around us. I and you born also Muslims but due you culture you are Hindu. My parents practicing Islam so I am Muslims. My ancestors were Originally Muslims but they adopted Hinduism, Chirtianity, Judaism, Jainism, Budhism but when they get the message of Islam. READ AND UNDERSTAND, As they are right minded, with good science, intelligent they embrass Islam. Wish you good luck. Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by Secular Indian on Mar 17, 2007 05:10 PMWe are all born as humans devoid of any religion. Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by Mike Gandhi on Mar 17, 2007 05:29 PMRAFI IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. AS PER THE ISLAMIC BELIEF "EVERY HUMAN BEING BORNED AS MUSLIM". THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT CHANGED THEM TO THD DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AND SECT. I AM PROUD SAY NOT ONLY MY, BROTHERS KALYAN MITRA, CHATANYA KUMAR AND OTHERS' ANCESTORS WERE MUSLIM. WE ARE ALL COUSINS. Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by CG NAIR on Mar 17, 2007 06:05 PMIslam religion was established about 1400 years back. How could then "every human being born (there is no word like "borned" in English) as Muslim? Was there no human race before the advent of the Prophet? I would suggest my friends of all religions to read the free e-book "The Necessity of Atheism" by Dr. D.M. Brooks available on the site of Project Gutenberg. Also read the book God, Demon and Spirits by the late Dr. Abraham Kovoor (still not available freely)to put an end to their misplaced belief of superiority of one religion or the other.Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Hi I am here again few replies. Some people talk about Purdah. The veil and Modesty.by on Mar 17, 2007 05:26 PMMr. Farooqui, I have heard such great things about Islam from a friend of mine. But what I never had any answer was that 'what % of Muslims are true Muslims'? It seemed it is negligible, given the total darkness prevailing in Musilm Socities worldover inspite of such great words of Shariat etc etc. Question is then: what is the effectiveness of such teachings and why would one care to accept these words as living standards of Islam? If the colossal Majority of Muslims do not care about fine teachings of Shariat Koran, then why would you ask the Kafers to undetstand the Muslim socitey in terms of those books? Funny, isn' it? Well, the answer is that it is pure baloney. The nice words of Sharit and Koran are just a cover for the darker side of the teachings. Forward Report abuse

Why such hypocracyby An Indian on Mar 17, 2007 03:37 PM Hide replies Hide-->
Reply to Mr. Fayyaz A against his message posted on Mar 17, 2007 11:09 AM under heading HINDU MUSLIM I indeed aghast for his small posting, wherein he has advised to avoid hatred. Though I do not know to whom he has addressed, and what for he has posted but I bow to his wishes and simultaneously I wish, such wishes should have been of all, but unfortunately it is not like that. I do not carry any prejudice, so I feel that all the readers are educated and intelligent, and probably are the regular visitors to Rediff. Recently, one gentleman, Shahalam had posted a long list on Mar 04, 2007 (under the news - UK Muslims converting our girls: Hindus %u2013 I think that the news has been deleted now), where the marriages or relationship were of inter-religion in nature i.e. Hindu-Muslim. The gentleman had selected very carefully and quite mischievously the name of those couple only where the males were Muslims and females were Hindu and mostly they were married and off-course few of them have separated / divorced. He used the relationship and marriage as USED and divorced / separated as ABUSED / DUMPED. Now all were celebrated couples, have their public life, normally belonged to upper classes and not at all fundamentalists. Even an ordinary person could well understand those are / were a relationship, continuing or broken, but those were relationship and none of them even thought that those were the case of USE, ABUSED or DUMPED. He also mentioned - Muslims always have this ability to target Gullible Hindu girls whether in India or UK. It is quite surprising that none of the Muslim readers had come to condemn the act such stupidity i.e. message posting. I do not know what the writer wanted to convey but he had depicted his insanity i.e. teaching of hatred and not coming forward by any Muslim reader, have shown that they had endorsed the writer%u2019s opinion or in other word they have endorsed and supported the act of hatred, and it is the teaching of Islam. If I have read that message, I am sure millions of readers must have read too and quite a number of people / organization might be planning to target or retaliate i.e. USED, ABUSED or DUMPED, the act probably nobody have thought even that the marriage is synonymous to these. What a mentality and what a support from their community. Had anything thought the consequence? I wonder if the Muslims females also in that way i.e. relationship is USE, ABUSE or DUMP. I am sure that many of my Muslims sisters must have selected their partners from other religion, and few might be planning to do so, and in future also some would do so. What a definition of relationship, USE, ABUSE and DUMP. Now I take the second case, under this article where Mr Mohammed Ahmed have been continuously justifying the act of Jihad, murder etc. should continue and he has given series of illogical reasons, and endorsed that the killing of innocent people, which he decides as devils and the murderer has right to do or in other word Jihad is must act for Muslims. It is the killer who would decide that who should be murdered and compared the act with court judgment where the judge gives the verdict for hanging. Apart from this he has comparison of capitalism vs communism etc. etc. In nutshell he has tried to spread a message that whoever does not believe in Islam should be ready to face the Jihad, as Islam wants to control the whole world. The readers must read the all message of Mr Mohammed Ahmed and my replies. I wonder if some extremists from other group decides that the writer is curse for humanity, which actually he is, and he must be eliminated then what would happen. In my all the message, I have tried to bring the facts and ignoring them is bringing to havoc to my Muslim brothers and all those are based on the discussion with educated Muslim (but absolutely not fundamentalists) people and with examples. I have really felt the pain among few. I strongly feel that the normal people is hardly interested with the religion of anyone, as long it is not affecting their personal life and it is the terrorism which is making the Muslims vulnerable. I strongly feel all Muslims are not terrorists; there are only few percentage. But it is also sure that these few percentages get full co-operation, be it hiding the information about the terrorists, be providing the shelter, be providing the logistics or any other support, otherwise act never be spread and it is just because of same. Now if the ISLAM teaches not to support bad acts and still they are getting the support of terrorism or Jihad, then people has to think about the teaching. The writer of message against which I am replying, must have not come to condemn any act, be it against the terrorism, be it against such nuisances message posting, be it against such religious leaders who bashes their celebrity sisters like Sania Mirza, Shabana Azmi etc. I am not spending my time to criticize anyone rather writing as their well-wisher and for my Muslim friends, who though openly accepts such crude fundamentalism and wants to break the shackle, practice humanism and wants to wash such dirty stigma which raises eyebrows of others. In other they want to keep alive the name of ISLAM as religion for humanity, the biggest religion of the world, mother of all religion and much bigger than ISLAM. I am sure all the readers (including Muslims, I hope majority are not fundamentalist) would understand my good intention. So far my background is concerned, I brought up in liberal, educated, cosmopolitan society, where the case, creed and religion carried hardly any meaning. I enjoy the relationship of all the community including Muslims and have lots of Muslim female friends also, but I enjoy their relationship, a relationship which is true in real sense, a relationship of humanism, not the kind USE, ABUSE and DUMP. The awareness among the Muslim female of very high level (may they because they educated), and they have deep pain about their social condition, they on and often discussed that the lack of education in their community (which is unfortunately promoted by their own community people, and wants to keep under shackle for their vested interest). It is the message of those my sister like friends that Muslim female has to fight against such evils and acquire modern education, this is the only salvage. Jai Hind An Indian Forward Report abuse

UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby jeremy williams on Mar 17, 2007 02:14 PM Hide replies Hide-->
THE GUJARAT POGROM INITIATED BY THE RULING BJP GOVT., THE RAPING AND MURDER OF CHRISTIAN NUNS & PRIESTS BY HINDUTVA FORCES,THE MURDER OF GRAHAM STAINES AND HIS LITTLE CHILDREN IN ORISSA BY DARA SINGH ,A MEMBER OF HINDUTVA BRIGADE,THE CENTURIES OLD DISCRIMINATION OF THE DRAVIDIC NATIVES AND TRIBALS OF INDIA IN THE NAME OF CASTE SYSTEM.THESE ARE SOME OF THE HARSH TRUTHS MR GAUTIER WOULD LIKE US TO PRETEND DO NOT EXIST IN CURRENT DAY INDIAN SOCIETY.CRY MY BELOVED INDIA.CRY Forward Report abuse
This post has been permanently removed following an abuse alert.
RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby chaitanya kumar on Mar 17, 2007 02:42 PM"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942) Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby chaitanya kumar on Mar 17, 2007 02:50 PMChristianity could not content itself with building up its own altar; it was absolutely forced to undertake the destruction of the heathen altars. Only from this fanatical intolerance could its apodictic faith take form; this intolerance is, in fact, its absolute presupposition.-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)For how shall we fill people with blind faith in the correctness of a doctrine, if we ourselves spread uncertainty and doubt by constant changes in its outward structure?...Here, too, we can learn by the example of the Catholic Church. Though its doctrinal edifice, and in part quite superfluously, comes into collision with exact science and research, it is none the less unwilling to sacrifice so much as one little syllable of its dogmas... it is only such dogmas which lend to the whole body the character of a faith.-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)More such quotes from Hitler in praise of Church from his Mein Kampf: http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm Forward Report abuse
RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby bharatiya on Mar 17, 2007 02:44 PMThe large scale demolition of Hindu temples by the portugese in Goa & by Muslims in the rest of India, the forced conversions, murder, rape & loot centuries after centuries cannot be forgotten. If you add up all the violent acts of Hindus in the entire history it will not even total to 6 months (& that too has always been as a reaction to something nasty you guys have done) whereas for Muslims & Christians it has been an everyday way of life for many centuries. Your b@lsh@% religions offer incentives like virgins & rivers of wine to lure you into crimes against humanity. You are agents of Satan on earth. It is a well known trick of the Satan that he pretends to be a devote Christian & shows his true colors when exposed. Forward Report abuse
RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby chaitanya kumar on Mar 17, 2007 03:02 PMAtrocities on Native people:Beginning with Columbus (a former slave trader and would-be Holy Crusader) the conquest of the New World began, as usual understood as a means to propagate Christianity.Within hours of landfall on the first inhabited island he encountered in the Caribbean, Columbus seized and carried off six native people who, he said, "ought to be good servants ... [and] would easily be made Christians, because it seemed to me that they belonged to no religion."While Columbus described the Indians as "idolators" and "slaves, as many as [the Crown] shall order," his pal Michele de Cuneo, Italian nobleman, referred to the natives as "beasts" because "they eat when they are hungry," and made love "openly whenever they feel like it." On every island he set foot on, Columbus planted a cross, "making the declarations that are required" - the requerimiento - to claim the ownership for his Catholic patrons in Spain. And "nobody objected." If the Indians refused or delayed their acceptance (or understanding), the requerimiento continued: I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter in your country and shall make war against you ... and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church ... and shall do you all mischief that we can, as to vassals who do not obey and refuse to receive their lord and resist and contradict him."Likewise in the words of John Winthrop, first governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony: "justifieinge the undertakeres of the intended Plantation in New England ... to carry the Gospell into those parts of the world, ... and to raise a Bulworke against the kingdome of the Ante-Christ."In average two thirds of the native population were killed by colonist-imported smallpox before violence began. This was a great sign of "the marvelous goodness and providence of God" to the Christians of course, e.g. the Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony wrote in 1634, as "for the natives, they are near all dead of the smallpox, so as the Lord hath cleared our title to what we possess." On Hispaniola alone, on Columbus visits, the native population (Arawak), a rather harmless and happy people living on an island of abundant natural resources, a literal paradise, soon mourned 50,000 dead.The surviving Indians fell victim to rape, murder, enslavement and spanish raids.As one of the culprits wrote: "So many Indians died that they could not be counted, all through the land the Indians lay dead everywhere. The stench was very great and pestiferous."The indian chief Hatuey fled with his people but was captured and burned alive. As "they were tying him to the stake a Franciscan friar urged him to take Jesus to his heart so that his soul might go to heaven, rather than descend into hell. Hatuey replied that if heaven was where the Christians went, he would rather go to hell."What happened to his people was described by an eyewitness:"The Spaniards found pleasure in inventing all kinds of odd cruelties ... They built a long gibbet, long enough for the toes to touch the ground to prevent strangling, and hanged thirteen [natives] at a time in honor of Christ Our Saviour and the twelve Apostles... then, straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive."Or, on another occasion:"The Spaniards cut off the arm of one, the leg or hip of another, and from some their heads at one stroke, like butchers cutting up beef and mutton for market. Six hundred, including the cacique, were thus slain like brute beasts...Vasco [de Balboa] ordered forty of them to be torn to pieces by dogs."The "island's population of about eight million people at the time of Columbus's arrival in 1492 already had declined by a third to a half before the year 1496 was out." Eventually all the island's natives were exterminated, so the Spaniards were "forced" to import slaves from other caribbean islands, who soon suffered the same fate. Thus "the Caribbean's millions of native people [were] thereby effectively liquidated in barely a quarter of a century". "In less than the normal lifetime of a single human being, an entire culture of millions of people, thousands of years resident in their homeland, had been exterminated." "And then the Spanish turned their attention to the mainland of Mexico and Central America. The slaughter had barely begun. The exquisite city of Tenochtitln [Mexico city] was next."Cortez, Pizarro, De Soto and hundreds of other spanish conquistadors likewise sacked southern and mesoamerican civilizations in the name of Christ (De Soto also sacked Florida)."When the 16th century ended, some 200,000 Spaniards had moved to the Americas. By that time probably more than 60,000,000 natives were dead."More Christian attricities(incomplete list):http://www.truthbeknown.com/victims.htm Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby chaitanya kumar on Mar 17, 2007 03:09 PMyour list is really small Jeremy. Hindus and their so called "atrocities"(which even you need to exaggerate and concote with lies) are nothing before whatever happened in the name of Christ. Forward Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby chaitanya kumar on Mar 17, 2007 03:17 PMall you christians do is point at the Hindu caste system and the discrimination in it while you hide the atrocities of Church that will bewilder the devil and satan. As if the caste system is only followed by Hindus and rest are egalitarian. What happened to the discrimination between ruling class, working class...bourgeois , proletariat. Forward Report abuse
RE:UNTOLD TRUTHS BY FRANCOIS GAUTIERby pranat on Mar 17, 2007 03:23 PMAny progressive developing diverse country will have its share of problems in creating equitable distribution of wealth and social equaity that started in the last 3/4 centuries will hopefully be completed in this century. But clearly we neither did nor will like to go the way of Aurangzeb/Osama Bin Ladin (a radical Muslim) or lead a crusade against non cristin religions or have an Adolf Hitler here. These people wanted to kill humanity in millions. These were progroms to eliminate/annihilate other religions. Genocide directed at completely eliminating weaker minorities. I am happy that in Hindu Majority India, crimes of this horric nature have neither happened nor will happen. Thank the Hindu majority for this who are tolerant and stop crying about RSS/BJP at every given opportunity. Hindus now, in their own country dont even have a right to stop Islamic fundamentalism and cristian conversion... mostly encouraged by the outside powers and money. Forward Report abuse
This post has been permanently removed following an abuse alert.

Why such acrimonious thinking Mr. Mohammed Ahmedby An Indian on Mar 17, 2007 11:52 AM Hide replies Hide-->
A fresh reply to mohammed ahmed on Mar 16, 2007 04:03 PM [RE:Why the Afghanistan or any other countries / territories are of / for Muslims] against his few queries: Your comments - Islam is global, from the beginning, we want Islam in the whole world. My reply - What is meaning of global (tell me the % of population, % of acceptance of willingness), what is meaning of beginning (how old it is, tell me about your ancestral background, who they were, if you abuse to your own ancestors whose blessings you are, whose blood you carry, then what is impression you are spreading) and what is meaning of, we want ISLAM (meaning peace and justice) in the whole world, who cares what you want you have right to accept anything why should I captivate myself or others to illiteracy , unscrupulous religious leaders. Even your thinking is dirty that you want others should follow it and simultaneously you are claming ISLAM (meaning peace and justice), if you preach ISLAM and meaning is it, how dare you can think about democratic rights of others or in the word you yourself is abusing and pitting to ISLAM. This is the biggest problem with you fundamentalist; you dare to think the others should follow you. Gentleman, people follow a path as per their wish, considering its good and evil, where the very basic nature of Islam (or what it has been propagated by your so called religious leaders) is barbaric and forced. You people never come to rescue your own sister like Sania Mirza, when she is bashed by your religious leaders, you never utter single word about our great H.E. President APJ Abdul Kalam that when your people say that he is not Muslims and he is puppet etc. etc. since he practices the humanism not fundamentalism and now it is barbaric thinking that you want ISLAM (meaning peace and justice) in the whole world, what a rotten thinking. Gentleman go and cleanse you mind, you have right to thin about you but you should not dare to think about others, as they also have the same right and they are more intelligent than you as they do not mortgage their mind and soul to someone that too illiterate religious leaders. Your comment - we preach everywhere about the Creator, good things of life, good living, cooperation, charity, meditation, circumcision, burial of dead bodies with dignity. My reply %u2013 By the way, who decides which is good and which is bad? How dare you can think about the whole world and their thinking? Do you feel yourself that you are capable to do so or you are also life self-styled prophet, who can decide the fate of whole world. I think I need to tell that in non of the Gulf country where Muslims are in population, they have declared it as Muslim country (forget about the secularism), no democracy is there, literacy rate is dismally poor, even the person hold some qualification (not education) they are captive to illiterate religious leaders, they have fear to use their own brain (always use to quote misinterpretations or interpretations of some phrases of some books / preaches, which they themselves do not know what they are uttering), and here in India, they live in India, eat in India, drink in India, inhale in India but they are loyal to Arab countries or Pakistan and they declare it proudly. By the way can you tell me what should I learn %u2013 Jihad, killing of innocent people, unpatriotic acts, illiteracy, kept myself under the captivity of someone etc. etc. You should think about yourself and let other think about themselves. You can think that the day may come when other people like you would start thinking about their own Jihad, as you have right to decide to kill someone, the others may have right to kill you and they would justify your killing because of rotten thinking. Why do you want bring the hell for your brothers and sisters? Have you not seen the repercussion of Godhra Train Carnegie? I do not know whether the real culprita got any punishment or not but innocent people were killed who had nothing to do with Godhra incident. An elderly person was killed who was not related to Godhra incident, but suffered only because the people of his age did not teach their younger generation about the good, bad and their consequences. Gentleman, do not spread hatred, rather live peacefully and allow others to leave peacefully. This is the essence of Humanism, the biggest religion in the world and much bigger than your ISLAM. I pray to God (or your Allah) to cleanse your mind and pour some good thinking on you. An Indian Forward Report abuse

hindu muslimby Fayyaz A on Mar 17, 2007 11:09 AM Hide replies Hide-->
pls try to avoid to start the topics which increases the hate. kindly stop the topic, you are not doing the good .past is good ok but when it is bad then why are you opening it to initiate hate and mental block. an Indian Muslim Forward Report abuse
RE:hindu muslimby KALYAN MITRA on Mar 17, 2007 04:28 PMI do agree with you...forget past...we should start a fresh... Forward Report abuse

