Posted in Politics, Social Issues

कुएं के मेंढक

कुछ दिन पहले मैं अपने एक दोस्त से बात कर रहा था जो यूरोप आने से पहले जिंदगी भर देहली में रहा और पला बढ़ा। उसने मुझसे यह सवाल पूछा कि लंदन और डबलिन जाने से पहले तुम हिंदुस्तान में कहां कहां रहे थे। तो मैंने उसको सब बताया के कैसे मेरे वालिद साहब बीएसएफ में थे और मैं हिंदुस्तान के हर कोने में रहा और पला बढ़ा हूं। फिर उसने पूछा कि तुम्हें नॉर्थ इंडिया खासतौर पर देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश कैसा लगता है, मेरा जवाब था कि मैंने पूरी दुनिया में देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश से बुरी जगह नहीं देखी। देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश मैं कुछ भी नहीं है और लोग सब से बदतर हैं। बाकी दुनिया तो छोड़िए हिंदुस्तान में ऐसी कोई जगह नहीं है जो देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश से बदतर है, हर जगह के लोग देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश के लोगों से बहुत बेहतर हैं। मेरे दोस्त ने कहा कि मुझे भी यही एहसास होता है क्योंकि मैं जिंदगी भर दिल्ली और हरियाणा में रहा और बाहर की दुनिया नहीं देखी थी तो मुझे अपना कुआं ही ठीक लगता था और आज मुझसे कहा जाए कि मैं जाकर वहां दोबारा बस जाऊँ तो मैं नहीं बस सकता।

इस बात में कोई दो राय नहीं कि कुएं का मेंढक सिर्फ अपने कुंए का ही हाल जानता है जो लोग उत्तर प्रदेश और देहली से बाहर जाकर नहीं रहे उनको मालूम नहीं कि दुनिया कहां पर है और उनके क्या हालात है…. यह मैं इसलिए कह रहा हूं के कुछ दिन पहले मैं इलेक्शन का प्रोग्राम देख रहा था उसमें लखनऊ में कुछ वकील बहस कर रहे थे यहां खूब तरक्की हो रही है, खूब विकास हो रहा है, सब ठीक है। यह सारे वकील कुएं के मेंढक हैं, इन्होंने अपने कुएं से बाहर की दुनिया नहीं देखी। इतनी घटिया जगह है लखनऊ कि वहां पर कोई अच्छा शरीफ इंसान रह नहीं सकता जो कुएं के मेंढक वहां रहते हैं उन्हें वही ठीक लगता है। शायद उन्हें सारी दुनिया ऐसी ही लगती होगी। लेकिन सारी दुनिया ऐसी नहीं है दुनिया की सबसे घटिया जगहों में देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश हैं। दुनिया के सबसे झूठे बेईमान मक्कार खु़दग़र्ज नफ़रती और घटिया लोग रहते हैं लखनऊ, देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश में। इन कुएं के मेंढ़कों को नहीं मालूम कि बाकी दुनिया में लोग सच बोलते हैं, एक दूसरे पर भरोसा कर सकते हैं, औरतें और बच्चियां रात में बाहर अकेली आ-जा सकती हैं, हर आदमी दूसरे आदमी की काट में नहीं लगा….

और जहां तक विकास या तरक्की की बात है तो आज सुबह में लंदन से डबलिन गया और हवाई अड्डा तो छोड़िए खाली ट्रेन और बस का हाल देख लीजिए। नीचे जो तस्वीरें हैं उसमें हमारे ट्रेन के डब्बे में लिखा आता है के कहां-कहां बैठने की जगह ट्रेन में खाली है और कौन-कौन से टॉयलेट ऑक्यूपाइड है। बसों में हर जगह हर सीट पर यूएसबी चार्जर हैं कि आपके फोन में बैटरी खत्म हो जाए तो आप अपना फोन रिचार्ज कर सकें। नीचे एक और तस्वीर है, एक बुक्शेल्फ की। यह गैटविक एयरपोर्ट के ट्रेन स्टेशन की है इस बुक्शेल्फ पर किताबें रखी हैं और लिखा है कि आपको जो खरीदनी हो आप वह ले लीजिए और एक पाउंड चंदे के डब्बे में डाल दीजिए। बिल्कुल इसी तरह डबलिन एयरपोर्ट पर एक जगह हज़ार दो हज़ार पानी की बोतलें रखी रहती है हर जगह लिखा हुआ है कि 1 बोतल 1 यूरो की है। आप वहां से एक बोतल उठाइए और एक यूरो वहां डब्बे में डाल दीजिए। दोनों जगह कोई दुकानदार नहीं, कोई लेने देने वाला नहीं, कोई रखवाल नहीं, सिर्फ लोगों की इमानदारी के भरोसे पर सामान बिक रहा है और सालों से बिक रहा है। क्या ऐसा कभी भी दिल्ली लखनऊ या उत्तर प्रदेश में हो सकता है? नहीं, कभी नहीं

और जहां तक विकास या तरक्की की बात है तो आज सुबह में लंदन से डबलिन गया और हवाई अड्डा तो छोड़िए खाली ट्रेन और बस का हाल देख लीजिए। नीचे जो तस्वीरें हैं उसमें हमारे ट्रेन के डब्बे में लिखा आता है के कहां-कहां बैठने की जगह ट्रेन में खाली है और कौन-कौन से टॉयलेट ऑक्यूपाइड है। बसों में हर जगह हर सीट पर यूएसबी चार्जर हैं कि आपके फोन में बैटरी खत्म हो जाए तो आप अपना फोन रिचार्ज कर सकें। नीचे एक और तस्वीर है, एक बुक्शेल्फ की। यह गैटविक एयरपोर्ट के ट्रेन स्टेशन की है इस बुक्शेल्फ पर किताबें रखी हैं और लिखा है कि आपको जो खरीदनी हो आप वह ले लीजिए और एक पाउंड चंदे के डब्बे में डाल दीजिए। बिल्कुल इसी तरह डबलिन एयरपोर्ट पर एक जगह हज़ार दो हज़ार पानी की बोतलें रखी रहती है हर जगह लिखा हुआ है कि 1 बोतल 1 यूरो की है। आप वहां से एक बोतल उठाइए और एक यूरो वहां डब्बे में डाल दीजिए। दोनों जगह कोई दुकानदार नहीं, कोई लेने देने वाला नहीं, कोई रखवाल नहीं, सिर्फ लोगों की इमानदारी के भरोसे पर सामान बिक रहा है और सालों से बिक रहा है। क्या ऐसा कभी भी देहली लखनऊ या उत्तर प्रदेश में हो सकता है? नहीं, कभी नहीं, और देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश वालों के चलते पूरे हिंदुस्तान में भी नहीं हो सकता। लेकिन लखनऊ में बैठे यह झूठे, मक्कार, कुएं के मेंढक वकील सिर्फ अपना कुआं जानते हैं और बाकी पूरी दुनिया से अनजान हैं। उन्हें यह तक नहीं मालूम कि वह दुनिया की सबसे घटिया जगह में रहते हैं और मैं जितनी बार उत्तर प्रदेश या देहली आता हूं तो मुझे तब्दीली नजर नहीं आती। बल्कि इंसान के इख़लाक़ की तरफ से देखा जाए तो हालात और ख़राब हो रहे हैं। वही घटिया लोग और बदतर हो गए हैं, उनके वही घटिया ख़्याल और बदतर हो गए हैं और उनका वही घटिया प्रदेश और बदतर हो गया है।

