Halaku Khan
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2008
- Messages
- 699
- Reaction score
- 0
I would say Sanatana Dharma (i.e. Hinduism) is a science.
Accept Vande Mataram or go to Pakistan
- Thread starter Spring Onion
- Start date
I would say Sanatana Dharma (i.e. Hinduism) is a science.
Spring Onion
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 41,403
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
You can find many mr arifs who will bluff Muslims but seriously there is big big difference between Bowing and Salute or Salam and as Asim said if you think bowing is equal to salam or salute than why dont you change to salam. The issue will be over.
Are you ready to do that ??
Halaku Khan
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2008
- Messages
- 699
- Reaction score
- 0
Vande means to show reverence. There is no bluffing.
Kavin
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 450
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I see that most of the Pakistani fellows here have a common problem -
They cannot see Indians and Hindus as different things. Same is applicable to Mr Zaid Hamid. He offen goes thumping his chest and yelling "we (Muslims) rules them (Hindus) for more than 1000 years and we will do it again, as history repeats itself." But unfortunately, the scholar forgets that India does not need to look towards Pakistan for Muslim rulers. We have more than enough of them. I bet Hon. A P J Abdul Kalam is most popular president of India till date! So, worthy Muslims still rule India, and guess what, we are proud of it!
The same confusion is the reason many Pakistanis (including Musharraf) try to support and convey their sympathies to Indian Muslims. As there are some 165 million or so Muslims in India, problems are gonna be there. Same goes for Hindus. But Pakistan is only interested in Muslims. People conveniently forget that not a single Muslim said "it's better to be in Pakistan, where we are not compelled to sing any such songs". Not even after such irresponsible statements from Uddhav Thackerey.
Now, being made it clear where the confusion lies, let's try to clear it up. India is a country where people of different religions live and contribute. Being second most populated country, the quarrels and arguments and fights are bound to happen.
But the important thing is, every person is an Indian before being Hindu or Muslim. So, Indians does not mean Hindus.
And as I have observed on this forum, many members take Indians as Hindus and believe that insulting Hindus is insulting India. But obviously, that miserably fails. When a member tries to insult Hinduism, I have rarely seen any Hindu member bashing Islam for a revenge (I know there are exceptions). The reason is, Hindu members understand and believe that they represent India (and not Hinduism) on this forum. As Muslims are inseparable part of India, they take care not to hurt Muslim sentiments. This maturity comes from living in a secular state. Many Pakistani members take advantage of the limit Hindu members put on themselves and try to insult Hinduism more and more. Poor souls.
Lastly, I take this opportunity to repeat that if somebody has genuine doubts / problems / objections with Hinduism, I am interested in starting a separate thread where me and any person with knowledge will try to give a healthy reply.
Regards, Balance.
Post of the day.
But waste of bandwidth and time in a thread of a 'Lady Zaid Hamid'.
Balance
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 244
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh yes, we are having an discussion.
Here are facts in the order they happened -
1. GoI thinks to make it mandatory to sing "Vande Mataram"
2. Muslims deny, giving religious sentiments as reason
3. GoI decides to think again on the proposal
4. Some Muslim leaders (Mullahs) go for fatwa, probably in the presence of Home Minister of India, Mr P Chidambaram.
5. People get disturbed on this act of Mullahs (not because they denied to sing the song)
6. A childish leader of childish mob (who is not supported by even one third of Hindus in his own region) barks something
7. Nobody cares (including Muslims in India) but some 'sensitive' Pakistanis
8. No Indian member says "it should be forced", they only try to convince "there is no harm singing the song"
So, what's the problem? To me, the whole issue it something to be proud of. Does it bother anybody?
Regards, Balance.
Balance
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 244
- Reaction score
- 0
Yeh, I knew it before posting.
But sometimes, one cannot deal with the issue by isolating it. Tried my best and just found it was not good enough.
Spring Onion
PDF VETERAN
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 41,403
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
Halaku Khan
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2008
- Messages
- 699
- Reaction score
- 0
We are happy to reply to your queries.
yes, you will find it galling but you can never find it wrong, its what you believe in so you have to invite it and accept it
the fact that there is a proportion of india who think that india is and always has been and will be a hindu nation or hindu secular, not purely secular.
if you dont stand up for secularism that means you open the way for a hindu insurgency, and alot of indians do stick up for secularism, but not on this forum
toxic_pus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 1,852
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
Wrong. The original POEM mentions that. The SONG doesn't.
