The Hindus: An Alternative History by Wendy to be destroyed

[Peshwa]

If it is not Hinduism what is exactly holding India together? What exactly is the incentive for a Bengali and a Kannada to belong to the Indian Union. What is the commonality between us that makes us a Country, a people? Why do I have to suffer a Mamata Banerjee or a Mulayam Singh Yadav?

.

What's holding us together you ask?
In my opinion a shared history, shared experiences, the idea of India as a nation and a common vision for a nation. I think your idea of nationality is based on finding commonality of faith. However, there are many that base it upon commonality of vision.
Just as an example, when Gandhi united India towards independence (Mind you im no fan of Gandhi), it was not based on a shared religion, but a common vision. thats a fact! and exactly why Hindus and muslims as people could coexist or at least hoped to in a united india.
Do you really believe that I lived in India because it was Hindu? Or that my love for India or for that matter anyone elses has to do with the fact that India is the birthplace (possibly) of Hinduism? I find that hard to believe...but thats me and many that I have come in contact with.

I dont want to argue with you about the above anymore, since its your opinion and you're entitled to it. I urge you to apply the same logic to this situation. Would you have your opinion squashed about your idea of India and its identity just because some others decided it wasnt theirs?

While we are not a theocratic state, Hindus have a right to defend their religion. Ideas are not born and live in isolation, especially in a country which has completely surrendered its intellectually thinking capability to the Western Universities. There are "researched facts" day in and day out from every group that can fund research to get an outcome favorable to their objectives. I have seen enough hatred of people for Hindus and Hinduism, especially from people who moved out of Hinduism based on these "researched facts." The separatism in Kashmir, Nagaland, and Punjab are not based on anything else but contempt for a people of different religion

I do believe that everyone has the right to defend their religion. Religion is important to a majority of people in this world and i absolutely see why people get riled up about it.
However, my objection is to the fact that we cannot be aversed to a crtical opinion.
I think every religion has to evolve with time....reform is the only way for a religion to be relevant. The reason why religion has been popular throughout history is because it tried to answer some very important existential question for humans at those junctures in history. But we have come a long way since.
We cannot just blindly accept any faith (not limited to Hinduism) at what has been told us. If we live in a democracy, it means that we value the idea of expression and free thinking. Then we have to be honest to ourselves and be able to honestly evaluate a piece of work through individual thinking.
I have no problem if the people of india as a whole reject this book after reading it. But dont block the ability of people to read it!
You maam are free to defend hinduism as a faith...

Lastly, I think you're mixing up politics (ie. religion based politics) based on your final few comments with what is a topic of freedom of speech and expression, one of the basic tenants of our consitution. Unless i completely missed the woods for the trees when I read, "especially from people who moved out of Hinduism based on these "researched facts.""

 

[Hermione]

What's holding us together you ask?
In my opinion a shared history, shared experiences, the idea of India as a nation and a common vision for a nation. I think your idea of nationality is based on finding commonality of faith. However, there are many that base it upon commonality of vision.
Just as an example, when Gandhi united India towards independence (Mind you im no fan of Gandhi), it was not based on a shared religion, but a common vision. thats a fact! and exactly why Hindus and muslims as people could coexist or at least hoped to in a united india.
Do you really believe that I lived in India because it was Hindu? Or that my love for India or for that matter anyone elses has to do with the fact that India is the birthplace (possibly) of Hinduism? I find that hard to believe...but thats me and many that I have come in contact with.

What is India's history if not the history of Hinduism. What is India's experience, if not the experience of its Hindu people and Hindu civilization. What common vision does India has that other countries do not have? Do other countries not deem science, technology, prosperity, and progress as their objectives too? So what differentiates India from other country? Why should India exist? Why not a humongous South Asia based on only geographical boundary. Gandhi's objective was Ram Rajya. Hindus and Muslims co-exist only when Hindus are majority, else Hindus pretty much get wiped out. India was divided on the basis of this very fact which you conveniently ignore.

I do not know why exactly you live in India, but India gets its very defining characteristic because it is Hindu.

We cannot just blindly accept any faith (not limited to Hinduism) at what has been told us. If we live in a democracy, it means that we value the idea of expression and free thinking. Then we have to be honest to ourselves and be able to honestly evaluate a piece of work through individual thinking.