मुझे सबसे ज्यादा गुस्सा और हंसी इस बात पर आई के यह झूठे बेईमान मक्कार वकील कह रहे थे कि कोविड-19 हुआ वह पूरी दुनिया में हुआ और ब्रिटेन यूएसए और फ्रांस तक में यही हाल था। लेकिन यह कुएं के मेंढक नहीं जानते के ब्रिटेन यूएसए या फ्रांस में एक भी आदमी ऑक्सीजन की कमी से नहीं मारा, जितने मरे इसलिए मरे क्योंकि कोविड-19 का कोई इलाज नहीं था। देहली और उत्तर प्रदेश में ज्यादातर लोग इसलिए मरे क्योंकि ऑक्सीजन नहीं थी, बेड नहीं थे, बेसिक इन्फ्राट्रक्चर नहीं था। लंदन तो दूर की बात है बम्बई में भी महाराष्ट्र सरकार ने कई हज़ार बेड का कोविड-19 टेंपरेरी हॉस्पिटल बनाया था।

आखिर में एक बात मैं साफ कर देना चाहता हूं, ज़ाहिर है के दिल्ली और उत्तर प्रदेश में हर शक़्स बुरा नहीं है लेकिन लोगों की अक्सरीयत बुरी ही है।

Posted in Politics, Social Issues

Muslim Appeasement

Among the hundreds of lies of Hindutavavaadis, this is among their favourite and oft repeated lies. The implication of this is to tell Hindutavavaadi’s Hindu Audience that they are somehow inferior citizens in eyes of Indian Government thus fueling hatred against Muslims and dissatisfaction against whoever is the ruling party in Delhi, calling them Anti-Hindu. But as most of the things RSSwalas say, this too is also a lie.

Institutions of Indian State are Institutionally Anti-Muslim and these institutions work very hard to keep Muslims marginalised and at bay of education, power or wealth. Trying to prove this here is going to make a blog into book, so book lovers should read Aakar Patel’s Our Hindu Rashtra: What it is. How We Got Here, the book proves it without doubt that India is Anti Muslim, including its judiciary which is biased and bigoted like the rest of Institutions. There is no appeasement happening, Indian Institutions work very hard to push and keep Muslims in illiteracy and poverty.

Anyone who cares to love India, must love its citizens as well, and Muslims are Indian citizens. If India needs to be become wealthy and influential it can not be done with Muslims left behind. And lies like Muslim Appeasement is detrimental to aims of making India wealthy and influential. All figures here are from Sachar Committee Report.

Urban Poverty
Muslims are among most poor socio-economic group. Urban Muslims are even behind Scheduled Castes, after thousands of years of oppression of SCs they have still done better than Muslims. Following are the percentages of people living below poverty line
Hindus General Category: 8.3%
Hindus SC-ST: 36.4%
Hindus OBC: 25.1%
Total Hindus (Below Poverty Line): 20.4%
Minorities Except Muslims: 12.2%
Muslims: 38.4%
If Muslims are being appeased and they are still the poorest socio-economic group than Muslims do not want any such appeasement.

Rural Poverty
Again Muslims are among the poorest Indians
Hindu General – 9%
SC/ST – 34.8%
Hindu OBCs – 19.5%
Total Hindus (Below Poverty Line): 22.6%
Other Minorities: 14.3%
Muslims: 26.9%
If Muslims are being appeased and they are still the poorest socio economic group than Muslims do not want any such appeasement.

Literacy
This is main reason most people will site for Muslim backwardness, saying that Muslims go for traditional education in Madarssas where teaching is sub par. But that is not the truth in quality or Quantity. Quantitywise, only 3% of the Muslim children go to Madarssas. And they go to Madarssas because they come from abject poverty. They get three meals a day in Madarssas. Those who go to Madarssas are poor kids, their fate is sealed even before they step in Madarssas, and after Madarssa they do not have enough resources for higher education. Those who belong to the cream of Muslim societies, when they go to Madarssas they become something coming out of it. My family comes from the cream of Muslim society but in two generations of my family only one uncle and two cousins went to Madarssa, my uncle became an MRCP Doctor and is so qualified that when he went to settle in Australia, Australians exempted him from giving the bridging exams that all Doctors from India have to give to practice medicine in Australia. One of the cousin who went to Madarssa is now an Director of Banks in Dubai while the other is an Islamic scholar whose videos keep going viral.

Next the common problem is accessibility of education, only half of the Muslim dominated villages in India have a school in the village, the average in country is eighty percent. Is this what you call appeasement? Rest of the stats of Muslims in education are just as poor. Keep in mind when reading the table below that Muslims made 13.7% of population when Justice Sachhar was doing his research

HindusMuslimsOthers
Literacy63.5%57.2%67.5% (Sikhs)
Graduates6.0%2.8%6.4% (Sikhs)
Studying Bachelors Degree in IIT1.7%
Studying Medicine4.0%
In IIM1.4%
In Premiere Art Colleges4%
In Premiere Commerce Colleges4%
In Premiere Science Colleges3%

Employment
This is where we will pick up institutional discrimination against Muslims in India. Number of Muslims who sit for Civil Services (IFS/IAS/IPS) is 5%, i.e. of everyone who sits in the exam 5% are Muslims, and when the system is automated Muslim representation does not fall below 5%, hence at the last stage of recruitment i.e. interview, all those who go for interview 5% are Muslims. But when the list for successful applicants issued, Muslims make only 2.5% of the people. How come when the system is automatic Muslims keep to their percentages and when they are interviewed their success rate falls by 50%. If this fall is appeasement, please stop appeasing Muslims.

Muslim Population when these figures were taken 13.7%Muslim Representation
Sessions Judge And Above3%
IAS3%
IPS4%
IFS2%
Railways3%
Posts4%
Public Sector Banks2%
Universities4%
Public Sector Undertakings2%
Civil Services in States (with avg. 16% Muslim Pop.)3%

Most Muslims are not in jobs but self employment, manufacturing or trade is because often they have no option. Most jobs are controlled by people who hate Muslims so I do not understand why these people will ever do anything for Muslims. There is no appeasement happening here, if there was appeasement Muslims would be at least similar to their population.

How Reservations is Used to Marginalise Muslims further
Although I am the biggest supporter of reservation for persecuted groups. But in India this system is being abused as a tool to suppress Muslims representation in Parliament and Legislative Assemblies, for example  in West Bengal assembly Nabagram and Khargram are Muslims majority Assembly Constituencies they have half the number of SC/ST than Muslims (ie. Muslims are over 50% and SC ST are around 25%), but these seats are reserved for SC/ ST, while Kashipur and Alipurduar are General Category constituencies while SC/ST population in these is well over 50% and Muslim population is around 5%…. How is that appeasement? Karimganj in Assam is another Lok Sabha constituency which has Muslim majority but is reserved for SC/ST.

How Justice system persecutes Muslims
Justice system in India is the worst. Everyone praises Jai Bhim, and it is indeed very good film and highlights the discrimination against SC/ST. But let us look at Prison statistics as well, the 2015 prison statistics report that in West Bengali 85% of all detenues are Muslims (Muslims are only 27% in WB) which means they have not being booked or charged with anything and are being held up on spurious charges or no reason at all. Typical Jai Bhim happening with Muslims to an extent that 85% detenues are Muslims. Please supporters of Appeasement argument explain me how are so many Muslims kept as detenues.

Who is really being Appeased?
Hindus and everyone else except Muslims. This table tells how many followers of each religion are in what category of Reservation class, for example, only 26% of Hindus are in General Category, 22% of Hindus are in SC Category, 9% of Hindus are in ST Category while 43% of Hindus are in OBC Category.