Read and replyby An Indian on Mar 17, 2007 10:36 AM Hide replies Hide-->
Reply to mohammed ahmed on Mar 16, 2007 04:03 PM [RE:Why the Afghanistan or any other countries / territories are of / for Muslims] Dear Mohammed Ahmed I could not understand the reason for your unusual anger as I had not target you but at the same time if you say that who told so for Muslim lands, you may go through several postings, under several articles, where your so fundamentalists brothers have written. At present I do not have the details, I am sure even under this article somewhere the people have justified Jihad for Israel occupied area, Iraq, Afghanistan, J&K etc. etc. claiming that there are fighting to liberate their motherland. Otherwise can you justify the meaning of Jihad and killing the innocent people, including children, woman and elderly people, only because you have gun in your hand and they are soft targets. Forget about the world history, just refer back the invasion of Islamic terrorists in this country, you may call it 500 years back or 1000 years back. Can you justify the forced conversion? Can you refuse the majority population is of forced conversion (there are 99.99% chances that your ancestors have also been forced, have you ever tried to go back to your own ancestors, when I telling this I strongly feel that you are from Indian origin), you can definitely think about your own ancestors, I repeat your own ancestors including female members and their agony when they were forced for conversion and other humiliation your female family ancestors had faced at that time (I could your understand what I want to say) . I am giving few links which are small example of barbaric invasion: http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A5220 http://www.stephen-knapp.com/an_architect_looks_at_the_taj_mahal_legend.htm http://www.stephen-knapp.com/badshahnama.htm http://www.stephen-knapp.com/letter_of_aurangzeb.htm http://www.stephen-knapp.com/question_of_the_taj_mahal.htm My brother my intention is not to annoy you rather to request just to open your own eyes, open your own brain, the precious gift of Almighty (the supreme power, you may call as ALLAH, or whatever suits you), release yourself from the captivation of fundamentalist cages. I am pasting a message which I had replied to someone which can open your eyes and change your mind and attitude that I am new to this discussion. In this context I would like to confirm that I have discussed these subject to my several Muslim friends & colleagues (educated, not fundamentalists, who bow to the reality not the baseless teaching of so called leaders. I hope you are also an educated person. I would request you to kindly go through the history (I am not recommending any rather advise you to go to the reputed authors and publishers (including Muslims authors) and judge yourself, again only after releasing yourself from the cages of fundamentalism Message No. 1 Dear Musfar Ahmed and all the people of community who are spreading the hatred Since all the people are more or more than average intelligent so I hope you are also, you can definitely think that who were you ancestors, whose son / daughters you are. You can change your religion, your coming generations can convert them to any religion (by force, by lure or otherwise), but you can never change your ancestors, your background, your roots etc. So far the religions are concerned, it has been started by someone (here the Hindu religion is the only natural religion, adopted from the lifestyle of this country and has not initiated and propagated by anyone). Whatever may be the reason (mostly forced at that time) for conversion to Islam, but it is certain that the root of 99% is from our great India only. You may go through (if you can) the back history of your own family and then only you can understand the agony and pain of your ancestors (especially the ladies), if you have your ancestral background. Go to history, you can definitely find and if you have the courage go to your own roots (after all your carry blood your own ancestors, I repeat, blood of your ancestors). I could not understand the meaning of %u2018WE%u2019, is it MUSLIM or INDIAN, I can safely presume that it is as MUSLIM and if it so then also the Muslims are not in majority within the pre-British border, but again I am not like you who is spreading against their own ancestors (your forefathers) or anyone. I also could not understand what is the meaning of we would be in majority. My great country India has record or real democracy (not like other Gulf-countries), our majority people (you can call them Hindu) has tolerance to promote non-Hindu leaders (including Muslims), promote them on the basis of their talent (not on the basis of their religion, present PM and President is example, though there are other series of examples available), our majority cheers the success of any person irrespective of his / her religion (example, Sania Mirza, our people have never bashed or abused her, though there are series of example about her clothing etc. etc. by so called Mulls / Maulvis / Muftis but the majority of the Muslims never came to support her and condemn so called religious leaders, though the truth is this that she is from you community and your sisters. Can you tell any other country where majority has accepted the minority leadership? Even in sports such dirty and disgraced religious fanaticism can be seen, a classic example is conversion of Christian %u2018Yousuf Yohana%u2019 to Muslim %u2018Mohd Yousuf%u2019 (Pakistan Cricket Team), whatever reason could be given i.e. acceptance to forced conversion to lure conversion etc. but the truth is he has been motivated to convert to Islam (now one can think about his family and relatives and why the Govt do not ban such type of nuisances, because such acts are state sponsored). What force a person to mortgage their brain and soul to so call filthy religious leaders? Why a person do not use his or her brain, a gift or nature / almighty of all (say God, Allhah etc,) and follow the misinterpretations (or interpretations) of their so called religious books. Are the misinterpretations or interpretations of so-called religious books provide better insight than the gift of Almighty (God or Allah)? Are you not insulting the Almighty (God or Allah) by doing so? Why an educated person does not take their own judicious decision and depend on the so called religious leaders? Any person (irrespective of any particular religion) can think judiciously and find the reason of vulnerability, religious fanaticism and terrorism. An Indian Message no. 2 Reply to dear Essa Ismail Sait, message posted on March 12, 2007 01:39 PM I the outset I would like to make it clear that my intention is not to hurt anyone. In my personal life I had discussed the matter with many of my Muslim friends and they have ultimately agreed the truth (only because they were educated, not fanatic by heart). I received many lessons from father of one of senior (an it was most fortunate that the he was Muslim but highly educated but not only degree holder qualified, the elderly gentleman was Bar-at-Law, his son i.e. my senior was a Management Graduate and, and elderly gentleman%u2019s daughter were also highly educated which are very rare in Muslim community and almost all the family were settled in London and ultimately my senior had also resigned with an intention to settle there. I was too young at that time may be 20 years back when the elderly gentleman told me that my community has become too vulnerable as they have fallen under the trap of unscrupulous political and religious leaders who are exploiting the sentiments of our youth for their dirty interest, be it religious or political and the most dangerous part is, that our youth our becoming religious fanatic and major reason is their emotion because of illiteracy. These unscrupulous political and religious leaders would damage our community to irreparable extent. Now after such long years I salute to that elderly person though he is no more know, for his vision and who taught me the meaning of philosophy in life i.e. open your eyes, see clearly, analyse properly, never follow what my leaders have told or what is written here or there and act accordingly. Always follow the path of humanity, not of any community, be true to yourself and almighty.) Now I come to your objection and request, the meaning of natural religion, it means it has not been initiated and propagated by anyone, so it does not have any such restriction which tell that one should be bound within these rules. With apology I would like to mention that you could not dare to accept the truth (though it hardly makes any difference, because truth would remain the truth whether you accept it or not) that Indian Muslims carry the Indian background, the background of this soil only. I think I need not to explain further. It seems that you are an educated person and that is why you have classified the modes of conversion. I need not to explain you as to what method of conversion was adopted at that time, though you are not responsible for that but you would be definitely responsible for your ignorance and not accepting the truth. I have no intention that you should accept the truth in this forum. Generally all the people are blessed with intelligent brain, so are you also. You go through the history (if possible, go to your own family background, under which circumstances they were converted, though it is practically not possible) and you would find that the comparison of farmer or criminal is meaningless as I had never mention this. I do agree that the birth of Islam and entry (rather invasion) in this country was much earlier than Moghul era. As per my history knowledge, it was sometime 612 AD from where the real spread of Islam started and if my memory is correct then it is around 570 AD when Prophet Mohd born, again the historians are also not unanimous about the birth year. But the truth is this that Akbar was the only secular emperor, who had started real secular religion called DIN-E-ILLAHI, but today nobody remembers even. The profile of rest of the muslim emperors are quite dubious, barring Bahadur Shah Zafar, but he did not have the leadership quality, though he was not religious fanatic. You have right to believe anything that you are generation of Adam and Eve so is I and all, but what I wanted to tell that what your ancestors were in between. Again my intention is not to hurt anyone. You have avoided the episode of anger and agony of your ancestors; again you have hundred and thousands reasons behind it. I once again reiterate that none of the conversion of that time was of category 3, i.e. Converting by understanding the religion as the people of that era were very innocent and had deep faith in their own custom, the custom they inherited / borrowed, so your attempt to paste category 3 at that circumstances is totally meaningless / irrelevant and so your justification in subsequent paragraph. So far the case of Mohd Yousuf is concerned, it is an example only as the forced conversion can be from gunpoint to harassment to creating the situation etc. etc. I do not know whether you are pro-Pakistan or not, but you can definitely go through the census of Pakistan from 1947 to last and can judge yourself about the decline of other religion people in that country. I had raised many other facts also and you must have read those. I could understand as to why you could not gain courage to raise those, like about the acceptance of other leadership, about the democracy, about the secular nature of nation etc. etc. Can any Muslim country would allow any Hindu or any other religion people to lead them. My intention here is not to bash anyone rather tell them to see themselves with their own eyes, though I know it is useless. Recently I met with a Senior Executive of an Oil Company and was a Muslim. We were waiting in lounge and could spent time together. By sheer chancee the talk turned toward this hot topic and I could feel the deep pain in his face about the vulnerability of the community. He was worried about his teenage daughter and son, about their society as he told how difficult rather impossible go get flat / house in cosmopolitan society as the people of other community does not want mix-up for such bad names, what would happen about the life partners of their kids etc. etc. as the gentleman was not religious fanatic and he does not want to grow his children under such environment which is nowadays highly vulnerable and susceptible. Though it was a casual meeting, he was not open to me, but what I could understand that he would encourage his children to break the barbarian shackle during their college days in European or American countries. I could refresh my memories about the teachings of that elderly man. Though I personally feel that all the people are not bad and this is certain. But it is also certain that major cause of hatred is terrorism which can never prosper and flourish without local support, be it through network, shelter, communication, logistics etc. etc. You may not agree but it is truth, be it Godhra, be it Mumbai or be it Varanasi. At the end I thank you for your message, which atleast does not spread any hatred but simaltanously does not reflect broadminded view also which is the need of hours. I apologize for my little harsh language but I could not get any appropriate word also which can reflect my disagreement with you but again it is not with any wrong intention. I welcome my real Indian Muslim brothers and sisters to fight with evils, may be anyone, do not support to wrong doing, might have committed by your own brothers and then only you can win the trust of others, which is the essence of brotherhood and I hope of the Islam also. Jai Hind An Indian Forward Report abuse
Showing 1-10 of total 1377 messages
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 > >>
Write a message
");
}
-->
Disclaimer

