Free Republic India Ping List
Freepmail me if you want on/off
The list and image source is on my FR homepage, and you may use it for any important India and Indo-US and other related pings.
Posted on 04/12/2005 9:27:39 AM PDT by underlying
Heed the New Hindu Mood
March 11, 2003
It is not easy to be an Indian living abroad: Not only one has to retain one's Indian-ness while coping with the West's positive and less positive aspects which creep into one's life, but one is also subjected to the humiliation of seeing one's own countrymen spit on India in mainstream foreign newspapers and television. Recently, the Gujarat riots and the IDRF episode have been used by a few Indian academics/scholars/writers, particularly in the United States, to demean India and Hindus.
Many of us are appalled by the comments people like Pankaj Mishra or Angana Chatterji, both Indians -- and Hindus at that -- make about their country in mainstream American newspapers such as The New York Times. Americans are generally very ignorant about India and ready to gobble up any rubbish they are fed. Hindus are portrayed as Nazis killing innocent Muslims in Gujarat. But this is historical nonsense.
My experience as a Westerner living in India for more than 30 years and married to an Indian is that not only does this country owe a lot to Hinduism, but Hinduism must be the most tolerant spirituality in the world, recognizing the fact that God is One, but that he manifests in many ways, under different forms, at different times. To take the Gujarat episode and make it an absolute theorem of Hindu fundamentalism is not only bad academism, but unfair and highly biased. Do they mean to say that the 30 millions Gujaratis who voted for Narendra Modi in the last election are all Nazis and Hindu fanatics?
It is true that during the Gujarat riots horrible things, which no human being should condone, happened. But Chatterji and Mishra forget to mention that that 25% of the people killed during the riots were Hindus or that, according to police records, the 157 subsequent riots which happened in Gujarat were started by Muslims.
They are unable to explain how 125,000 Hindus, many of them Dalits, tribals, or even upper middle class, came out on the streets of Ahmedabad with such anger after Godhra. While condemning their terrible acts one has to at least understand the cause of their deep-rooted rage, as Hindus throughout the ages have shown that they are patient and tolerant of others. There is also not a single mention of Hindus reaching out to Muslims after the riots such as the Hindu businessman who built 90 houses in Ahmedabad for Muslims whose homes had been destroyed.
America is fighting a war against terrorism today. India has suffered most from Muslim fundamentalism. In 1399, Taimur killed 100,000 Hindus in a single day. Professor K S Lal, in his Growth of Muslim Population in India, writes that according to his calculations, the Hindu population decreased by 80 million between the years 1000 and 1525, probably the biggest holocaust in world history. Today, Mishra and Chatterji are not without knowing that 400,000 Kashmiri Pandits are refugees in their own country, an ethnic cleansing without parallel. They must be also aware of what is happening to Hindus in Bangladesh today. I wonder why they do not mention all this in their articles.
Why is it that when for decades Saudi Arabia has funded madrassas in India some of which preach sedition, Mishra and Chatterji find nothing to say about it? Why is it that when foreign Christian organizations pour billions of dollars in India to convert innocent Harijans and tribals, teaching them to hate their culture and country, they also keep quiet? And why is it that when a few Hindu organizations, such as the IDRF, collect funds for harmless programmes like the Ekal Vidyalaya schools, which are doing a wonderful job for tribal children, they are attacked as fundamentalists?
The India Development and Relief Fund, a Maryland-based charity, has been targeted not only by Chatterji and Mishra, but also by the Federation of Indian American Christian Organisations of Northern America, Teesta and Javed Anand's Sabrang Communications for 'funding hate.' The irony is Indians have demanded a probe by the US Congress into IDRF and asked the IRS to blacklist it and withdraw its tax exemption status.
Last August in Washington I met IRDF's chief executives, Vinod and Sarala Prakash, two old, harmless, friendly people who would not hurt a fly. Their biggest achievement was to gather funds during the 1999 Orissa cyclone. It is true they are RSS affiliated and that they give first priority to Hindus afflicted by riots/cyclone/poverty. So what? We find nothing to say that Saudi Arabia only funds Muslims refugees in Bosnia, Palestine or Chechnya. Is it not time to call a spade a spade?
The specter of a 'dangerous' RSS, for example, is a creation of the British who understood, as the Muslims invaders did before them, that Hindus were the greatest hurdle to their grip on India. So their press started attacking anything Hindu or any group trying to protect Hindu culture or leaders such as the brilliant Hindu Mahasabha of Veer Savarkar who today is maligned by 'secular' Indians.
It is also time for Hindus of the world to face the truth: We are looking at the Gujarat riots only through the prism of what the Western press and the English-speaking Indian media have said -- mad 'fundamentalist' Hindus going after peace-loving Muslims. But the reality might be totally different: Are not tolerant, God fearing, peace-loving Hindus fed up of being constantly maligned, attacked, killed, their women raped, their temples sprayed with bullets and grenades?