Nothing is imposed in Hinduism. Everyone who takes up a belief or commits a religious action does it of his/her own volition. What is to say your secular beliefs are not falsely premised and that you have been led to them on faulty reasoning and data. So you are just as much "blind" in your choices as anyone else is. Democracy does not mean acceptance of any garbage in the guise of free thinking. There are reasonable restrictions to even free speech in our democracy per our constitution.

A favorite quote from Richard Dawkins "We should be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brain falls out."

Lastly, I think you're mixing up politics (ie. religion based politics) based on your final few comments with what is a topic of freedom of speech and expression, one of the basic tenants of our consitution. Unless i completely missed the woods for the trees when I read, "especially from people who moved out of Hinduism based on these "researched facts.""

Politics and religion have been mixed as long as humanity existed. If your freedom of speech and expression results in my community getting exterminated, then I have a reason to worry about your freedom of speech.

 

[Indo-guy]

I haven't read it. Maybe there were indeed some inaccuracies in the book. Otherwise, there have been plenty of other books as well which have incensed fundamentalists periodically.

A book should not be banned because it has inaccuracies ...in fact no book should ever be banned .

Best way to make a book famous ...is to ban it .

moment you ban a book ...even people who otherwise would not be interested in reading it , jump on it . It's human nature . Forbidden fruit is always sought and tasted ....

For that matter God should not have forbidden Adam from eating apple ...see what happened !

Just kidding . felt like trolling a bit ....



On a serious note ...Banning a book is not good in a country like India which has been source of enlightenment for whole world .

These days it seems to me that we are regressing very fast . There was a time when India was so open and tolerant .


sad day indeed !

 

[Hermione]

Proponents of all ideas are equally respectable and should be acceptable without reservation, here is one more idea which will find your respect.

Krokodil: Flesh-eating 'zombie' drug may be in U.S. - CNN.com

 

[Chronos]

What's holding us together you ask?
In my opinion a shared history, shared experiences, the idea of India as a nation and a common vision for a nation. I think your idea of nationality is based on finding commonality of faith. However, there are many that base it upon commonality of vision.
Just as an example, when Gandhi united India towards independence (Mind you im no fan of Gandhi), it was not based on a shared religion, but a common vision. thats a fact! and exactly why Hindus and muslims as people could coexist or at least hoped to in a united india.
Do you really believe that I lived in India because it was Hindu? Or that my love for India or for that matter anyone elses has to do with the fact that India is the birthplace (possibly) of Hinduism? I find that hard to believe...but thats me and many that I have come in contact with.

I dont want to argue with you about the above anymore, since its your opinion and you're entitled to it. I urge you to apply the same logic to this situation. Would you have your opinion squashed about your idea of India and its identity just because some others decided it wasnt theirs?



I do believe that everyone has the right to defend their religion. Religion is important to a majority of people in this world and i absolutely see why people get riled up about it.
However, my objection is to the fact that we cannot be aversed to a crtical opinion.
I think every religion has to evolve with time....reform is the only way for a religion to be relevant. The reason why religion has been popular throughout history is because it tried to answer some very important existential question for humans at those junctures in history. But we have come a long way since.
We cannot just blindly accept any faith (not limited to Hinduism) at what has been told us. If we live in a democracy, it means that we value the idea of expression and free thinking. Then we have to be honest to ourselves and be able to honestly evaluate a piece of work through individual thinking.
I have no problem if the people of india as a whole reject this book after reading it. But dont block the ability of people to read it!
You maam are free to defend hinduism as a faith...

Lastly, I think you're mixing up politics (ie. religion based politics) based on your final few comments with what is a topic of freedom of speech and expression, one of the basic tenants of our consitution. Unless i completely missed the woods for the trees when I read, "especially from people who moved out of Hinduism based on these "researched facts.""

Brillant answer

Since when has Hinduism becoming the only binding factor Indians? what national integrity do you speak of maam?