Discouse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Truth in the Sciences

2007-03-15T11:21:00.000-07:00

Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Truth in the Sciences
Rene Descartes
Chapter 4
Chapter 4 I am in doubt as to the propriety of making my first meditations in the place above mentioned matter of discourse; for these are so metaphysical, and so uncommon, as not, perhaps, to be acceptable to every one. And yet, that it may be determined whether the foundations that I have laid are sufficiently secure, I find myself in a measure constrained to advert to them. I had long before remarked that, in relation to practice, it is sometimes necessary to adopt, as if above doubt, opinions which we discern to be highly uncertain, as has been already said; but as I then desired to give my attention solely to the search after truth, I thought that a procedure exactly the opposite was called for, and that I ought to reject as absolutely false all opinions in regard to which I could suppose the least ground for doubt, in order to ascertain whether after that there remained aught in my belief that was wholly indubitable. Accordingly, seeing that our senses sometimes deceive us, I was willing to suppose that there existed nothing really such as they presented to us; and because some men err in reasoning, and fall into paralogisms, even on the simplest matters of geometry, I, convinced that I was as open to error as any other, rejected as false all the reasonings I had hitherto taken for demonstrations; and finally, when I considered that the very same thoughts (presentations) which we experience when awake may also be experienced when we are asleep, while there is at that time not one of them true, I supposed that all the objects (presentations) that had ever entered into my mind when awake, had in them no more truth than the illusions of my dreams. But immediately upon this I observed that, whilst I thus wished to think that all was false, it was absolutely necessary that I, who thus thought, should be somewhat; and as I observed that this truth, I think, therefore I am (COGITO ERGO SUM), was so certain and of such evidence that no ground of doubt, however extravagant, could be alleged by the sceptics capable of shaking it, I concluded that I might, without scruple, accept it as the first principle of the philosophy of which I was in search
In the next place, I attentively examined what I was and as I observed that I could suppose that I had no body, and that there was no world nor any place in which I might be; but that I could not therefore suppose that I was not; and that, on the contrary, from the very circumstance that I thought to doubt of the truth of other things, it most clearly and certainly followed that I was; while, on the other hand, if I had only ceased to think, although all the other objects which I had ever imagined had been in reality existent, I would have had no reason to believe that I existed; I thence concluded that I was a substance whose whole essence or nature consists only in thinking, and which, that it may exist, has need of no place, nor is dependent on any material thing; so that " I," that is to say, the mind by which I am what I am, is wholly distinct from the body, and is even more easily known than the latter, and is such, that although the latter were not, it would still continue to be all that it is.
After this I inquired in general into what is essential I to the truth and certainty of a proposition; for since I had discovered one which I knew to be true, I thought that I must likewise be able to discover the ground of this certitude. And as I observed that in the words I think, therefore I am, there is nothing at all which gives me assurance of their truth beyond this, that I see very clearly that in order to think it is necessary to exist, I concluded that I might take, as a general rule, the principle, that all the things which we very clearly and distinctly conceive are true, only observing, however, that there is some difficulty in rightly determining the objects which we distinctly conceive.
In the next place, from reflecting on the circumstance that I doubted, and that consequently my being was not wholly perfect (for I clearly saw that it was a greater perfection to know than to doubt), I was led to inquire whence I had learned to think of something more perfect than myself; and I clearly recognized that I must hold this notion from some nature which in reality was more perfect. As for the thoughts of many other objects external to me, as of the sky, the earth, light, heat, and a thousand more, I was less at a loss to know whence these came; for since I remarked in them nothing which seemed to render them superior to myself, I could believe that, if these were true, they were dependencies on my own nature, in so far as it possessed a certain perfection, and, if they were false, that I held them from nothing, that is to say, that they were in me because of a certain imperfection of my nature. But this could not be the case with-the idea of a nature more perfect than myself; for to receive it from nothing was a thing manifestly impossible; and, because it is not less repugnant that the more perfect should be an effect of, and dependence on the less perfect, than that something should proceed from nothing, it was equally impossible that I could hold it from myself: accordingly, it but remained that it had been placed in me by a nature which was in reality more perfect than mine, and which even possessed within itself all the perfections of which I could form any idea; that is to say, in a single word, which was God. And to this I added that, since I knew some perfections which I did not possess, I was not the only being in existence (I will here, with your permission, freely use the terms of the schools); but, on the contrary, that there was of necessity some other more perfect Being upon whom I was dependent, and from whom I had received all that I possessed; for if I had existed alone, and independently of every other being, so as to have had from myself all the perfection, however little, which I actually possessed, I should have been able, for the same reason, to have had from myself the whole remainder of perfection, of the want of which I was conscious, and thus could of myself have become infinite, eternal, immutable, omniscient, all-powerful, and, in fine, have possessed all the perfections which I could recognize in God. For in order to know the nature of God (whose existence has been established by the preceding reasonings), as far as my own nature permitted, I had only to consider in reference to all the properties of which I found in my mind some idea, whether their possession was a mark of perfection; and I was assured that no one which indicated any imperfection was in him, and that none of the rest was awanting. Thus I perceived that doubt, inconstancy, sadness, and such like, could not be found in God, since I myself would have been happy to be free from them. Besides, I had ideas of many sensible and corporeal things; for although I might suppose that I was dreaming, and that all which I saw or imagined was false, I could not, nevertheless, deny that the ideas were in reality in my thoughts. But, because I had already very clearly recognized in myself that the intelligent nature is distinct from the corporeal, and as I observed that all composition is an evidence of dependency, and that a state of dependency is manifestly a state of imperfection, I therefore determined that it could not be a perfection in God to be compounded of these two natures and that consequently he was not so compounded; but that if there were any bodies in the world, or even any intelligences, or other natures that were not wholly perfect, their existence depended on his power in such a way that they could not subsist without him for a single moment.
I was disposed straightway to search for other truths and when I had represented to myself the object of the geometers, which I conceived to be a continuous body or a space indefinitely extended in length, breadth, and height or depth, divisible into divers parts which admit of different figures and sizes, and of being moved or transposed in all manner of ways (for all this the geometers suppose to be in the object they contemplate), I went over some of their simplest demonstrations. And, in the first place, I observed, that the great certitude which by common consent is accorded to these demonstrations, is founded solely upon this, that they are clearly conceived in accordance with the rules I have already laid down In the next place, I perceived that there was nothing at all in these demonstrations which could assure me of the existence of their object: thus, for example, supposing a triangle to be given, I distinctly perceived that its three angles were necessarily equal to two right angles, but I did not on that account perceive anything which could assure me that any triangle existed: while, on the contrary, recurring to the examination of the idea of a Perfect Being, I found that the existence of the Being was comprised in the idea in the same way that the equality of its three angles to two right angles is comprised in the idea of a triangle, or as in the idea of a sphere, the equidistance of all points on its surface from the center, or even still more clearly; and that consequently it is at least as certain that God, who is this Perfect Being, is, or exists, as any demonstration of geometry can be.
But the reason which leads many to persuade them selves that there is a difficulty in knowing this truth, and even also in knowing what their mind really is, is that they never raise their thoughts above sensible objects, and are so accustomed to consider nothing except by way of imagination, which is a mode of thinking limited to material objects, that all that is not imaginable seems to them not intelligible. The truth of this is sufficiently manifest from the single circumstance, that the philosophers of the schools accept as a maxim that there is nothing in the understanding which was not previously in the senses, in which however it is certain that the ideas of God and of the soul have never been; and it appears to me that they who make use of their imagination to comprehend these ideas do exactly the some thing as if, in order to hear sounds or smell odors, they strove to avail themselves of their eyes; unless indeed that there is this difference, that the sense of sight does not afford us an inferior assurance to those of smell or hearing; in place of which, neither our imagination nor our senses can give us assurance of anything unless our understanding intervene.
Finally, if there be still persons who are not sufficiently persuaded of the existence of God and of the soul, by the reasons I have adduced, I am desirous that they should know that all the other propositions, of the truth of which they deem themselves perhaps more assured, as that we have a body, and that there exist stars and an earth, and such like, are less certain; for, although we have a moral assurance of these things, which is so strong that there is an appearance of extravagance in doubting of their existence, yet at the same time no one, unless his intellect is impaired, can deny, when the question relates to a metaphysical certitude, that there is sufficient reason to exclude entire assurance, in the observation that when asleep we can in the same way imagine ourselves possessed of another body and that we see other stars and another earth, when there is nothing of the kind. For how do we know that the thoughts which occur in dreaming are false rather than those other which we experience when awake, since the former are often not less vivid and distinct than the latter? And though men of the highest genius study this question as long as they please, I do not believe that they will be able to give any reason which can be sufficient to remove this doubt, unless they presuppose the existence of God. For, in the first place even the principle which I have already taken as a rule, viz., that all the things which we clearly and distinctly conceive are true, is certain only because God is or exists and because he is a Perfect Being, and because all that we possess is derived from him: whence it follows that our ideas or notions, which to the extent of their clearness and distinctness are real, and proceed from God, must to that extent be true. Accordingly, whereas we not infrequently have ideas or notions in which some falsity is contained, this can only be the case with such as are to some extent confused and obscure, and in this proceed from nothing (participate of negation), that is, exist in us thus confused because we are not wholly perfect. And it is evident that it is not less repugnant that falsity or imperfection, in so far as it is imperfection, should proceed from God, than that truth or perfection should proceed from nothing. But if we did not know that all which we possess of real and true proceeds from a Perfect and Infinite Being, however clear and distinct our ideas might be, we should have no ground on that account for the assurance that they possessed the perfection of being true.
But after the knowledge of God and of the soul has rendered us certain of this rule, we can easily understand that the truth of the thoughts we experience when awake, ought not in the slightest degree to be called in question on account of the illusions of our dreams. For if it happened that an individual, even when asleep, had some very distinct idea, as, for example, if a geometer should discover some new demonstration, the circumstance of his being asleep would not militate against its truth; and as for the most ordinary error of our dreams, which consists in their representing to us various objects in the same way as our external senses, this is not prejudicial, since it leads us very properly to suspect the truth of the ideas of sense; for we are not infrequently deceived in the same manner when awake; as when persons in the jaundice see all objects yellow, or when the stars or bodies at a great distance appear to us much smaller than they are. For, in fine, whether awake or asleep, we ought never to allow ourselves to be persuaded of the truth of anything unless on the evidence of our reason. And it must be noted that I say of our reason, and not of our imagination or of our senses: thus, for example, although we very clearly see the sun, we ought not therefore to determine that it is only of the size which our sense of sight presents; and we may very distinctly imagine the head of a lion joined to the body of a goat, without being therefore shut up to the conclusion that a chimaera exists; for it is not a dictate of reason that what we thus see or imagine is in reality existent; but it plainly tells us that all our ideas or notions contain in them some truth; for otherwise it could not be that God, who is wholly perfect and veracious, should have placed them in us. And because our reasonings are never so clear or so complete during sleep as when we are awake, although sometimes the acts of our imagination are then as lively and distinct, if not more so than in our waking moments, reason further dictates that, since all our thoughts cannot be true because of our partial imperfection, those possessing truth must infallibly be found in the experience of our waking moments rather than in that of our dreams.