GenSCSTOBC
Hindus26%22%9%43%
Muslims60%1%0%39%
Christians33%9%32%25%
Sikhs46%31%1%22%
Jains94%0%3%3%
Buddhists3%90%7%0%

It is Hindus and everyone else who is being appeased, everyone except Muslims. Only 25% of Hindus fall in General Category, 36% of Sikhs are in General Category, 34% Christians are in General Category and only 3% Buddhists are in General Category…. on the other hand 60% Muslims are in General Category. Muslims, the most socially, educationally and financially poor section of the society have the least reservation, and people are saying that Muslims are being appeased. Appeased with what?

Sachar Committee Conclusion
Exact words of Sachar Committee in conclusion, “In almost all aspects of community development, Muslims lag behind and show lack of progress. The condition of Muslims is marginally better than SC / STs. But Muslims lag behind Hindu OBCs, Other Minorities and Hindu Generals (mostly upper caste) in almost every measured signal. The committee suggested that the condition of Muslims is so bad that all Muslims should be put in OBCs. The situation is grim in states with large Muslim populations, especially in the states of West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Assam.”

There is hardly a single privilege or facility that Muslims exclusively enjoy in India. Indeed Indian Institutions from Parliament to Supreme Court, all of them work towards marginalising Muslims and making sure that they stay poor and uneducated. Muslim Appeasement is a complete and utter lie.

Posted in Social Issues

End of a Friendship

The way I thought I would tackle this piece was the way I thought this conversation would go along and how it actually went. But, before we do that, I need to explain how close I was to this particular friend, everyone in my family knows his name, even extended family, so he was a very dear friend, one I cared and worried about. To sum it up we shared a room while we were in college, and those who have shared room in college with their class fellow know how close these friendships are. Ever since Modi got elected, we were having these hot and cold runs because of our divided opinion on Modi as he is Bhakt. I had stopped replying to his calls and messages after a few fiery WhatsApp messages around Kashmir and leadership of Modi. But I didn’t call him as I thought that a hot head like me, should take some time to cool down before calling his friends. So I callled him when I thought I had cooled down… His words are italicised… and a disclaimer in the end… this happened a while back and I don’t have exact recollection of the call to the extent that I might have mixed content of two calls, but however the build up to the end of call, I remember exactly how the call ended.

This is how I thought the call would go like

Hi Ali.
Hi Friend.
So you finally called.
Yes, my friend. You have been asking me to call you to discuss.
Why do you oppose Modi in everything he does in Kashmir
Because he does everything wrong in Kashmir. With this he is not going to win hearts and mind. His policy on Kashmir is directed towards his Hard Right Hindutva Voter Base in Hindi Heartland rather than Kashmir. And that is why all his policies are wrong.
Why? What do you know about Kashmir?
I grew up in Kashmir, I know many Kashmiri Muslims, I used to share a room with a Kashmiri guy in Bombay. Kashmiris open to me quickly and frankly than they will ever open to you.
…. So on and so forth, I thought he would ask a question calmly and I would reply kindly. After all the reason I didn’t call him right after our angry exchanges was to keep our tempers from getting out of control….

But….this is how it actually went….

Hi Ali. (in somewhat drunk voice)
Hi Friend. Let me call later, looks like you are drunk.
No, its fine, I am okay. So you finally called.
Yes, my friend. You have been asking me to call you to discuss.
Why do you bring my grandfather in middle of this? [His Grandfather was a migrant from Pakistani Punjab side, but he was a great man and didn’t garner hatred towards Muslims, knowing that background and what my friend was doing, saying and posting (primarily Anti Muslims propaganda from Hindutva brigade), I had remarked that he is a disappointment to his grandfather.]
I have never ever said anything against your grandfather, I have always praised him.
You think he is a great guy because he didn’t hate Muslims.
I think he is a great guy in spite of what happened to him through hands of some Muslims. And you are a disappointment to him, because you are doing something he would have hated. Whenever you meet him, he is going to tell you that you are a disappointment. (I think he knew that this was the truth, and his grandfather would have never approved of his hatred and bigoted thinking. The pain that he felt in being a disappointment to his grandfather made him loose his temper and the conversation just went down the drain from there).
Moving on…… you guys want to kill us through COVID now? (during these days Tablighi Jamat was the flavour of hate in India, lots of unkind exchanges that resulted me in saying)
You are chutiya to believe that this is a conspiracy. (Chutiya was probably not right to say. Usually he would have passed it off as well. In my college I was known for having more gaalis in my vocabulary/sentences than words, and whenever I meet guys from college this vocabulary comes back)
Do you support CAA?
CAA along with NRC, No. Do you understand the chronology (famous Amit Shah chronology statement)
But CAA is different from NRC… you just an Anti National
I understand perfectly what combination of CAA-NRC does, you don’t understand the chronology.
No I don’t agree (This was again followed by unkind exchanges with tempers really high, and to end the argument I said)
Tu Chutiya hai aur main Chutiyon ko nahin samjha sakta.
He insisted on an answer that I was refusing to give because not only it was not a genuine question, but also because I had already said everything I had to say on the matter.
Nahin, main nahin samjha sakta, kyunki tu chutiya hai
And you are a bloody Talibani terrorist.
With that we ended our call and friendship….

In conclusion

I miss my friend and this is one more more reason to hate Modi.
Even if I were to accept that I started it by calling him Chutiya, I was in major gaali league during college and he has heard far worse from my mouth and I have heard far worse from his. Also, Chutiya was coming from a point he individually was coming from but terrorist came solely from my religious affiliation and not something I had done. Hence I have never called him back, and he has never called me.

Posted in Social Issues

How YouTube tracked me in this one instance

This might not sound sinister but it is. Some time ago Brexit came back into news as negotiations restarted and also started getting sour and I started watching more Brexit news. Being an Anti Brexit guy YouTube always suggests Anti Brexit views to me. So, one day some Anti-Brexit news came up on The Sun’s YouTube channel which was flagged to me. Those who do not know UK Press, The Sun is Tabloid with a naked girl on Page Two and an Anti EU stance. The only reason it was flagged to me because it was news about someone making a statement that Brexit is an act of self harm.

After that YouTube knew that I could be interested in Brexit News from The Sun, i.e. I was flagged with several Pro Brexit videos from The Sun and two or three Pro Brexit YouTube Vloggers. After watching a couple of more News Videos on Brexit from The Sun. YouTube became more agressive to see these Vloggers, so I watched a couple of them but they sounded far more idiotic with every video I watched. In the end, I would watch hardly a few seconds of the Vloggers video and then switch to something else.

YouTube understood that I do not like these guys and my “engagement time” with these videos was very little. So it stopped flagging these Vlogger and started flagging other Pro Brexit Vloggers, but I was done with ProBrexit stupidity and its Vloggers. So I stopped watching them, and Voila! No Pro-Brexit videos after few days, back to feeding me what I like, news from BBC, The Guardian, NDTV, HW, The Wire, Quint… etc.

Point being that I am fed up with the way my data is collected. Google, Facebook, Instagram and every company that gathers my data must be taxed on how much data they collect for me. That is the only way these guys are going to collect less and less data about me.

Posted in Nationalism, Politics, Social Issues

The First Forty Times Muslims are mentioned in A Bunch of Thoughts by M.S. Golwalkar

A Bunch of thoughts by M.S. Golwalkar is a text book for RSS, they read and cherish it more than any other book on the planet. But, it is vile book that spews hatred against Muslims and Christians without end. Its bigoted author Golwalkar was the head of fanatic Right Wing Hindu Nationalist Organisation called Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS). Out of some 310 times he mentions or talks about Muslims, I examine the first forty time the work mentions Muslims. And, whenever Golwalkar mentions Muslims, I feel it is either an insult or maligns Muslims and often Christians as well.

