Did Two Nation Theory Die in 1971 After Creation of Bangladesh?

[toxic_pus]

Please tell this to the Indian Supreme Court. The Judges of Indian Supreme Court do not agree with @Joe Shearer and your explanation. In the verdict they gave, it is very clearly stated that they identify Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists as a sub-sect of Hinduism and denied the request to grant them a separate religious status, based on the edicts of Indian Constitution. 

They didn't.

I have the copy of the verdict.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Thank you, @toxic_pus , for your clear post. I had planned to point this out to the boring little git who took his own ignorant interpretation of Article 25, his own half-understood newspaper report about a Supreme Court judgement, and added 2 + 2 to get 22. It is just that his arguments are so utterly banal. Even one of the deans of this forum expressed surprise, but he doggedly persisted; no doubt it costs him a lot in terms of his self-esteem to accept that he made a thorough mess of the argument.

Thanks again.

 

[doppelganger]

Have some shame Baniya, every day there are reports of hindus raping cows. Muslims will continue to slaughter your matas in India, you cant stop them.

Aa gaya laandiya apni asli aukat pe .....

 

[Nassr]

They didn't.

I have the copy of the verdict.

Thank you, @toxic_pus , for your clear post. I had planned to point this out to the boring little git who took his own ignorant interpretation of Article 25, his own half-understood newspaper report about a Supreme Court judgement, and added 2 + 2 to get 22. It is just that his arguments are so utterly banal. Even one of the deans of this forum expressed surprise, but he doggedly persisted; no doubt it costs him a lot in terms of his self-esteem to accept that he made a thorough mess of the argument.

Thanks again.

@toxic_pus, YOU ARE A LIAR. I confirmed it from my Indian lawyer friends. The statement that the Sikhs and Jains are part of the wider Hindu community occurs on P.15 of the court Judgment. They say that if what you state is the truth, why would mainstream Indian newspapers publish wrong and erroneous news story and were not taken to the court for contempt.

Jains, Sikhs part of broader Hindu religion, says SC
New Delhi, August 10 [2005]

In a significant ruling defining the status of communities like Sikhs and Jains within the Constitutional frame work, the Supreme Court has declined to treat them as separate minority communities from the broad Hindu religion, saying encouraging such tendencies would pose serious jolt to secularism and democracy in the country.

The so-called minority communities like Sikhs and Jains were not treated as national minorities at the time of framing of the Constitution. Sikhs and Jains, in fact, have throughout been treated as part of wider Hindu community, which has different sects, sub-sects, faiths, modes of worship and religious philosophies, a Bench of Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti, Mr Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Nation

A separate petition has also been filed in Nov 2012 by a Sikh scholar Birendra Kaur, which is being heard by Indian Supreme Court.

If Indian constitution accepted Sikhs, Jains and Bhuddists as separate religions why would there be a bill tabled in the Lok Sabha to amend the constitution of India in this regard.

Sikhism is a separate religion and is acknowledged as such throughout the world, except in Indian legal system. Article 25 of the Constitution of India has amalgamated Sikhism into Hindu religion. The demand of separate status for Sikhism under the Constitution has been supported by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) headed by the former Chief Justice of India, Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah which in its report has recommended amended to Article 25 of the Constitution to restore the status of Sikhism as separate religion.

Panjpani Radio » Blog Archive » India – Sikh Identity Issue: Rights Group to Launch “Amend Article 25” Campaign

At present, Article 25 of the Constitution of India describes Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as parts of the Hindu religion. Sikhs have long been seeking amendment to this Article to grant Sikhism an independent identity under the law.

In a significant move, Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar today allowed Shiromani Akali Dal’s Khadoor Sahib member Rattan Singh Ajnala’s private member Bill to amend Article 25 of the Constitution to meet the community’s pressing demand.

The Bill titled ‘Constitution Amendment Bill 2012’ seeks to drop Explanation II in Article 25, which — while guaranteeing a right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion — defines Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as components of the Hindu religion.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News

Seeking a Constitutional amendment to provide independent religious status to Sikhs, Buddhist and Jain communities, SAD MP from Kadoor Sahib (Punjab) Rattan Singh Ajnala met Law Minister Salman Khurshid on Friday and him to bring a bill in this regard. Ajnala, who has been allowed by Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar to introduce a Private Member Bill in the House, said Sikhism have been established as a separate religion.

Bring bill guaranteeing separate religious status to Sikhs: MP - Indian Express

@Joe Shearer and the deans of this forum as Joe describes them, "rest in peace".

 

[toxic_pus]

I confirmed it from my Indian lawyer friends.

No you didn’t.

The statement that the Sikhs and Jains are part of the wider Hindu community occurs on P.15 of the court Judgment

Don’t know what you mean by P.15. If it is a reference to the page number of the verdict, then I am not sure if a 9-page document can have a 15th page.

I had one of my friends forward to me the soft copy of the verdict. I will post it later. Before that I want to see just how much of a fool you are willing to make of yourself.

They say that if what you state is the truth, why would mainstream Indian newspapers publish wrong and erroneous news story and were not taken to the court for contempt.