Quotable Mohammad

2007-03-04T08:07:00.001-08:00

Muhammad is quoted in al-Athar as having said, "Do not enforce your own ethics on your children; they have been created for a time other than yours."

Imam Muhammad Ibn Al Hasan Ash Shaybani The Kitab al-Athar was the first book composed in Islam after the generation of the Companions. Al-Imam al-A’zam Abu Hanifah Nu’man ibn Thabit wrote it. It comprises Ahadith that connect directly back to the Messenger of Allah sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam (marfu’), those which stop short at a Companion or one of the Followers (mawquf) and those which are attributed to the Messenger sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam directly by one of the Followers or Followers of the Followers without attribution to a Companion (mursal). His companions Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Zufar, Imam Muhammad, Imam al-Hasan ibn Ziyad, Imam Hammad ibn Abi Hanifah the Imam’s son, Hafs ibn Ghiyath and others narrated it from him. In the version before us, Imam Muhammad, himself a mujtahid, narrated each tradition from Imam Abu Hanifah and then followed each with some explanatory material, sometimes confirming and occasionally differing with his Imam. Imam Abu Hanifah Imam Abu Hanifah was from Kufa and was one of the Followers (taabi’oon). He was born in 80 AH in a family of Persian ancestry. Imam Abu Hanifah was a trader in fabrics. He studied with the great scholars of Kufa who transmitted the schools of Ibn Mas’ud and ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib in particular, but he also travelled further afield in search of hadith and fiqh. He was noted for his exceptional grasp of fiqh, and is said to have laid its foundations. He died in 150 AH in Baghdad.His list of teachers is very extensive, and his list of pupils a roll-call of honour. Sahl ibn Muzahim said, “Abu Hanifah’s knowledge was universal knowledge.” Ash-Shafi’ee said, “In fiqh people are the needy dependents of Abu Hanifah.” Imam Muhammad He is Abu ‘Abdillah Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Farqad ash-Shaybani. Muhammad was born in Wasit in 132 AH, and grew up in Kufa. He was a pupil of Abu Hanifah. Ash-Shafi’ee said, “I have not seen anyone more eloquent than him. I used to think when I saw him reciting the Qur’an that it was as if the Qur’an had been revealed in his language.” He also said, “I have not seen anyone more intelligent than Muhammad ibn al-Hasan.” He died in Ray in 189 AH. Hafiz Riyad Ahmad al-Multani The explanatory footnotes to this text are the work of the contemporary scholar Hafiz Riyad Ahmad from Multan in Pakistan.