All Mighty.
You are not familiar with Tagore's writings, particularly his poems and songs. If you were you would have known that there can be ten thousand interpretations.
Even at the cost of the song's rhythm?
Don't worry. You are not alone. We have some people here in India, who think like you do. Gives us comic relief.
Balance
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 244
- Reaction score
- 0
Cool down, bro.
If you already have made your mind, no one can help you. Though, you should come to India and ask Muslims here about secularity.
As 'incidents' get reported in news, and everyday life does not; it's easy for someone sitting far from the action to assume things. So, Mr Realist, either try to get reality or keep living in dreams.
toxic_pus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 1,852
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
'Vande' actually translates into 'I praise' or 'I revere'. It is one of those words which doesn't have any direct equivalent in English. Sanskrit has a truck load of such words, as I am sure, all regional languages have.
EDIT: 'Vande' is verb. The noun is 'Vandana'.
Last edited:
humblehobbes
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Messages
- 449
- Reaction score
- 0
As the anniversary of the cataclysmic event of 26/11 draws near, undoubtedly the country will relive the painful and humiliating memory of its powerful financial capital held hostage for more than 36 hours by a group of murderous terrorists sneaking in from Pakistan, challenging the might and capabilities of the Indian nation. But instead of replaying those dark moments, Indians ought to remember with pride the aftermath of the tragedy. The days after the terror strikes saw a spontaneous nationwide outpouring of sympathy for Mumbai with all communities united in their anger and outrage at the impunity with which Pakistan-based jihadi terrorists had struck at India.
Indeed the Indian national spirit triumphed in that dark moment with thousands of citizens of diverse cultural and social identities rallying together to support Mumbai in that traumatic phase. There was a remarkable absence of communal violence with even the Shiv Sena in Mumbai resisting the political temptation of baiting Muslims in that stressful period. As a new generation of Indians made the political class and the political system the targets of their ire, one refreshing change was that there was absolutely no focus on communal and social identities. Projected was a collective sense of we Indians against the external intruders. All this showed that the enduring sense of national unity was a solid asset that helped the country tide over what could have been a deeply disintegrative challenge.
It is clear that with the United Progressive Alliance government emphasising its commitment to secular governance and the preservation of cultural pluralism, the minorities, especially the Muslim community, find little conflict between their civic identities as Indian citizens and their cultural and religious affiliations. When national identity is defined in cultural nationalist terms, the loyalty of minority groups to the national identity comes under intense pressure. In an increasingly disturbed security environment with terrorism sharpening in intensity in Pakistan, it is imperative that the UPA remain unswerving in its acknowledgment that without secularism and internal communal harmony, it would be difficult to fight terrorism.
In a departure from its usual reticence, the election campaign for the 2009 Lok Sabha saw both Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi asserting that terrorism and communalism were two aspects of the same challenge and that a country divided by communalism could not fight terror. The logic of that argument needs to be sustained forcefully today in the face of renewed challenges to the minority groups assertions of their cultural rights. The UPA must not allow the BJP which is battling its own internal demons to resurrect majoritarian Hindutva campaigns mounting pressure on the cultural rights of the minorities especially Muslims. The latest incident in which BJP leaders Murli Manohar Joshi and Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi have sought to put Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and a section of the Muslim community on the defensive is a case in point. The 30th general session of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind at Deoband, western Uttar Pradesh adopted a resolution on November 3, upholding a fatwa of 2006 by the Deoband Ulema, describing the singing of the Vande Mataram as anti-Islamic because some of its verses were against the tenets of Islam.
The Deoband clerics apparently took pains to ensure that their objections to the singing of the Vande Mataram were not to be seen as being unpatriotic. The resolution that was adopted said categorically Patriotism does not require singing of the Vande Mataram. We love our country and have proved this several times but Vande Mataram violates our faith in monotheism that is the foundation of Islam We love and respect the mother but do not worship her. It went on to demand that the issue of Vande Mataram should not be deliberately raised for causing communal discord and threat to law and order. It was also pointed out after discussions amongst the participants in the meeting that the resolution was necessitated by the fact that the song was being introduced in several government schools in BJP-ruled States.