“The failure of Indian history to assimilate the Muslims into the national society, as it had succeeded in assimilating the earlier invaders”… Mentioned in Introduction

So, are Muslims Indians/Invaders? Next, everyone can see that Muslims are well integrated in Indian Society, for God’s sake even Obama saw it, but not to Golwalkar. For Golwalkar Muslims will integrate in the ‘national society’ once they start donning tilak and chanting bhajans. Only after Muslims cease to be Muslims and become Hindus will he accept that Muslims have assimilated in India.

“They committed the blunder that by giving concessions to Muslims at the cost of the majority, they could win them over!” … Introduction

What concessions were given to Muslims? SC/ST were given concessions and they have come long way from where they were during independence. RSS was completely opposed to establishment of Sachar Committee because it could bring out the truth in terms of how backward and disadvantaged Muslims of India were. And the report confirmed that Muslims were far behind general public and in certain parameters they have fallen behind even SC/ST.

“The Muslims, Christians and Jews etc., have perfect upasana swatantrya, freedom of worship so long as they do not seek to destroy or undermine the faith and symbolism of the national society.” … Introduction

This essentially shows the mindset of Golwalkar. He thinks RSS is the master of India and will dictate what needs to be done. Also, note that he says that National Society of India excludes Muslims, Christians and Jews

“The national history of the Muslim period should be re-written giving the truth without varnish and all should appreciate the best values exemplified by the heroes of authentic history.” … Introduction

Absolutely we need to stress that Jama Masjid is Yamuna Mandir and Taj Mahal is Tejo Mahalaya. Or should we talk about the fake letter that Shivaji wrote that appears as an appendix of his other book ‘We and our Nationhood defined’.

“The use of the word dharma does not preclude the inclusion of different sects and religious fellowships who may use different words for the same meanings – like the Muslim and Christian.” … Introduction

The Hypocrisy is now evident till now Muslims and Christians were not part of National Society but suddenly they are…. This is how RSS deceives and lies.

“They bear Hindu names. We find so many Hindu faces all over there, proud of their Hindu heritage, even though many of them are now Muslims by religion.”… The World Mission

Just some time ago Muslims were ‘outside invaders’ and outside ‘national society’ now suddenly they are being branded of ‘Hindu heritage’ and are being asked to have Hindu names. Can Golwalkar please clarify the confusion?

The next 7 places where Muslims are mentioned, they are mentioned in a reference point of way or as part of Muslim League.

“Countries after countries lost their soul to Islam and became Muslim countries for ever in this fashion.”… Vision of Our Work

This is mentioned as a long part of narration as to how religions in other nations collapsed because of defeat of king by adharmic barbarians, and since king was the keeper of the religion, the religion disappeared as well. Thus according to Golwalkar, Islam became dominant religion. However he forgets that Muslims ruled several parts of Europe from few centuries (like Greece, Romania, Serbia etc.) to a thousand years (Spain), however most of these countries did remain primarily Non-Muslim, so no credit to ‘national society’ for that. While looking at Indonesia, who had the ‘national society’ became Muslim country without King loosing any battles. Such prejudices and too simplistic way of thinking marks the whole life of Golwalkar. His understanding of complex issues is simplified into one or two examples that are barely one percent of the complicated worl we live in.

“Even during the days of Muslim domination great saints and sanyasins rose to continue that tradition. All those stalwarts – Chaitanya, Tulsidas, Surdas, Jnaneshwar, Ramananda, Tukaram, Ramanuja, Madhwa, Nanak and a host of such others – flooded the land from one end to the other with religious devotion.” … Vision of Our Work

He continues from the above paragraph and says that Buddhism died in India, because it did not have sages to revive it, completely ignorant of the fact that Buddhism lost patronage in India because Buddhist Kings lost wars making Buddhism became an orphaned religion, with no money and no centres of learning. He then talks about how ‘our dharma’ survived this. But the hard question for him to answer is that if these people were allowed to propagate ‘our dharma’ and they were doing it openly, how bad could the Muslim rule be, where people are freely allowed to propagate their religion and win followers from among even Muslims. For example, Nanak’s permanent companion was Bhai Mardana, a Muslim usually referred as ‘The First Sikh’.

“He (ie Britishers) carried on an insidious propaganda that we were never one nation, that we were never the children of the soil, but mere upstarts having no better claims than the foreign hordes of the Muslims or the British over this country.” … Vision of Our Work

What! After making Muslims Indians and appealing them to have Hindu names, we are back to “foreign hordes of Muslims”. How many flips like this should we expect Mr. Golwalkar? Also, please note that here Muslims are again disenfranchised from having an inferior claim of being Indians.

“Would they not have risen uncompromisingly, heroically as one man against all such machinations of the British and the Muslim, prepared to shed their last drop of blood for maintaining the scared integrity of the motherland?”… Our Motherland

Talking about Partition, he talks about our motherland (our being defined as those devoted to scriptures like Puranas, for the rest the motherland isn’t theirs, specially Muslims). If integrity of motherland was that important, why did every Hindu Mahasabha/RSS leaning leader submitted to partition so easily. The easy answer is that they knew if this big chunk of Muslims remained in India, there would never be a Hindu Rashtra with close to 60% Hindus in India, but if Hindus made close to 90% of India, that is a different story. That is why Right Wing leaning politicians like Patel, did not even want J&K, he had said it is a Muslim majority state and must go to Pakistan. It is well documented that he was ready to give up claim for J&K for Hyderabad.

“There are some others who justify Partition saying, “After all, Hindus and Muslims are brothers. Partition is just a brotherly division of their property.” But have we never heard of children cutting up their mother saying that she is their common property?” … Our Motherland

The man’s obsession to treat India as an actual physical being is sickening. If he wanted India not to be divided so much, why did he not come out in favour of Cabinet Mission Plan. Can he produce any shred of evidence that he or RSS supported Cabinet Mission Plan to keep India united.

“Was not the whole of our country, until recently, under the foreign domination of the British? Before that, was not part of our country under Muslim domination for centuries?” … Our Motherland

As if Muslims are not Indians and are like British, who came ruled and took its riches to Britain, never to come back. Muslims again are being treated as ‘the other’ and not Indian, but are still expected to Hindu names. Mohan Bhagwat is a perfect hypocrite, he understands all this but chooses not to tell this from the podium when he wants to improve image of his organisation.

“If, today, we say that what we have lost to the aggressors, whether they be the Muslims or Chinese, is not ours but belongs to them by right, then it only means that we have lost the will to fight, that we have forsaken our manliness to the extent that we have begun to glorify our defeats and humiliations.” … Our Motherland

This is again goes on to say that Pakistan’s creation was an act of Muslim aggression, while it was an act of a population first asking for its fair representation in politics and law making. After that was denied, came the demand for Pakistan and the way to save it, The Cabinet Mission Plan. Neither RSS nor Hindu Mahasabha came out in favour of Cabinet Mission Plan to save India from being partitioned. These crocodile tears they shed today must not mislead anyone, they wanted partition to happen, it is hard to make India a Hindu Rashtra if 33% of population is Muslims, but if Muslims are reduced to 9.7% we are talking business.

“It (Bhartiya) is commonly used as a translation of the word ‘Indian’ which includes all the various other communities like the Muslim, Christian, Parsi, etc., residing in this land. So, the word ‘Bhartiya’ too is likely to mislead us when we want to denote our particular society. The word ‘Hindu’ alone connotes correctly and completely the meaning which we want to convey.”… Children of Motherland

This is from the chapter ‘Children of Motherland’. Golwalkar says that children of motherland are Hindus, and he explains that Hindus is correct and Bhartiya is wrong because the word Bhartiya includes other communities like Muslim, Christian, Parsis. The fact is however much Bhagwat shouts from the podium, in his heart is Golwalkar and Golwalkar’s rejection of Muslims, Christians and other communities.