The Western press and governments should take notice of this new popular mood of Hindus, who after all represent 1 billion people in the world, one of the most peace-loving, law-abiding, tolerant and prosperous communities of this planet -- one sixth of humanity -- and try to understand their feelings, instead of accusing them of being 'fanatics.'
Sorry about that.
You presume I haven't examined this issue just because I hold a different opinion than you?
You implied overtly that Hinduism "sanctioned" dowry practice and caste discrimination. Which couldnt be further from truth. Women were (and still are) regarded very highly in Hindu culture. And caste system is a thing of the past, atleast in urban countryside.
I know that there were some who attempted to use the bible to support legal slavery, and there were those who used the bible to show that slavery is wrong.
The caste system is intrinsic in Hinduism. However, caste discrimination isnt. If people were treated as sub-human all along, how would the system sustained itself for over 3000 years ? It took less than 300 years for slavery to collapse in US, 400 years for serfdom in Russia and even less time in China.. its hard for any discriminatory system to sustain itself, if it were extremely cruel (like the caste system you imagine).
Yep. Slavery was immoral. Doesn't change the fact that the caste system is immoral. Surely you aren't trying to say that two wrongs make a right, are you?
Ma'am, the Indian constitution itself was written by an "untouchable" (lower caste person). And he made sure that caste system in Hindu society was outlawed. Why did upper caste Hindus, who had power decided to do this if they wanted to sustain that system ?
On the contrary, such a situation wasnt possible in southern US, with its Jim Crow laws till 70s.. If you look at America's first full length motion picutre ("Birth of a nation" by D.W.Griffith), the inherent fear of a black person "ruling over them" and "making laws for them" is very self-evident.
Am sure, they could never accept a black guy writing the American constitution.. it just doesnt work that way here.
Its easier to get away in US, if you use the N-word than it is to get away by calling a lower caste person anything in India.. just for referring to their caste, you could be jailed and a bad name (as a casteist) would linger on you for a very looong time.
Please don't be so disingenous as to try to paint India with a utopian brush.
I am just citing some positive facts about Hindu culture and India.. yes, there are various negative episodes too, like dowry.. however, I merely want to impress up on you that blaming Hinduism for all social ills that India is currently afflicted with, is not correct.
Incidentally, why do you hate me so much ? did I do anything wrong to you ?
i know a bit about hinduism too. it is strange how a philosophy / religion that considers god to be present in every thing living could have invented the abhorrable practice of untouchability.
i never said anything against hinduism. all my posts are usually pro-india except when it comes to those communists - who are worse than vermin
hate..nope i dont. tone down your anti american rhetoric..that is all. have something nice to say about the country that has welcomed you and given you soo much
Anti-American ?? Why would an anti-American chose to do research here instead of Germany and Australia, both places where he gets higher scholarship than here ?
Is it because he so despises this country that he ends up contributing numerous patents and publications ?
You ignore what I posted earlier when I was praising US and her people, and merely want to brand me as whatever suits your fancy.. how fair do you think it is sir ?
Apparently, the easiest excuse for anyone around, is to call others "anti-American" and tell them to "get out of their country" when they run out of points to indulge in a meaningful discussion.
Well, I dont care about anyone.. I really want to contribute to my host society, where the majority of people are nice and welcoming.
I noticed that, and that you seem knowledgeable on the subject.
I agree about the commies. I lived in India for two years and grew to appreciate the culture and relgion. I was sad to see Soviet Life magazine everywhere (this was in the 80's). It seemed the communists were appealing to the lower castes as the proletariat, styling the Brahmins as the bourgoisie.
I guess the orthodox Hindu explanation for the castes makes sense if you believe in reincarnation. You are born to a level based on your past actions, and if you perform well you get to move up in future lives.
Without reincarnation it's a raw deal, but maybe a better deal than non-believers get in Christianity for the next life, and in Islam for this AND the next life.
that is bull crap. i dont agree with that kind of crap that passes off as religion. however if you remove caste then hinduism is a nice philosophy - like buddhism.
i think that the brahmins and some other 'upper'castes - exploited the lower castes. (and by the way from what i understand - most of the marxist liars are brahmins themselves) . but i am impressed that much of india is willing to put that in the past and move on. they have the largest affirmative action program in the world and are very tolerant of other cultures.
india is a passive country that is progressive. chip away at that evil caste system and you will have a society that can teach the world a thing or two
The caste system as originally practiced was not a carved in stone by birth system. The Bhagavad Gita explains that the varnas are characterized by work and quality, birth isn't even mentioned.
Naturally, the understanding has deteriorated.
You blather a lot for someone who is 100% ignorant of the history of India.
Perhaps you misunderstood my intent. The examples I gave regarding burning women to death because their dowerys were not big enough were to refute the idea that Hinduism is a utopia of peacefulness. Clearly, it's not. And as to the caste system, you admit in your post that it is intrinsic in Hinduism.
"And caste system is a thing of the past, atleast in urban countryside."
Yes, India has become modernized. I am glad to see that you finally admit the caste system was in effect in India in the past (which is what I have been saying).