Do remember, we are not a theocratic state and diversity is one of our strengths, which includes diversity of opinion. The author might not be Indian, but Hinduism isnt only present in India and can have followers around the globe. So if someone presents their opinion based on researched facts, we cannot just consider it propoganda. Just because Hinduism is native to India doesnt make Indians the indisputable authorities on Hinduism or always right.
To attack the author and her position (ie. opinions and her western roots) just because its critical of hinduism is wrong. Its for the reader to decide what to make of it...not for you and me.

I haven't seen you around here before. Again, a brilliant answer.

 

[livingdead]

I dont agree you need to find something in common to create a country. As long as its a geographically single entity(makes it easier to stop dissidents) and most people want to remain together for whatever reason they want, you can have a country of your own.

 

[Indo-guy]

Yes and this is freedom of information and expression in the world's largest democracy, atleast when we regulate our people's access to certain books etc we dont claim to be champion of democracy and human rights in Pakistan, Indian hypocrisy is startlingly evident.....

Book has been withdrawn by publisher after settlement between the Publisher and NGO that had filed suit.
It has not been banned ....but withdrawn and that too by publisher itself and not by Indian government .

Some people are biased enough to jump at very first opportunity to criticize , out of their sheer hatred and in the process make fool of themselves .

 

[Chronos]

I will leave here a statement for others to ponder. And for the OP as well.

The Satanic verses was first banned in India.

Make of that what you will.

Have you read it? It's available online for download. I'll read it before I will give my appraisal.

if you ever finish reading it, do tell us what you think of it

 

[Indischer]

I will leave here a statement for others to ponder. And for the OP as well.

The Satanic verses was first banned in India.

Make of that what you will.



if you ever finish reading it, do tell us what you think of it

It's 680 pages long....might take some time, given my other commitments. Will definitely let you know when I complete it.

I wanted to ask if you've watched Kumare....Brilliant documentary. Watch it if you haven't.

 

[Chronos]

Agreed.

can anyone post copy of it here?

anyone of you read it?

Nope. I repeat these statements.

A movie by Kamal Hasan was banned because it was offensive to Muslims (even though a small minority wanted it banned)

You have this book, a book on Gandhi that is controversial. You had the Da Vinci code banned because Christian groups raised heckles.

This whole premise of not hurting religious sentiments has become a byline for every religion in India especially to avoid any introspection.

There is currently an outrage industry dominated by a minority of busybodies who specialise in feigning outrage for their community. They are stagnating intellectual discourse.

It's 680 pages long....might take some time, given my other commitments. Will definitely let you know when I complete it.

I wanted to ask if you've watched Kumare....Brilliant documentary. Watch it if you haven't.

is it on youtube

 

[Indischer]

is it on youtube

Not on youtube. It's available online though, on ********* and other video hosting sites.

 

[livingdead]

Nope. I repeat these statements.

A movie by Kama Hasan was banned because it was offensive to Muslims (even though a small minority wanted it banned)

You have this book, a book on Gandhi that is controversial. You had the Da Vinci code banned because Christian groups raised heckles.

This whole premise of not hurting religious sentiments has become a byline for every religion in India espeially to avoid any introspection.

There is currently an outrage industry dominated by a minrity of busybodies who specialise in feigning outrage for their community. They are stagnating intellectual discourse.



is it on youtube

I tried to read satanic verses.. rusdies novels are impossible for me to understand so I gave up..
I could not even read roy's god of small things beyond a few pages..
may be am as thick as @RAMPAGE.. should only read shidney sheldon ..

 

[RAMPAGE]

I tried to read satanic verses.. rusdies novels are impossible for me to understand so I gave up..
I could not even read roy's god of small things beyond a few pages..
may be am as thick as @RAMPAGE.. should only read shidney sheldon ..

I read paulo coelho, it's difficult to make sense of his novels especially Aleph.

God made me thick so don't mock me

 

[Chronos]

Not on youtube. It's available online though, on ********* and other video hosting sites.

anyway, I think I know why religious controversy would be avoided in India. Religious leaders of every stripe, every religion have their own little fiefdoms.

Books that seek to challenge them and their followers and break them out of their mental coccoons will be met with screams of 'offense' and 'outrage'

I read paulo coelho, it's difficult to make sense of his novels especially Aleph.

God made me thick so don't mock me

 

[livingdead]

I read paulo coelho, it's difficult to make sense of his novels especially Aleph.

God made me thick so don't mock me

same pinch..