From the ashes of a burnt train

2007-03-02T08:09:00.000-08:00

From the Ashes of a Burnt Train
*UPDATE** Please see updates to this story here.
*UPDATE 2** can be located hereThe date of this story was changed so it remains on the front page for a longer time.
*****18th February, 2007: Yet another chapter has been added to the list of terrorist attacks committed on the Indian transportation system. While politicians now appear to have decided to comment with even greater caution as to the content of their own remarks on the atrocity, the MSM (Mainstream Media) has somehow tried to further their censorship of such comments by politicians, with the result that the real picture is increasingly mired in thick fog.Verbal tricks now commonly being deployed among the Western MSM, such as the remark that "a person of South Asian origin" was behind the terrorist attack, continues as ever to evade and obscure the real issues at hand. But still the question remains: what is really happening? This question will remain unanswered satisfactorily until vast sections of the media stop defending the real terrorists, and until politicians stop their continual hesitation in discussing global terrorism from behind a thick veil of political correctness. The following documentation will take you inside the untold story of the "blast in Samjhauta Express," and will address existing differences among media reports, and what they certainly forgot to tell.This is not the first time that Indian railways have come under attack from terrorist and radical elements. To begin with, we list a chronology of attacks provided by the MSM on this very issue:
July 11, 2006: 185 people were killed in seven bomb explosions at rail stations and on trains in Mumbai. March 13, 2003: A bomb attack on a commuter train in Mumbai killed 11 persons. June 22, 1999: A powerful explosion rocked the New Jalpaiguri railway station killing at least nine passengers, including two Indian soldiers headed for Kashmir. 85 others were injured, including 10 soldiers. July eight, 1997: Thirty-three people were killed in a bomb blast in a passenger train at Lehra Khanna railway station in Punjab's Bhatinda district. December 30, 1996: Thirty-three people were killed in a bomb blast in Brahmaputra Mail between Kokrajhar and Fakiragram stations in lower Assam.
The above provided chronology, a chronology available on almost every media site, can easily be located at the following URLs: (Times of India; NDTV.com; Washington Post)Almost every Indian, including Hindus, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and Sikhs, is openly condemning this terror attack. Moderate Muslims are also victims of terrorism, because if they disagree with the Jihadists, then such radical elements will attack them as well. However, the terrorism cited is taking place in Hindu-majority India. When the media focuses on radical Hindu groups, but pays less attention to the radical Islamic groups, this gives an extra reason for moderate Muslim groups not to speak out.As an individual from India, I will document the situation as I interpret it. I hope the following will enlighten you about an India that you may not have yet explored.If you were to ask me to explain the attack on Samjhauta express, then I will say not just that it is a terrorist atrocity like others, but also thus:
If you ignore one massacre, there will be another soon waiting to happen.
In line with this, this episode is unfortunately not something new happening on Indian trains. Just look at a few descriptive words from the horrific Samjhota Express tragedy:On the train, many feared to be dead, bodies were charred beyond reorganisation, disturbing their peace process, heinous crime, bottles of explosives, screaming, struggling to get out of fire stricken carriages…Put these floating words next to perhaps any Hindu, or a person well aware of Indian history, and he will give you an account of an incident that took place on 27th February, 2002. Unfortunately, this same incident has been missed out on altogether in the above chronologies. Perhaps the MSM saw that an attack on Hindus was not a terrorist attack, thus becoming the latest addition to the Indian brand of "Negationism"? However, the manner in which the recent Samjhota Express terror attack was reported is yet another example of why Hindu Indians are losing faith in their government. But the government will claim it is only "Hindu radicals" that are losing faith in the Indian National Congress-led government.Anger is not only growing towards the Indian government, but also towards the West. A typical Indian thinks that these kinds of cover-ups and endless submissive posturing to certain Islamic interest groups owes in large part to Western pressures, and wonders why India does not take action against terrorist organisations inside Pakistan-organised Kashmir. A recent NDTV poll shows that Indians thinks the West uses double standards in dealing with terror. While Indians have faced terrorist attacks continuously for decades, western commentators seem unwilling to sympathise with the pain of India, as in the case of documentaries like Obsession, where they just skipped any reference to the Indian experience.People have been murdered, and an unbearable pain exists in hearts of relatives and friends of those murdered victims. But the question arises: how do you begin to define this human pain? In the case of the "Samjhauta Express," the Indian government has accepted that there was a security loophole. In case of the Godhra train burning, we got thousands of conspiracy theories. Are moderate Muslims ready to accept the comment of Laloo Prasad Yadav that it was just a security loophole, or will they also think of the inter-religious hate that Muslims direct towards non-Muslims?If the Indian government even speaks from security loophole point, then why was there little or no discussion about the security of Indians after the Mumbai bomb blast? Why were fire-extinguishers not installed in Indian trains after the Godhra incident? Various other questions include ones such as whether Panipat was strategically chosen. If it was, then why is the media not speaking of it? Why did the blast occur in an ultra-sensitive security zone? How did the blast occur? Who was behind the attack? All of the answers are hidden inside Godhra train burning incident, the same incident that was brutally ripped off from terror attack chronologies.Perhaps Americans should learn from this that if they do not defend themselves against 9/11 conspiracy theories, they will also end up with similar fates, with no one to remember victims of 9/11, except all those who curse Americans for their war against terror. The media has chosen the option of sidelining 9/11. So to see what is really missing in media commentaries, and what politicians really want to hide, let us drill into Godhra.
REVISITING ASHES OF GODHRA
The Godhra Train Burning Incident occurred in the town of Godhra in the Indian state of Gujarat at 0630 hrs on 27 February 2002. A train named the "Sabarmati Express" caught fire right after it left the train station. One of the coaches (Coach #S6) that was set on fire was occupied by Hindu religious pilgrims called Kar Sevaks who were returning from Ayodhya. 58 Hindu pilgrims including 15 women and 20 children were burnt alive in the train coach.It is said that intelligence agencies were aware of an impending disaster as the areas around the small town of Godhra were by then already called mini-Pakistan. Americans must equate this to those 9/11 conspiracies theories which place blame back on America.Coach S6 was completely gutted by the fire. The fire happened during an attack by a Muslim mob following an altercation between the Hindu pilgrims and local Muslims when the train was in platform.People, who are unaware of the background, should understand that term "mini Pakistan" was a term coined at a time when Islamabad had a stronghold of terrorists, and radical Islamic elements were openly taking roads in Karachi and Islamabad. These Islamists were contributing to worldwide demonstrations of calls of "death to America, death to Israel, death to India." The areas which were full of people sympathizing and contributing in those death call missions were known as mini-Pakistan.The Tribune reported:
As the train left Godhra station, one of the miscreants who had boarded it, pulled the chain alarm after some time to halt the train a km away. It was here that a large number of stone-pelting [Muslim] miscreants set the coach ablaze by throwing petrol bombs and dousing it with kerosene and petrol.
Setting Frame around Godhra train burning incident
Initial investigations led to the suspicion that a planned conspiracy was behind the train burning, rather than a spontaneous reaction. In 2003, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Gujarat Police moved the session's court in Godhra to invoke provisions of Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) against all 123 accused in the case, including seven who were out on bail. On February 6, 2003, Maulana Hussein Umarji a Muslim leader of the Deobandi sect of Islamic Fundamentalism in Godhra, was arrested. The police alleged that he was the prime conspirator in the train burning. His arrest followed the confessional statement of Jabir Binyamin Behera, an accused who was arrested on January 22.For those who are unaware, Deobandi sect of Islam also represents the Talibani movement.Behera confessed that around 11.30 p.m. on the previous night he was present on the ground floor of a guest house when other suspects arrived on a scooter and initiated the first meeting. Allegedly, the strategy was to launch an attack at the slightest provocation from the Kar Sevaks who were returning from Ayodhya. The same night, the conspirators collected 140 litres of fuel from a local petrol pump and stored it at a guest house. They also had instructions from Umarji, who had advanced information on the position of the Kar Sevaks on the Sabarmati Express and specifically told them to target Coach S6 of the train.The confession further went that a second meeting was held around midnight after which a co-conspirator named Paanwala allegedly left for the railway station to check on the train's arrival time. After learning that the train was late, they scrapped their original plan of a pre-dawn attack. In his confession Behera says it was Umarji ( equivalent figure to the Mayor of London, who had supported Mega Mosque project) who advised him against surrendering to the police. The investigators considered Umarji(leader of the Deobandi-Tablighi Jamaat) a "big catch" since the mob that burnt bogie S6 was mainly composed of people from the Ghanchi community, a majority of whom were followers of the Deobandi sect.It was also suggested that foreign Islamic terrorists were involved in the act thus necessitating the invocation of POTA.In September, the investigations changed course with the naming of Razzak Kurkur, a hotelier from the Muslim-dominated Signal Falia area, as an accused. It was then claimed that though a huge mob was involved in the attack, the actual train burning was the handiwork of a core team of twenty.By the end, the findings of Godhra were suffering the conspiracies theories, like the vast conspiracies theories in case of 9/11. The defense lawyers of the accused argued against the theories of the SIT, alleging that the charge sheets did not mention that the accused were active participants in the burning, and that the confessions needed to be backed up by sufficient evidence. The SIT report has also been questioned for apparent inconsistencies, such as the speed at which the petrol fuel was delivered to the attack site, and the lack of witnesses.Frontline reports on Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Gujarat Police findings:
SIT called a press conference to reiterate its conspiracy theory. Rakesh Asthana, who heads the SIT. He maintains that the plan to torch the train was masterminded during meetings at the Aman Guest House, owned by Razak Kurkur, who allegedly heads a local criminal gang involved in railway crimes. ... the actual operation was conducted by six people, who cut open the vestibule and entered the coach, opened the doors of the compartment and poured 120 litres of petrol (each person supposedly carried a 20-litre jerry can) before jumping out. Then, burning rags were thrown into the compartments through the windows. The SIT's main evidence is a court confession by Zabir Bin Yameen Behra, one of those who allegedly entered coach S-6. Behra first gave details of how the plan was hatched. Later, he went back on the testimony, saying the police forced him to depose before the court.
Searching Godhra in Samjhauta Express flamesIn the Samjhauta Express incident, the majority of victims were Pakistani Muslims, but the various similarities between Godhra and Samjhauta Express case are ignored. The ignorance given to Godhra itself raises various questions about the neutral role of Indian government and Mainstream Media.Normally, all of the reports say that the purpose of the attack on the Samjhauta Express was to derail the peace process, or indirectly to provoke Hindu Muslim riots.Condemning the incident, Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav said it was an attempt to derail the improving relations between the two sides. "The dead include children, guards and many of our Pakistani brothers and sisters," said Lalu. "Whoever is behind the incident is against peace and wants to spoil our growing relationship with other countries," said Patil.More of political and media condemnation and its media coverage can be located here: (Daily Pioneer; BBC)While most news agencies were busy in mangling the news from the ground, the BBC was shining a bit of light on the topic, despite its previous record.
The reaction from both governments suggests the prime suspects might be groups such as Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad - the main Islamic militant groups, who have been blamed for many high-profile bombings, says the BBC's Jill McGivering.They further added:
Recent attacks on Delhi, Mumbai and Varanasi, for example, seemed designed to damage India's image abroad and stoke anti-Pakistan feeling inside India.But the fact that so many of the dead on the train were Pakistani Muslims may indicate that the devices were intended for a different target, or exploded prematurely, she says. For sure, I must appreciate the BBC's lead in this coverage, for accepting the truth of Islamic militancy, but is name-mangling a solution to Islam-o-phobia? Is it helping the world to fight global terrorism? Is it a crime if you openly blame Wahhabi or Salafi ideology instead of covering up things in tags like "South Asian"? Let's connect various news sources to understand why Panipat was chosen.
Dissecting Panipat Geographically
Panipat lies in Indian State Haryana, bordering another Indian state of Uttar Pradesh.