“Some of the Sikhs, Jains, Lingayats and Aryasamajists declare that they are separate from Hindus. Some prominent Sikh leaders are demanding and agitating for a separate sectarian Sikh State – though under the grab of a linguistic State, the Punjabi Suba. And strengthen their demand some of them have stooped to justify the creation of a separate State for Muslims, i.e., Pakistan.” … Children of Motherland

This is the root cause of why RSS opposes Lingayats demand for being classified as a different religion than Hinduism. Coming to Sikhs, he wants Sikhs to call themselves Hindu, but then says that these Sikhs want a separate state like Muslims. The fact is that Sikhism is not Hinduism, and Sikhs are not Hindus, just like Lingayats.

“They find that for being anti-Hindu, the Muslims got an independent State of their own.” … Children of Motherland

This is where today’s propaganda of ‘Hindu Khatre mein hai’ comes from. It started here as ‘Government of India, ie Congress Government is anti-Hindu’, and anyone other than Hindus get favours from the government. Completely ignoring the fact the SC/ST are Hindus and have got most favours from the government. Muslims on the other hand are worse off in certain parameters than SC/ST. And it is this RSS and its political stooge the BJP that objected to even formation of Sachar Commission to find out the political, economic and social conditions of Muslims of India. If anything, except for the Nehru Government, every single government of India has treated Muslims as second class citizens, because of organisations like RSS, because if anyone wants to do anything for Muslims to bring them to normal standards, they shout appeasement and Anti-Hindu.

The next 6 times the word Muslim comes is in terms of Golwalkar’s defence that the Caste System is not root of Hindu loss of power. He puts responsibility on people like Jayachand and Man Singh who drove their own away for sake of foreign hordes.

This is another classic show of his mentality, where Muslims are always portrayed as foreign aggressors, even if they were born in India, lived all their life in India and died in India. To Golwalkar such people will always be foreigners. Even those who became Muslim became foreigners by association. For example, both Ghori and Ghazni are in ‘India’ as defined by even RSS, but Mahmud of Ghazni and Mohammed of Ghori are foreigners because they accepted Islam. This is his mentality, full of contradictions because of his hatred of Muslims.

“Some wise men of today tell us that no man is born as Hindu or Muslim or Christian but as a simple human being. This may be true of others. But for a Hindu …. About the others, they are born to this world as simple unnamed human beings and later on, either circumcised or baptised, they become Muslims or Christians.” … Children of Motherland

Can’t say about Christianity, but certainly circumcision is not the criteria for being a Muslim. One can be perfectly good Muslim even if he is not circumcised. This is the level of ignorance Golwalkar had about Islam. And diddly squid is what his followers know about Islam.

“The famous instance of Shivaji who sent back honourably and laden with presents the beautiful daughter-in-law of the Muslim Subhedar of Kalyan captured in war (though it appears exceptional in the eyes of the foreign, especially Muslim, historians) is a very ordinary instance symbolic of the sublime culture of this land.”… For a Virile National Life

Maligning Muslims with false propaganda, saying that it is common for Muslims to rape every woman of the defeated kings. Since he narrated one incident, I will narrate an incident as well. Shivaji’s daughter-in-law, Yesubai, wife of Sambhaji and Shivaji’s grandson Shahu (then a boy of 8 years) was taken prisoner by Zulfikar Khan Nusrat Jung. When they were brought to Aurangzeb’s camp, Aurangzeb ordered that Yesubai and Shahu to be accommodated in enclosed quarters near his daughter’s and next to his own tent. For the next 18 years, they were fixed a generous allowances and given adequate number of servants to serve them. Zinat-un-Nisa, Aurangzeb’s daughter treated Shahu like his own son and Yesubai like his own sister. This was a time time when Yesubai’s and Shahu’s family wanted to slit their throats, Aurangzeb not only protected Yesubai and Shahu but also gave Shahu title of ‘Raja’. He also allowed a tutor to be appointed for the boy by the name of Jyotiyaji Kesarkar, Shahu received training in riding, hunting and swordsmanship through Aurangzeb.

“When we say “This is the Hindu Nation”, there are some who immediately come up with the question, “What about the Muslims and the Christians dwelling in this land? Are they not also born and bred here? How could they become aliens just because they have changed their faith?” But the crucial point is whether THEY remember that they are the children of this soil. What is the use of merely OUR remembering?” … For a Virile National Life

Clearly, irrespective of whatever definition of a Hindu RSS gives in its Public Relations talks this is the reality. Clearly Golwalkar’s reply to the argument makes it amply clear that when they say Hindu nation it excludes Muslims and Christians. Muslims and Christians need to prove their loyalty to India before they could be classified as Indians, this will be further detailed by Golwalkar when he explains that the biggest threats to India are Muslims and Christians.

“An eminent American Professor once asked me the question, ‘Muslims and Christians are of this land alone. Why don’t you consider them as of your own?” To that, I put him a counter-question: “Suppose one of our countrymen goes to America, settles there and wants to become an American citizen. However, he refuses to accept your Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson and others as his national heroes. Would you then call him a national of America? Tell me frankly.” He said, “No.”” … For a Virile National Life

There is no way to verify this anecdote, it is like me narrating, I once met an RSS worker whom I asked, “Muslims and Christians are of this land alone, why don’t you consider them as your own?” Instead of answering my question he asked, “Suppose someone goes to America, settles there and wants to become an American citizen. However, he refuses to accept Lincoln, Washington and Jefferson and other as his national heroes. Would you then call him a national of American?” To this I replied, “In a democracy, everyone has a right to make his own heroes, there are millions of Americans who loathe Lincoln and support the Confederates. Even today, in Southern America you can find the Confederates flag flying. The thing is that because you come from a caste ridden, undemocratic organisation that does not value free speech or free thinking this is a big thing for you. But for democrats and free thinkers like me, this is a non-issue.”

“So, all that we say is that the Muslims and Christians here should give up their present foreign mental complexion and merge in the common stream of our national life. Everybody knows that only a handful of Muslims came here as enemies and invaders. So also, only a few foreign Christian missionaries came here. Now the Muslims and Christians have enormously grown in number. They did not grow just by multiplication as in the case of fishes. They converted the local population. We can trace our ancestry to a common source, from where one portion was taken away from the Hindu fold and became Muslim and another became Christian. The rest could not be converted and they have remained as Hindus. Now, how did the converts leave their ancestral home? Was it out of their own sweet will and out of conviction of the superiority of those faiths? Well, history does not record a single notable instance of that sort. On the contrary, history tells us that the reason was the fear of death or coercion or the various temptations of power, position, etc., or the desire to please the powers that be by adopting their ways and customs and finally even taking to their faiths.” … For a Virile National Life

Saying that everyone who accepted Islam or Christianity accepts it out of fear for his life or temptations of power, position, etc. means that Islam and Christianity have nothing good to offer to people. The only way people would become Muslims is through opportunism or coercion. Let me ask him, what could have possible coerced Mohammed Ali to accept Islam? Mohammed Ali, was one of the most stubborn free men. He spent time in jail for refusing to do something that he did not believe in, his wealth and career received a major setback when he stuck to his guns as Cassius Clay. What could have coerced Mohammed Ali to accept Islam? Nothing, accept the good he saw in Islam. The first converts to Islam went through severe persecution, people were coercing the first Muslims to leave Islam, but they stuck to it out of the truth and goodness they found in Islam. Similarly, why would anyone become a Christian when Christians were being fed to hungry lions in Colosseums in Europe? The only reason why someone would become a Christian is this scenario was when he found truth and goodness in Christianity. The bigoted mind Golwalkar, cannot comprehend this simple fact, that it is possible for people to leave one religion and convert to another because they see truth and goodness in it.