"The caste system is intrinsic in Hinduism. However, caste discrimination isnt."
Seemed to take a long time for the adherents of Hinduism to figure that out.
"Why did upper caste Hindus, who had power decided to do this if they wanted to sustain that system ?"
Why should they care if some lower caste person writes something when they know no one will pay attention to it? That would be like a slave owner caring what a slave wrote in the early days of America.
"On the contrary, such a situation wasnt possible in southern US, with its Jim Crow laws till 70s"
Keep in mind, India is a much older country than the U.S. They've had longer to deal with such issues. Given the length of time each nation has existed, I'd say India isn't keeping pace with the U.S. in improving efforts to wipe out discrimination.
" just for referring to their caste, you could be jailed"
In America, we have this thing called freedom of speech. I guess we are ahead of India there.
"blaming Hinduism for all social ills that India is currently afflicted with, is not correct."
I wouldn't say Hinduism is to blame for all the social ills in India. My entire point has been that to imply that Hinduism is the model of peace is erroneous.
that is bull crap. i dont agree with that kind of crap that passes off as religion. however if you remove caste then hinduism is a nice philosophy - like buddhism.
You may not agree with the philosophy of castes, but I think that good Hindus have traditionally considered the system to be humane and just. They've believed that people are happiest doing the work for which they are most suited and associating with the people who are most like themselves. They haven't condoned abuse.
I'm not a Hindu, but I respect the ideals, if the not the way they're sometimes imlemented. To me, evolving through different lives to higher and higher castes is not any weirder than a lot of the doctrines of other religions.
anyways the upper castes are reaping their bad karma - the lower castes in india have political power now and affirmative action for the past 60 years has made the scheming brahmins weak. hinduism minus caste is a good religion. the argument is moot - because in urban india - casteism or caste are treated with contempt and as a sign of being uncouth.
To me, evolving through different lives to higher and higher castes is not any weirder than a lot of the doctrines of other religions.
if you seriously believe in that - then i can only pity you. that is bulllllll crapppp. all men are born free and equal.
Caste system is NOT equal to caste discrimination. Hope you understand what I'm trying to say here.
Seemed to take a long time for the adherents of Hinduism to figure that out.
You just dont get it... caste system NEVER implied caste discrimination. Forget it, you will never understand.
Why should they care if some lower caste person writes something when they know no one will pay attention to it? That would be like a slave owner caring what a slave wrote in the early days of America.
How old are you ? 12/13 ? That was no small work.. it was the constitution of the country, kid.
The correct analogy would be if Americans had allowed Booker T. Washington and Sir Frederick Douglas to draft their constitution instead of Jefferson and Hancock.
I dont want to read the rest of your post. You are apparently some little girl who is trying to have some fun on Freep, not a serious discussioner.
if you seriously believe in that - then i can only pity you. that is bulllllll crapppp. all men are born free and equal.
I didn't say I believed it, but I think it's as logical or more then virgin birth, ritual circumcision, or ancestor worship, just to pick three examples from three major religions off the top of my head.
My point was, the orthodox Hindu concept of caste was not the same as slavery and sincere proponents of it were acting in good faith, not bad, whether you agree with them or not.
In any case, since you invoked the "bull cr**" argument twice, I guess the discussion is over.
if you seriously believe in that - then i can only pity you. that is bulllllll crapppp. all men are born free and equal.
I didn't say I believed it, but I think it's as logical or more then virgin birth, ritual circumcision, or ancestor worship, just to pick three examples from three major religions off the top of my head.
My point was, the orthodox Hindu concept of caste was not the same as slavery and sincere proponents of it were acting in good faith, not bad, whether you agree with them or not.
In any case, since you invoked the "bull cr**" argument twice, I guess the discussion is over.
how can anyone agree to untouchability. i am sorry my values are different than that. i think that most indians disagree with the caste system too. except the older hindus or the orthodox brahmins (who are racist bigots). it is against humanity to judge a person by birth. maybe casteism didnt lead to massacres like islam did. but that doesnt take away from the fact that it deprived millions of hindus basic human rights
And as I said, if that is the case, it took awhile for Hindus to figure that one out.
"How old are you ? 12/13 ? That was no small work.. it was the constitution of the country, kid."
Who said it was a 'small work'. I merely said it obviously wasn't adhered to until fairly recently. How old are you to resort to such personal attacks? Not exactly a good representation for Hinduism.
I don't tolerate personal attacks from anyone. Our conversation is over.
And as I said, if that is the case, it took awhile for Hindus to figure that one out.
"How old are you ? 12/13 ? That was no small work.. it was the constitution of the country, kid."
Who said it was a 'small work'. I merely said it obviously wasn't adhered to until fairly recently. How old are you to resort to such personal attacks? Not exactly a good representation for Hinduism.
I don't tolerate personal attacks from anyone. Our conversation is over.
Wow, some thread. Seems like quite a few folks need to chill a bit. Why don't you interject Sikhism in it, just for the fun of it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.