This area is also famous for high crime rates; since criminals found it a haven in escaping to the neighbouring state of Uttar Pradesh (Uttar Pradesh and Haryana are divided by river Yamuna). The crime rate in that area soars even higher than that of Jammu and Kashmir. The 2003 records are available here from across the Yamuna region.From 2003 onwards, there were some new promotion policies under which a police officer is promoted if the crime rate goes down. This started a new trend, and if you go to police station in western UP (trans-Yamuna from Panipat) to report a crime, they will be reluctant to register your report.As soon as a criminal cross this river, he in a different state, served by different rules, observed by different police, and also a different kind of lawlessness. In short, if you do a crime one side of the river, just go to the other side and it becomes the rhetorical completion of a pilgrimage to Mecca; you are sin-free again. There are open borders, so there is no fear of border agents controlling militants crossing inside Haryana.The ability to return back to the other state is applicable; it may vary from a few months or sometimes a year. Indian police usually stores its data in registers (not electronic, but paper registers), and after few years these registers are dumped in some preservative room to store the data of crime for future use, perhaps for some statistical survey.Unlike western Islamofascists, Indian Islamofascists don't have to flee the country, but rather just have to cross the state borders to secure themselves. If you are in India, and break some rule, now you know the trick as to how to get off scot-free.In discussing Godhra riots, we came across the Deobandi sect of Islam. If one crosses the river Yamuna from Panipat, you are in a stronghold of Deobandis, the Indian district of Muzaffarnagar. This district also came to light last year with the Imrana rape case. Deoband, the origin of Deobandi sect of Islam, is one of the neighbouring cities to Muzaffarnagar.This district also came in light last year with Imrana Rape case. Deoband, the origin place of Deobandi sect of Islam, is one of neighbouring cities from Muzaffarnagar.

Historical significance of Panipat and neighbourhood
Panipat in itself is famous for various historical battles, but the historical significance here is with respect to Deobandi, which lies on the other side of Yamuna, and is a stronghold in the neighbouring areas of Panipat. These areas are Sonipat, Muzaffarnagar, Deoband, Meerut and so on. In recent years it has been observed that various Deobandi madrassas have popped up in this area, including in Panipat.
Note: You may have also observed Deobandi Madrassas popping up in your cities too. The Mega Mosque Project from London is also a Deobandi project, as Tablighi Jammat is an umbrella group from the Deobandi sect.
In fact, the Deobandi movement in itself started from among neighbouring areas of Panipat, like the Saharanpur district (holding Deoband city), or Muzaffarnagar (an active participant in the 1857 mutiny) or Meerut. The Deobandi movement was an outcome after failure of 1857 Mutiny to save the Mughal Caliphate, which also started from this localized zone. More about this can be found here. (BBC; Sepoy Mutiny)
Joining the data available from various news sources about the Samjhauta incident
Samjhauta Express, which the media has advertised as the "Friendship Express" has one more meaning. Samjhauta also means deal. But these differences are merely of words, like that of Islam's meaning: does it mean peace (or does it mean surrender?).
In any case, the necessary condition you must fulfil to board on "Deal Express" is to get a passport (valid or fake) with a visa stamped in it (i.e. visa of the country you are bound to travel).
Hindustan Times
These conditions can be easily fulfilled by general passengers, as well as terrorists. The terrorist is then welcome to board the train to enter the country of Kufirs, the gateway of Paradise.
Some ex-terrorists have previously revealed how they travelled across the border using valid passports through the Samjhauta Express. This news from 6th January 2006 is still available in archives here:
Daily Excelsior NDTV
With the "war on terror" taking its hold over south Asia, Pakistan seems to be serious for the first time about holding a peace deal. We may never know: is it due to intense international pressure or because now Pakistanis slowly understanding that radical Muslims are enemies of whole human civilizations?
With this in mind, on 18 February 2007, some terrorist (we don't know the nationality, nor religion as yet), with all documents (valid or fake), joined the journey of Samjhata Express which was packed with a majority of Pakistani Muslims, a minority of Indian Muslims and six security personnel. The train was set bound towards Atari with one technical halt in between (it is not clear whether it was Ambala or Ludhiana).
Yahoo News
The terrorist managed to enter the train with 4 or 5 suitcase-bombs (it is difficult to get exact figure from documentations, as some say five suitcases). Each suitcase-bomb includes an electronic timer encased in clear plastic and packed next to more than a dozen plastic bottles containing a cocktail of fuel oils and chemicals. Of these, two exploded.
Reuters
Before the blast, two men (or perhaps even as many as five) managed to jump out of the train near Dewana (which falls under Panipat district) as the train slowed down near Dewana station. These two suspects engaged in a heated argument with the personnel of Railway Protection Force for about 20 minutes. This took place 15 minutes before the blast.
DDI News
After going through Dewana station, the train speeds up the engines. The man controlling the signals at Dewana station noticed a fire in the back compartments of the train and ran to the control signals to stop the train.
AP wire quoted: "Alerted to the blast by a railway worker, assistant station manager Vinod Kumar Gupta emerged from his trackside house and said he "saw flames leaping out of the windows.""
The train was already in speed of around 80-100 kms/hr, and then the sudden breaking induced a loud noise. Due to this noise, villagers from near by area gathered and had tried to extinguish the fire. The train halted about 1 km away from when the noise first started.
Awakened by the screeching of brakes, villagers in Sewah, just up the tracks from Dewana, rushed to douse the fire and save whomever they could.
"I opened my shop and grabbed buckets," said Satish Sharma, a 33-year-old store owner who sprinted up the dirt road toward the tracks, past the small temple to the Hindu god Shiva.
"We threw bucket and bucket on the train but the flames grew higher - we could do nothing," he said. "I could smell the people being burned - I wanted to vomit."
The intense heat had sealed shut at least one door in the forward coach, and the windows were barred, trapping passengers inside. At least another dozen died in the rear coach, from whom authorities said 20 to 25 people managed to escape through an open door, some jumping out with their clothes on fire.
"Fire trucks arrived about 45 minutes later. Within two hours, the two damaged coaches - now little more than blackened hulls on wheels - were pushed off to a siding."
Miami News
What was left behind was the death of many innocents, and for sure moderate Muslims. But the incident has raised many other questions too.
MOVING BACK TO GODHRA
By now we know that a suitcase packed with kerosene bottles can burn a train compartment.
A big suitcase can carry 10 to 15 bottles (1 litters Bottles as shown by police officials).

Thus the outcome is: two suitcases carrying less then 25 liters of kerosene (each) were enough to burn a whole train compartment.
The Fire brigade was also arrived after 45 minutes, and when the fire was extinguished.
The BBC further describes the scene by quote :
The BBC's Soutik Biswas, at the scene, said the heat of the flames had peeled the blue paint off the coaches, and oil and cinders covered the tracks.
But in case of Godhra, Mr. Laloo Parsad (Railway Minister) presented a enquiry report, says that the train coaches are designed as “fire-proof”. Tribune India
A Tribune archive from above quoted links says..
“The team, headed by Justice U.C. Bannerjee, held meetings with the General Manager, Mr Mohammad Sirajjudin. The team members were given details about the chemicals and procedures involved in making fire-proof coaches. The members discussed the factors that could have been responsible for the fast spread of fire in the coaches of Sabarmati Express.”
Further another archive information about Godhra (located here) says:
“With the elimination of the ‘petrol theory’, ‘miscreant activity theory’ as well as ruling out of any possibility of ‘electrical fire’, the fire in S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express can at this stage be ascribed as an ‘accidental fire’,” the committee said in its interim report which was submitted by Justice Banerjee to the Railway Board Chairman R.K. Singh. The committee was appointed by the UPA Government in September last year at the instance of Railway Minister Laloo Prasad.”
Unfortunately, the description of the Samjhauta Express with regards to peeled-off blue paint, oil and cinders speak volumes about the fire-proof standards of Indian trains. Perhaps the Fraud section under this link describing fire-proofing explains it well.
Some more important points to notice are:
The Godhra incident includes burning of one train compartment with 120 to 140 litres of petroleum. In the case of Samjhauta Express it took less than 25 litres of kerosene.
There were attempts to extinguish the flames by villagers and they were joined by fire brigade after 45 minutes. In the case of Godhra, there was no fire brigade for a long time. The first thing security personnel were concerned with was with moving Muslim mobs back. By this time groups of Hindus had burnt to death in the Godhra train burning incident.
We do know that Laloo is giving a compensation of one million Indian rupees ($22,690) to each victim, which is perhaps the largest sum of money any terror victim has received from the Indian government. We also know that Laloo vote bank is Muslim. We don't say that he should not contribute this way in helping victims, or that he should not think of his vote bank; however, can't he provide a bit of respect to those who died in Godhra train burning incident also?Bloomberg
Although terrorists are trying their best to provoke Hindu Muslims into fighting, what is especially troubling is what Indian politicians are trying to prove by brutally cleaning history. When they speak cautiously, why not also take caution that victims of Godhra also don't get hurt due to their dirty politics?
Some questions that arise
Owing to the proximity of the Samjhauta bombing to the Kasuri Peace visit, it seems quite likely that someone really against this peace process undertook the Samjhauta bombing. The organizations most to lose from this peace process are the terrorist organisations from Kashmir. When the "war on terror" gets close and tight, the terrorist outlet finds it hard to sustain their activities.
JKLF have openly protested: Hindustan Times Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are already pointed by the BBC.
And everything else roams around a region, which is close to the hub of Deobandis. Questions to ask: why do terrorist usually take shelter in mosques? In this case, why had terrorist choosen this specific location for escaping, a location which takes them only towards the hub of Deobandis?
Are the terrorists radical Hindus? If the government says it can't be ruled out, then who am I to say anything against it? But a logical question still remains: why would radical Hindus choose 18th Feburary 2007, when waiting a week would provide a reason in the form of the 5th anniversary of Godhra riots?
Some more data to be concerned with
The Tablighi Jammat is now expanding its work in the West. The Indian counterpart is given to SIMI. With the help of corrupted Indian politicians, SIMI don't need to feast at all. SIMI was believed to be linked to the Mumbai bomb blast last year. The terrorist organisation SIMI has had to face terrible shocks due to their linkage with that bombing, but ever since then, why have Indian politicians taken all charges back against radical organisations like SIMI (in Hindi only)?
We will never know really what the majority of politicians around South Asia are cooking up, but we do know that this will affect our lives, as well as lives of moderate Muslims.
This is a question for the sake of survival. After every Islamic terrorist attack, news channels broadcast a special series of article, which are typically entitled "Muslims feel the heat". Instead of condemning the terror openly, the media always tries to give a shelter to terrorists so they can hide behind words of ambiguity. Under the unknown truth about Samjhauta Express, questions still prevail:
Was it a Hindu radical who utilised the gateway, the same gateway Indian politicians had provided to terrorists via "Deal Express", so that he could check terrorist inflow inside India?
Or was it an Islamofascist, who was devastated with "war on terror" and the "peace process", and thus looked to attack the "Friendship Express"?
Whomever it was, I am sure that now Muslims feel the heat. I hope that Moderate Muslim world got a lesson, a lesson that our society is really polarized. The polarisation of society started from Islamic mosques and madrassas, which are making the world unsafe for all. If they really want to live in peace, then they should stop promoting radical mentalities inside their mosques, by speaking loudly against radical mullahs.
As for Indian politicians, please stop brutally cleaning the history of India. We do know what "Samjhauta" means in Islam. So before making any "Peace Deal", do read Koran SURA 9:5
So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
I hope that Pakistan's approach for peace is really meant for peace instead of "Samjhauta" (deal). But what they call peace, we call it surrender. The democratic world wants the Muslim world to throw away those Hate Suras, if they are really looking forward towards a peaceful world. But before signing the new peace pact book, you may need to actually stop teaching your children hate.
Labels: hinduism, india, islamofascism, moderate_muslims, MSM, PM, terrorism
posted by PM @ 5:00 PM 2 comments links to this post