Posted in History, Politics, Social Issues

A Parallel; Kashmiri Pandits & Tamil Muslims

Often the plight of Kashmiri Pandits is used as excuse by Hindu Right Wing and people like Anupam Kher to further their cause of polarising Hindus and Muslims of India. Of course what happened to Kashmiri Pandits was a grievous wrong. In no way I am trying to undermine the grievous wrong that happened to Kashmiri Pandit. The point I am trying to make that many crimes are committed during insurgencies by all groups that they regret later on. But Hindu Right Wing brings this as an example of characterlessness of Muslims, but they do not realise that their fellow Hindus have done the same, the same characterlessness that they accuse Muslims of was also committed by Hindus. Most people do not know that there is a parallel to story of Kashmiri Pandits, the story of Tamil Muslims. Today, both Hurriyat and JKLF both have acknowledged that it was wrong to throw Pandits out and they would protect Pandits should they choose to come back, same is the case with Tamil Hindus who are ready to welcome Muslims back.

The parallel is that like Kashmiri Pandits, Tamil Muslims were also thrown out of their homes in exactly similar circumstances. The crime was committed by Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). LTTE was a Tamilian outfit in Sri Lanka with goal of establishing a Tamil homeland in Northern & Eastern Sri Lanka, where Tamilians were in majority. Along with Tamil Hindus lived Tamil Muslims that formed around 20% of the region’s population. Tamil Muslims decided that they did not want Sri Lanka to be divided and hence refused to join LTTE in their insurgency. LTTE decided to throw Tamil Muslims out. This is exactly the case with Kashmiri Pandits, when Kashmiri Muslims started insurgency Kashmiri Pandits refused to join the insurgency. It was after this Kashmiri militants decided to thrown Kashmiri Pandits just as LTTE had done to Tamil Muslims. In fact LTTE was far more violent and killed far more Tamil Muslims than the number of Kashmiri Pandits killed by Muslim insurgents.

Both acts of ethnic cleansing were wrong and horrible; and should not have happened. Today, both Tamil Hindus and Kashmiri Muslims believe that ethnic cleansing carried by their brothers was a wrong thing to do. The only point I am making is that Hindu Hyper Nationalists that are currently ruling India do not see the that wrongs things happen during insurgencies, but to toe the line 30 years later with intentions of punishing not just the Kashmiri Muslims of today along with entire Muslim community of India is completely wrong.

Posted in Social Issues

The Illogicality of Malthusianism

Thomas Robert Malthus was an English cleric who wrote a series of Essays from 1798 on-wards arguing that the growing population is unsustainable and would lead to a catastrophe of famine and disease. He argued that, the time of catastrophe was not very far. And, he wrote this when the world population was 1 billion, today we are 7.5 Billion. His followers even today make the same statement. But the facts are quite different. They are different because they fail to underestimate the force of technology invented by humans, and how it changes outcomes.

The first argument is economical argument. This is the most bizarre one as well, when you have a sudden burst of young people joining a country’s workforce, you call it Demographic Dividend. Demographic Dividends lead to accelerated growth and pulling lots of people out of poverty. But if parents have more children, it suddenly becomes the reason for their poverty? If country’s can reap demographic dividend, why shouldn’t parents? Can someone really guarantee that having 1 child and giving him best education will make parents old age better, or having 11 children who will not enrich their parents life in their old age. There is no dispute in the logic of probabilities, if you have more children, it is more likely that your years as senior citizens would be better. Plus it is not wise to keep all eggs in one basket.

But the real argument is what happens when you actually have lesser children, well let us look at those countries who are facing reduction in population, ask Japanese and Italians who give cash to women when they have babies. The issue that these countries realise is that if they do not have enough population growth, their economies could collapse, they need to have more people. I remember a poor woman from China who got widowed a few years ago, and Goverment’s one child policy forced her to have only one girl, who unfortunately died in a car accident. Now she has no one to take care of her in her old age. Be it at individual level or state having lesser population hurts economy.

Next is about food supply. In the last few hundred years we are eating far better than we have ever eaten. If you see this chart it tells about how calories intake in the developing world has increased.

The most expensive food is meat, below are the stats from WHO on meat consumption per capita.

So let us be clear, we are not going to run out of food. In 2030, we are projected to eat not just more but also better. So all the fear mongering that we would run out of food with more people is just a stupid idea. Most people who support Malthusianism do not realise that we are moving ahead with science and research. We are producing almost three times per hectare, than we did 50 years ago. If you look at the chart below world average is still half of UK average, ie we do not need additional farmland to grow more food, we need to grow it better. Just growing it with UK’s efficiency is enough to feed population double the size today.

And we are living a lot longer, the world’s life expectancy has gone up by 20 years from 1960, so no one is saying by having more babies we are going to die early.

Another argument is environmental one. This is again not true, it is not necessary that more population lead to more pollution. As it can be seen from the chart below, although Population Growth rate for Sweden and UK remains healthy, and their CO2 emissions are coming down, because the governments are spending 0.5% to 1% of their GDP in Environment. The environment is getting polluted because of bad habits of people, not because of babies. The impediment to control pollution is not babies again, it is not willing to spend money on environmental programmes. The US had a budget of $8 Billion for its Environmental Protection Agency and $598 Billion for its defence. So please stop propagating Malthusianism and stop blaming babies for pollution. They have a very busy schedule of eating, pooping and sleeping.

Posted in Social Issues

The case of Capital Punishment

Capital Punishment is now prohibited in many countries and I agree with many reasons given to ban in outright. We will talk about all those reasons but let me clear my stance on Capital Punishment, I agree with Capital Punishment in case of thought out intended cold blooded murder, not a killing that happens in self defense or a man slaughter or any other peculiar circumstances. Next, the justice system in most countries is flawed, i.e., when Fredrick kills John, government in most countries think that it is not a crime against John or John’s family, but against her, ie the State. This is the most ridiculous part of justice system, the State failed to protect a citizen and instead of being rebuked and disciplined for its clumsy job, it suddenly becomes the plaintiff. Wrong.

I think John and John’s family should be the plaintiffs. They are the one’s who are going to suffer. And the judge has to decide only that if the person is guilty of murdering someone in cold blood. Whether he is given Capital Punishment or not should depend on those who are the victims of the crime, John’s mother – one who gave birth to John in pain, then cared for him for several years, John was the apple of her eyes, she had so many hopes and expectations from John and someone killed John. What happens to her? Is she just supposed to suck it up? The same argument can be made about John’s father, who provided for him when he was young, who worked additional shifts to provide for him better education or opportunities, one who advised him for his life and had hopes and expectations from him. What about John’s widow? Her life has come to an abrupt halt, her partner is dead, who loved her, comforted her in distress, promised to age with her, she had promised her life with him, how does she live this life without the pillar that she used to lean on. What about John’s children? They are orphans now, they have been deprived on fatherly love, fatherly advice, a role model and financial security. The same case can be made for brothers and sisters of John and wider family and friends who shared their life with John. These should be plaintiffs, not government.

Government had only transactional relationship with John, if John dies, the transactional relationship dies, Government is not going to cry over the dead body of John, neither does her future depends on John, like John’s family, hence having government as plaintiff is a serious error of justice. The Mother and rest of family should not be just plaintiff, these are the people who should decide if the execution is to carried or if they are ready to forgive. Obviously I prefer forgiveness over punishment, but it is not my call, it is call of John’s family. They alone should have the right to let Fredrick live or die.

Let us now discuss the arguments that are made against Capital Punishment.

Right to Life
Although I agree with the Right of Life of everyone, one who intends, then plans and then kills someone has proven that he does not care about Right to Life, hence it is his disbelief in Right of Life that this Right must not be given to him.