It must be recalled that historically the Vande Mataram song did not become the national anthem precisely for the reason that it had strong Hindu connotations by depicting the Indian nation as Goddess Durga. Not only did Muslims object but virtually every other minority had objected, leading to the Jana Gana Mana being adopted as the Indian national anthem. The essence of the idea of cultural pluralism is to ensure that every religious or social group is allowed its own cultural space in which it has the right to practise its own beliefs and traditions. How would it be right to question the patriotism of Muslims and other minority groups because of their rejection of a song that is by no means the national anthem?
To accuse the Deoband Ulema, a critical support group in the fight against terror, given that it issued a fatwa against terror last year, of a separatist mindset as the BJPs Mr. Naqvi did on Wednesday is to needlessly provoke a confrontation. Mr. Chidambaram who had clearly made a special effort to underline the UPAs commitment to cultural pluralism by participating in this conference did well to assert that a nation can ignore its minorities only at its peril, that Islam could not be viewed as an alien faith and that India was for Muslims, the land of their forefathers and of their birth. But subsequent attacks on his participation in the Deoband conference by Dr. Joshi and Mr. Naqvi, asserting that his presence gave legitimacy to the resolution opposing the Vande Mataram song appear to put the Home Minister on the defensive with his stating that he was not present when the resolution was passed.
The UPA government, which in its second term has promised that it views communalism and terrorism as two equally dangerous aspects of the same challenge, must not waver in its defence of the rights of minority groups to have their unique cultural assertions. Given that the Indian national identity as defined in the Indian Constitution is anchored to civic and territorial parameters, there is no inherent conflict between loyalty to the Indian nation and a communitys own religious beliefs. To question the patriotism of the Muslim community on the ground that it refuses to worship India as a concept is to make a mockery of the real meaning of patriotism and national loyalty.
As the framers of the Constitution wisely concluded decades ago, when they rejected the idea of including a reference to God in the Preamble to the Constitution, imposing such a concept would go against the spirit of the Constitution. As H.N. Kunzru told the Constituent Assembly during the debate on the Preamble, Such a course of action is inconsistent with the Preamble which promises liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship to everyone. How can we deal with this question in a narrow spirit?
For Dr. Joshi and his cultural nationalist colleagues to persist with describing the Deoband fatwa against the singing of the Vande Mataram song as against the provisions of the Constitution would be to misread recent Indian history. There can be no clearer assertion of the responsibility of the Indian state to provide for cultural pluralism and also of the rights of the citizens of India to enjoy cultural and religious freedoms, than is set out in the Indian Constitution. Cultural pluralism remains Indias strongest card and its best defence against attempts to wreck its integrity or weaken its national structure from inside and outside.
© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/...2009110554830900.htm&date=2009/11/05/&prd=th&
Indeed the Indian national spirit triumphed in that dark moment with thousands of citizens of diverse cultural and social identities rallying together to support Mumbai in that traumatic phase. There was a remarkable absence of communal violence with even the Shiv Sena in Mumbai resisting the political temptation of baiting Muslims in that stressful period. As a new generation of Indians made the political class and the political system the targets of their ire, one refreshing change was that there was absolutely no focus on communal and social identities. Projected was a collective sense of we Indians against the external intruders. All this showed that the enduring sense of national unity was a solid asset that helped the country tide over what could have been a deeply disintegrative challenge.
It is clear that with the United Progressive Alliance government emphasising its commitment to secular governance and the preservation of cultural pluralism, the minorities, especially the Muslim community, find little conflict between their civic identities as Indian citizens and their cultural and religious affiliations. When national identity is defined in cultural nationalist terms, the loyalty of minority groups to the national identity comes under intense pressure. In an increasingly disturbed security environment with terrorism sharpening in intensity in Pakistan, it is imperative that the UPA remain unswerving in its acknowledgment that without secularism and internal communal harmony, it would be difficult to fight terrorism.