Historical Jewish-Hindu Leadership Summit

2007-03-01T08:09:00.000-08:00

[Given below is a report on the Hindu-Jewish leadership summit held in Delhi recently and comments on the same in the Milli Gazzette, reflecting the Muslim viewpoint on the subject. I have cut and paste the whole thing for those who are interested in these sort of goings-on.]

Historical Jewish-Hindu Leadership Summit held2/28/2007 3:33:56 PM www.ajc.org
The first Hindu-Jewish leadership summit took place in Delhi, February 5-6, 2007; at which the delegation of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel convened with major religious leaders of Hindu dharma. It is planned that this historic gathering will lead to ongoing bilateral meetings on shared values and common concerns, many of which were highlighted at this summit.

Declaration of Mutual Understanding and Cooperation from the First Jewish-Hindu Leadership Summit Delhi ; February 5-6, 2007
The participants affirmed that: 1. Their respective Traditions teach that there is One Supreme Being who is the Ultimate Reality, who has created this world in its blessed diversity and who has communicated Divine ways of action for humanity, for different peoples in different times and places. 2. The religious identities of both Jewish and Hindu communities are related to components of Faith, Scripture, Peoplehood, Culture, Land and Language. 3. Hindus and Jews seek to maintain their respective heritage and pass it on to the succeeding generations, while living in respectful relations with other communities. 4. Neither seeks to proselytize, nor undermine or replace in any way the religious identities of other faith communities. They expect other communities to respect their religious identities and commitments, and condemn all activities that go against the sanctity of this mutual respect.
5. Both the Hindu and Jewish Traditions affirm the sanctity of life and aspire for a society in which all live in peace and harmony with one another. Accordingly they condemn all acts of violence in the name of any religion or against any religion. 6. The Jewish and Hindu communities are committed to the ancient traditions of Judaism and Hindu dharma respectively, and have both, in their own ways, gone through the painful experiences of persecution, oppression and destruction. Therefore, they realize the need to educate the present and succeeding generations about their past, in order that they will make right efforts to promote religious harmony. 7. The representatives of the two faith communities recognize the need for understanding one another in terms of lifestyles, philosophy, religious symbols, culture, etc. They also recognize that they have to make themselves understood by other faith communities. They hope that through their bilateral initiatives, these needs would be met. 8. Because both traditions affirm the central importance of social responsibility for their societies and for the collective good of humanity, the participants pledged themselves to work together to help address the challenges of poverty, sickness and inequitable distribution of resources.
9. The representatives of the two faith communities also agree to constitute a Standing Committee on Hindu-Jewish Relations.
Rabbi Yona Metzger
Chief Rabbi of Israel
Swami Dayanand Saraswati,
Hindu Dharma Acharya Sabha

Re: Historical Jewish-Hindu Leadership Summit held swamijyoti 3/1/2007 4:43:36 AM THE MILLI GAZETTE ON THE HINDU-JEWISH SUMMIT!By Zafarul-Islam Khan24 February 2007http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/2007/200702261_Hindu_Jewish_summit_rss.htmOne of Israel's two chief rabbis, that is Yona Metzger, religious head of the Ashkenazis, that is the European, that is Khazar, that is non-Semite Jews, paid a high profile visit to India during 5-7 February while friends of the Jewsih state here celebrated the 15th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel which was the only wish of the RSS delegation which met Narasimha Rao soon he became prime minister in 1991. Ashkenazis are the people who established Israel and still control it while the oriental Jews, Sephardim, are second class citizens and the Israeli Arabs are third class citizens of the state which boasts to be the only democracy in the Middle East. In Delhi, the Ashkenazi chief rabbi met top Hindu leaders including leaders of the RSS and BJP in what was termed as "Jewish-Hindu summit." It led to a 9-point "Declaration of Mutual Understanding and Cooperation from the First Jewish-Hindu Leadership Summit" (text: http://www.wfn.org/2007/02/msg00073.html )The declaration primarily acknowledges the “shared values” of the two traditions, as well as “the common challenges.” The summit, the delegation hoped, will lead to "ongoing bilateral meetings on shared values and common concerns.” The declaration noted that both the religions do not seek to proselytize and “condemn all activities that go against the sanctity of this mutual respect.” The declaration further said that both religions have "gone through the painful experiences of persecution, oppression and destruction. Therefore, they realize the need to educate the present and succeeding generations about their past, in order that they will make right efforts to promote religious harmony." The summit declaration, which failed to say anything about the occupation of Palestine, expulsion of the majority of the Palestinians from their homeland and continued denial of their national, political, social and religious rights, also resolved to constitute a "Standing Committee on Hindu-Jewish Relations." The declaration was signed from the Hindu side by Swami Dayanand Saraswati, head of Dharma Acharya Sabha, who is close to the RSS. The so-called "summit" was organised by an obscure organisation called "World Council of Religious Leaders" which is headed by Bawa Jain who found it necessary to allay "apprehensions that the meeting aimed to forge an alliance against Islam and Christianity." Jain revealed the reason behind this bonhomie: "Since Jews were a powerful community in the US, their association with Hindus would help to strengthen Indo-US relations." The Israeli side, on the other hand, betrayed its aim from this strange alliance. “Several Hindu leaders expressed their dismay at Muslim violence," said Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger. "They told me that both Judaism and Hinduism were the mothers from which all other religions suckled. But sometimes the offsprings bite the breast that feeds them," he told Jerusalem Post (6 Feb.). While Rabbi David Rosen, international director of inter-religious affairs at the American Jewish Committee said that, “Although, Muslim extremism was not singled out, it was at the forefront of many participants' minds." Speaking on the occasion, Swami Dayanand Saraswati said, "Hindu-Jewish dialogue will act as a benchmark for others to follow and emulate." The Israeli Foreign Ministry Spokesman called it an "historic event.”Chief Rabbi Metzger made a touching reference to the lasting contribution made by the BJP leader LK Advani in furthering the friendship and co-operation between India and Israel. Israeli Ambassador David Danieli was also present during the dinner at Advani’s official residence while the (Jewish) Indian officer, Lt. Gen. (retd) JFR Jacob, was part of the Jewish delegation. The tainted Kanchi Shankaracharya Swami Jayendra Saraswati too was involved with the Hindu side represented by some thirty prominent Hindu leaders.The Chief Rabbi said, "It is seldom that I go to somebody's residence to participate in a reception. Our custom does not allow this. But, here, I came to Shri L.K. Advani's residence, as if I were going to my own home. It is a debt that we owe to the leader. As India's Internal Minister, he was the first Indian top official to visit Israel. He played a major and sustained role in furthering and cementing the relations between the two countries. We immensely value this gesture. Our people are greatly indebted to India." It was unfortunate that some Indian Muslim leaders and scholars chose to meet the visiting chief rabbi and that too in the house of BJP leader LK Advani during whose time, as home minister, Indo-Israeli relations were transformed into "strategic relationship" to the point of exchanging intelligence and allowing the Israeli espionage and sabotage agency, Mossad, to openly operate in India. Until the Palestinian issue is solved to the satisfaction of the victims of the Israeli aggression no normal and cordial relations are possible with Jews who for fourteen centuries found patronage and refuge in Muslim countries from European persecution, and had their "golden period" under Islam according to their own (pre-Israel) confession. They held highest positions under Muslims in Egypt, Syria and Spain. All that goodwill was squandered by their gross injustice to the people of Palestine and insistence to stay in the Middle East as the catspaw of the western imperialism.