Execution of Innocents
This is a serious argument and it happens a lot of times that people do get wrongly convicted. And I don’t have much defense on this except that the guilty can still appeal to John’s family and beseech them of his innocence and convince them of their mercy. A terrible situation to be in, but this happens in all the time and in all sorts of crimes, that does not mean that we should stop punishments for crimes.

Retribution/Vengeance is Wrong
I principally disagree with the premise. All sort of justice is arguably some sort of retribution or vengeance. Let alone crimes of criminal nature but even civil crimes are a sort of retribution, Google was fined over £5 billion by EU, is that not a kind of retribution for breaking EU laws? When EU leaders and justices say that Google broke the law and must be fined for it, is this not retribution for breaking the law.

Failure to deter
I agree Capital Punishment or any other punishment do not deter people from becoming criminals. But I do not believe deterrence as one of the reasons for Capital Punishment. My argument is justice for family of John.

Brutalising Society
This argument is based on a flawed premise, that introducing Capital Punishment will burtalise society. This is wrong because when you have Fredrick Murdering John in cold blood, you already are a brutal society. When judge announces guilty for Fredrick for killing John, it is should be left with John’s family to decide what do they want to do with Fredrick. If they think forgiving him is better for the society let them forgive him, but it is a decision for John’s family, not someone who is not related to John, never met John, never loved him, never cared for him, had no emotional attachment to John, etc. These people whose life is not effected by John’s brutal death should have no say in whether Fredrick deserves the same brutality in his death.

Costs
Some people bring this ridiculous argument of costs, and they include all costs of the case. All the costs they list will be incurred even if there was no death penalty, so I do not see this as a viable argument.

Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading
This has the same answer as The Right to Life, when Fredrick murdered John, he was being cruel, inhumane and degrading. Fredrick is only reaping what he has sown.

I am not sure if I have left anything out, but if there is another argument, please leave it in the comment box. The above does not mean that I support death penalty, but I understand the context where it must be applied and most importantly by Whom.

Posted in Social Issues

The abomination of wicked men with no brains

Just heard about the attack on Churches in Sri Lanka on Easter. I have no words to express my disgust and anger at those who bomb civilians like this. I wish they catch the culprits quickly and put them to death.

For the rest God Almighty will inflict His retribution upon them, and His justice is not incomplete and undeliverable like ours. For example for a man who was killed in the atrocities, God Almighty will bring these criminals in front of children of the victim and inflict punishment on their behalf for taking away their father, then He will take parents and inflict punishment for loss of their child, then He will take up the wife and inflict punishment for loss of her husband, then He will take up siblings and inflict punishment for loss of their brother, so on and so forth. He will have to pay for loss borne by every single person, and every punishment will have a unique start and end date.

I am really fed up with the current status of how things are with the weapon policy. We must do something with these weapons that allow for small men to cause carnage.

My condolences and respect for those who have lost their loved ones. May God Almighty give them peace and respite…. Aameen

Posted in Islam & Religion, Social Issues

The case of forced conversions, an example of Aurangzeb

“History makes it clear that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping across the world forcing Islam at the point of the sword over conquered races is the most fantastic myth that historians have ever repeated.” De Lacy O’Leary, British Orientalist and Historian . Unfortunately the situation has not changed since Mr. O’Leary and the same fantasitc myth is being repeated, every day and every night. The accusation doesn’t die. For most people, because of their opposition of Islam, they are willing to digest every lie that is being told to them without applying any reason, logic or even simple checks of historic accuracy. And I have to write this down because I am fed up of it.

First of all, Quran itself prohibits people from forcing people to convert. This chapter of Quran (Surah Kafirun – Chapter 106), is learnt my most Muslims by heart at a very early age and one of the few chapters that almost every Muslim can recite, it is also regarded as quarter of Quran, this is the translation of the whole chapter, ” Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, . Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. ” For centuries Muslims has interpreted that There is absolutely no way to force religion on anyone else, ‘To you is your Way, To me is Mine’. Another proof is Surah Ghashiya – Chapter 88, verses 21 & 22, ‘Therefore do thou give admonition, for thou art one to admonish. Thou art not one to manage (men’s) affairs.’ Muslims interpret this as we are only to advice, so we should advice and let them decide and manage their own affairs, forcing someone to change their religion would be ‘managing their affairs’ which is clearly prohibited. Muslims do not believe in forced conversions because it effects one of the foundations of Islam, ie ‘free will’. If God wanted He could have forced everyone to follow Islam, but He didn’t do so who the hell are we Muslims to force people to change religion. But those who hate Islam, keep repeating this lie.

Today, the religion that gathers maximum amount of converts from other religions is Islam. And it has been the same for several decades. Most of these people accept Islam because they see something good in it. In Europe, a Dutch MP recently converted to Islam, and he belonged to Anti Islam party of Geert Wilders, was he forced to convert to Islam? No. He became Muslim after researching on Islam and found he had far too many things he had in common with Islam. In India, A. R. Rehman became Muslim, who forced him to covert to Islam? No one, he found Sufi Music closer to his heart and his calling. And in Americas, Cassius Clay became Muhammad Ali, who can possibly imagine someone forcing him to do something he didn’t want to do. No one could force Muhammad Ali in doing something, he became Muslim because of Truth of Islam and his heritage.

There is absolutely no evidence of mass forced conversions. There was nothing like soldiers marching into villages and homes and asking people to convert to Islam or die. Even the enemies of Muslims of those times do not accuse Muslims of doing such. Of course, there could be an odd incidence here and there but saying that all Muslim population of today is descendended from those who were forcefully converted is not just preposterously illogical, it is also impossible, an absolute and utter lie.

I am no fan of Aurangzeb and hold very poor view of him, after all this was a man who killed his own brother and sent his brother’s severed head to his old and ailing father. Undoubtedly a bad man. But do we find these forced conversion in history, the history that Aurangzeb wrote. There are various other documents of Aurangzeb’s where he mentions his great deeds, like sending Shah Jehan (his father) decapitated head of Dara (Shah Jehan’s eldest son and Aurangzeb’s brother), breaking of temples, general slaughter, wars and how he treated and punished his enemies, about his bravery, brutality and savagery. Everything is mentioned by Aurangzeb himself in his Persian records.

But forced conversions is not mentioned. What could have possibly stopped Aurangzeb from mentioning forced conversions? Nothing, if he didn’t feel ashamed in mentioning that he sent decapitated head of his brother to his father, why would this matter of forcing someone to convert to another religion move his conscience? So No, Aurangzeb had no reason not to mention forced conversions in his Persian records, the only reason they are not mentioned is because they never happened.

It is a well established practice of all kings and tyrants that they record every deed that they did that they believed was the right thing to do, right from Pharoah proudly writing “I destroyed seed of Israel” to recent Nazis who were also killing everyone to make an “ideal German Race” free from disabled people, other races, people who were mentally challenged, etc. Aurangzeb too wrote that he used to give money to people to convert, he wrote that he used to forgive convicted criminals if they accepted Islam (including death sentences), etc. But there are absolutely no records of even Aurangzeb forcing people to become Muslims.

It is a myth that Muslims forced people to convert. Nay, it is not just a myth, it is a lie.

Posted in Politics, Social Issues

State of Law in India and two men from Gujarat responsible for it

Mr. Gandhi was born in 1869 to Diwan of one of the princely states in Gujarat, from there he went to London, South Africa and then finally India. Where he led a strong people’s movement against the British and commanded respect and loyalty of millions of Indians. There are countless things that Mr. Gandhi gave to India that we must appreciate. But, there is another thing that he gave Indians, with unintended consequences, it was that he told Indians not to respect the law, and broke several of them.