In a departure from its usual reticence, the election campaign for the 2009 Lok Sabha saw both Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi asserting that terrorism and communalism were two aspects of the same challenge and that a country divided by communalism could not fight terror. The logic of that argument needs to be sustained forcefully today in the face of renewed challenges to the minority groups assertions of their cultural rights. The UPA must not allow the BJP which is battling its own internal demons to resurrect majoritarian Hindutva campaigns mounting pressure on the cultural rights of the minorities especially Muslims. The latest incident in which BJP leaders Murli Manohar Joshi and Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi have sought to put Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and a section of the Muslim community on the defensive is a case in point. The 30th general session of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind at Deoband, western Uttar Pradesh adopted a resolution on November 3, upholding a fatwa of 2006 by the Deoband Ulema, describing the singing of the Vande Mataram as anti-Islamic because some of its verses were against the tenets of Islam.
The Deoband clerics apparently took pains to ensure that their objections to the singing of the Vande Mataram were not to be seen as being unpatriotic. The resolution that was adopted said categorically Patriotism does not require singing of the Vande Mataram. We love our country and have proved this several times but Vande Mataram violates our faith in monotheism that is the foundation of Islam We love and respect the mother but do not worship her. It went on to demand that the issue of Vande Mataram should not be deliberately raised for causing communal discord and threat to law and order. It was also pointed out after discussions amongst the participants in the meeting that the resolution was necessitated by the fact that the song was being introduced in several government schools in BJP-ruled States.
It must be recalled that historically the Vande Mataram song did not become the national anthem precisely for the reason that it had strong Hindu connotations by depicting the Indian nation as Goddess Durga. Not only did Muslims object but virtually every other minority had objected, leading to the Jana Gana Mana being adopted as the Indian national anthem. The essence of the idea of cultural pluralism is to ensure that every religious or social group is allowed its own cultural space in which it has the right to practise its own beliefs and traditions. How would it be right to question the patriotism of Muslims and other minority groups because of their rejection of a song that is by no means the national anthem?
To accuse the Deoband Ulema, a critical support group in the fight against terror, given that it issued a fatwa against terror last year, of a separatist mindset as the BJPs Mr. Naqvi did on Wednesday is to needlessly provoke a confrontation. Mr. Chidambaram who had clearly made a special effort to underline the UPAs commitment to cultural pluralism by participating in this conference did well to assert that a nation can ignore its minorities only at its peril, that Islam could not be viewed as an alien faith and that India was for Muslims, the land of their forefathers and of their birth. But subsequent attacks on his participation in the Deoband conference by Dr. Joshi and Mr. Naqvi, asserting that his presence gave legitimacy to the resolution opposing the Vande Mataram song appear to put the Home Minister on the defensive with his stating that he was not present when the resolution was passed.
The UPA government, which in its second term has promised that it views communalism and terrorism as two equally dangerous aspects of the same challenge, must not waver in its defence of the rights of minority groups to have their unique cultural assertions. Given that the Indian national identity as defined in the Indian Constitution is anchored to civic and territorial parameters, there is no inherent conflict between loyalty to the Indian nation and a communitys own religious beliefs. To question the patriotism of the Muslim community on the ground that it refuses to worship India as a concept is to make a mockery of the real meaning of patriotism and national loyalty.
As the framers of the Constitution wisely concluded decades ago, when they rejected the idea of including a reference to God in the Preamble to the Constitution, imposing such a concept would go against the spirit of the Constitution. As H.N. Kunzru told the Constituent Assembly during the debate on the Preamble, Such a course of action is inconsistent with the Preamble which promises liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship to everyone. How can we deal with this question in a narrow spirit?
For Dr. Joshi and his cultural nationalist colleagues to persist with describing the Deoband fatwa against the singing of the Vande Mataram song as against the provisions of the Constitution would be to misread recent Indian history. There can be no clearer assertion of the responsibility of the Indian state to provide for cultural pluralism and also of the rights of the citizens of India to enjoy cultural and religious freedoms, than is set out in the Indian Constitution. Cultural pluralism remains Indias strongest card and its best defence against attempts to wreck its integrity or weaken its national structure from inside and outside.
© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/...2009110554830900.htm&date=2009/11/05/&prd=th&
humblehobbes
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Messages
- 449
- Reaction score
- 0
^^^^ read and get clarified "seculars"