Mass disobedience movements that were led by him or his supporters did immense harm to Indian psyche where respect for law vanished, today nobody even talks about Respecting the Law. The situation is so bad that we do not even teach kids to Respect the Law, I remember my classroom, which had a chart of a whole list whom and what I should respect…. but there was no mention of respecting the law. When Mr. Gandhi started his mass movements often asking people to break the law, he in his wildest imagination would not have thought that he is training people to stop respecting the law. Masses supported his ideas around breaking the law, whether is was Salt Law or Civil Disobedience. I am not sure, but of all the texts I have read, none of them speak about Mr. Gandhi urging his followers to follow the law except the attitude did not die, we kept breaking the laws even after we had made them.

I blame Mr. Gandhi to have motivated Indian public to have no respect for the law, but since law was still the law breaking it still meant that you went to jail, this meant that although the respect was absent, the fear of law was still present, but this would change with Mr. Modi.

Mr. Modi is a lifelong member of Right Wing Hindu Group called RSS that believes only those people could be Indian whose Fatherland and Holyland are in India. Hence, Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc are not Indians because their Holyland is not in India. And, people like Mother Teresa and Adnan Sami are not Indians because Fatherland is not India. The RSS says that such people are allowed to live in India but as second class citizens who have to incorporate Hindu culture in their lives. RSS also have militant wings like Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal.

Mr. Gandhi had removed the respect for law from Indian psyche. The Gujarat Pogrom of 2002 removed the fear of law, by actually telling the criminals participating the pogrom that they would be shielded by the law, Babu Bajrangi got into trouble only after boasting about it in front of camera. And after Mr. Modi became Prime Minister, the same message was delivered to Cow Vigilantes around the country…. look at one of them brag how he has government backing in these killings and how he does not fear the law and how he told the Jailor about his crimes.

These two men have done immense damage to Indian psyche, although Gandhi’s aim were noble and he hated violence (remember how Non Cooperation Movement was cancelled after Chaura Chauri). So his objectives were correct, his method was wrong. But Modi has completely changed the equation, where nothing is right, the respect and fear of law are completely absent. If civil society means that it is a society that respects the laws it sets for itself, then we are a long way from being Civil. And these two men from Gujarat are the primary reason for destroying civil society that used to exist in India.

Posted in Politics, Social Issues

Babri Masjid….. a hundred year old issue that I don’t get

Babri Masjid, 1529 – 1992

With elections near, and hearings about to start in Supreme Court, Babri Masjid is in news again. I am fascinated by how this contentious issue is spoken about, Muslims almost always call it Babri Masjid and Hindus almost always call it Ram Janam Bhoomi. Two names for the same place but different two identities, representing two different aspiration and desires.

Although Babri Masjid was nothing but a place of worship for Muslim, to some Hindus (ie not all Hindus) she represented defeat and humiliation and its mere existence really hurt their sentiments and their egos. They found it really hard to tolerate it, it used to hurt them that they were the ones now in-charge, they were the ones who were ruling, and still they could do nothing to this symbol of defeat and humiliation. So one day they decided that could not tolerate this place of worship any longer and they demolished it. Something that they perceived stood as a symbol of their defeat and humiliation was down to the ground.

To have a temple constructed at exact place of where Babri Masjid stood is an exercise in satisfying egos and not an act of devotion. Because everyone knows that if a temple is built there, it would lead to further bloodshed. Would Rama have approved his temple be built on dead bodies of children, women and men? Obviously Not. So let us be clear, it is not an act of devotion, it is act of ego, “I must build a temple to humiliate Muslims”.

I would be lying if I were to say that I don’t want to see the Masjid restored. And, I will also be lying if I say that it has nothing to do with ego. I believe Pathans are never born in odd numbers, all of them are born with their twin, their ego being the twin. Hence it is my ego that wants a Masjid there.

Anyway, leaving my twin behind and come back to the argument around Babri Masjid. The fact is that I really don’t find the arguments for Ram temple convincing, I find them wanting and unconvincing.

  1. Ramayana is Mythology: Ramayana is a mythological story, otherwise somebody has to explain a talking and intelligent monkey, who can make himself ginormous,  fly from Lanka to Himalayas to find a herb, when he is not able to find the herb on the mountain he uproots the mountain, picks the mountain and flies back to Lanka with mountain on his palm. To me it is a mythological  story, there is no need for bloodshed for mythology.
  2. Lack of Evidence in Text: I know many people believe Ramayana as absolute and inherent truth on basis of belief. But Ramayana, in no version of the text, mentions the exact place of birth of Rama, all it says is that he was born in Ayodhya. If no text mentions his exact place of birth, how could anyone be sure that location of the mosque is the exact same place where Rama was born.
  3. Other Claims of Exact Place of Birth: If a temple needed to be preserved in Ayodhya it should have been the one where he was born, and this should be undisputed as well. But that is not the case, there are 14 temples in Ayodhya whose Mahants claim that their temple is the place where Rama was born. And I think that is perfectly logical because someone who was allegedly born several thousand years ago and his exact place of birth is not recorded in any text, it would be impossible to point out his place of birth with absolute certainty.
  4. Gita says Rama and Krishna are not Born: Whether Rama could be born is a dispute in itself. Krishna in Gita (10.3) says that Krishna is unborn (ie he is not born like a normal person, who has to come out of his mother’s uterus and has to live in his own urine and stool in mum’s belly). Since Rama precedes Krishna as avatar of Vishnu, and have same status and qualities, same rules apply to both of them. Hence, according to Gita, if Krishna is not born, Rama can not be born either. Before anyone argues that I am interpreting Gita, please note that this is Hindu interpretation of Gita not mine, pick up a Gita and read commentary on the shloka. Gita makes it abundantly clear that individuals like Rama and Krishna are not born, they just appear and disappear at their own will. If this is the case, then it is illogical to argue about Rama’s birthplace who could not be even born.
  5. The illogical argument of mosque built over temple: The argument that Babur demolished the temple to erect a mosque in the exact same place is something I don’t find convincing. Archelogical Survey of India says that a structure (not necessarily a temple) existed right beneath the mosque, but it also says that when Babur arrived there was no temple and it was a public space says public space with no temple on it, then building a mosque on open land was fair game, no one in entire history digs 200 feet to find if remains of any temple are buried in the ground. Most advocates of this theory disregard the second part and say that Babur demolished the temple to build a mosque. But for Babur to make a mosque and yet leave remains of a temple buried under the ground, he would have to follow these steps, there is no second option:
    • Destroy the temple.
    • Move the temple rubble aside, emptying the space where temple stood.
    • Dig a very deep pit to bury the rubble and fill the pit with normal soil to a good depth for foundations to be dug above the rubble.
    • Next, he would move the earth he had dug previously back into the pit covering the rubble and extra space left for clear foundations.
    • Then, wait for it the rubble and earth to settle.
    • Finally, dig the foundations of the mosque and build the mosque.
    • The whole thing seems completely illogical and impossible even if Babur had CAT and JCB machines. At one place people accuse Muslims of being stingy and converting temples into mosques and on the other hand they are justifying such completely illogical expense. It just does not make any sense to me.

Seeking Solution instead of Conflict: After all said and done, we are in a situation we are. We should be thinking of possible solutions for the issue and not sticking to our pride and ego at the cost of lives and hurt feelings. For me the best solution for Babri Masjid is to build something that benefits the whole society like an Orphanage, an Old Age Home, a Hospital, a School, a Sarai or anything that the whole communities can use for social benefit. I don’t think that majority of Hindus and Muslims like to see mosques and temples built on bodies of children, men and women, I for one certainly don’t want to. And this seems as agreeable compromise for all.

The following is an excellent award winning documentary on the issue.