Next time try not to pass off your specious arguments as some Indian lawyer's, just to give it some legitimacy. It's just embarrassingly juvenile.

If Indian constitution accepted Sikhs, Jains and Bhuddists as separate religions why would there be a bill tabled in the Lok Sabha to amend the constitution of India in this regard.

We have our share of fools, most are willingly so while rest are just born that way. If you are not careful and don't let go of that chip on your shoulder, you will be taken for a long, long ride by these fools.

And by the way, it is only a very miniscule section of the Sikhs, that are finding rudimentary English too difficult to grasp, just like you. Not the Buddhists or the Jains.

Here is the Central Govt. notification declaring Sikhs and Buddhists as minority.

Jains are declared minorities according to individual state minorities' acts.

 

[Trev]

@toxic_pus, YOU ARE A LIAR. I confirmed it from my Indian lawyer friends. The statement that the Sikhs and Jains are part of the wider Hindu community occurs on P.15 of the court Judgment. They say that if what you state is the truth, why would mainstream Indian newspapers publish wrong and erroneous news story and were not taken to the court for contempt.

Jains, Sikhs part of broader Hindu religion, says SC
New Delhi, August 10 [2005]

In a significant ruling defining the status of communities like Sikhs and Jains within the Constitutional frame work, the Supreme Court has declined to treat them as separate minority communities from the broad Hindu religion, saying encouraging such tendencies would pose serious jolt to secularism and democracy in the country.

The so-called minority communities like Sikhs and Jains were not treated as national minorities at the time of framing of the Constitution. Sikhs and Jains, in fact, have throughout been treated as part of wider Hindu community, which has different sects, sub-sects, faiths, modes of worship and religious philosophies, a Bench of Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti, Mr Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Nation

A separate petition has also been filed in Nov 2012 by a Sikh scholar Birendra Kaur, which is being heard by Indian Supreme Court.

If Indian constitution accepted Sikhs, Jains and Bhuddists as separate religions why would there be a bill tabled in the Lok Sabha to amend the constitution of India in this regard.

Sikhism is a separate religion and is acknowledged as such throughout the world, except in Indian legal system. Article 25 of the Constitution of India has amalgamated Sikhism into Hindu religion. The demand of separate status for Sikhism under the Constitution has been supported by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) headed by the former Chief Justice of India, Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah which in its report has recommended amended to Article 25 of the Constitution to restore the status of Sikhism as separate religion.

Panjpani Radio » Blog Archive » India – Sikh Identity Issue: Rights Group to Launch “Amend Article 25” Campaign

At present, Article 25 of the Constitution of India describes Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as parts of the Hindu religion. Sikhs have long been seeking amendment to this Article to grant Sikhism an independent identity under the law.

In a significant move, Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar today allowed Shiromani Akali Dal’s Khadoor Sahib member Rattan Singh Ajnala’s private member Bill to amend Article 25 of the Constitution to meet the community’s pressing demand.

The Bill titled ‘Constitution Amendment Bill 2012’ seeks to drop Explanation II in Article 25, which — while guaranteeing a right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion — defines Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as components of the Hindu religion.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News

Seeking a Constitutional amendment to provide independent religious status to Sikhs, Buddhist and Jain communities, SAD MP from Kadoor Sahib (Punjab) Rattan Singh Ajnala met Law Minister Salman Khurshid on Friday and him to bring a bill in this regard. Ajnala, who has been allowed by Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar to introduce a Private Member Bill in the House, said Sikhism have been established as a separate religion.

Bring bill guaranteeing separate religious status to Sikhs: MP - Indian Express

@Joe Shearer and the deans of this forum as Joe describes them, "rest in peace".

If Sikhs and Jains where Hindu then why in the Census are they classified as separate religious groups?

 

[Sugarcane]

@toxic_pus, YOU ARE A LIAR. I confirmed it from my Indian lawyer friends. The statement that the Sikhs and Jains are part of the wider Hindu community occurs on P.15 of the court Judgment. They say that if what you state is the truth, why would mainstream Indian newspapers publish wrong and erroneous news story and were not taken to the court for contempt.

Jains, Sikhs part of broader Hindu religion, says SC
New Delhi, August 10 [2005]

In a significant ruling defining the status of communities like Sikhs and Jains within the Constitutional frame work, the Supreme Court has declined to treat them as separate minority communities from the broad Hindu religion, saying encouraging such tendencies would pose serious jolt to secularism and democracy in the country.

The so-called minority communities like Sikhs and Jains were not treated as national minorities at the time of framing of the Constitution. Sikhs and Jains, in fact, have throughout been treated as part of wider Hindu community, which has different sects, sub-sects, faiths, modes of worship and religious philosophies, a Bench of Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti, Mr Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Nation

A separate petition has also been filed in Nov 2012 by a Sikh scholar Birendra Kaur, which is being heard by Indian Supreme Court.

If Indian constitution accepted Sikhs, Jains and Bhuddists as separate religions why would there be a bill tabled in the Lok Sabha to amend the constitution of India in this regard.

Sikhism is a separate religion and is acknowledged as such throughout the world, except in Indian legal system. Article 25 of the Constitution of India has amalgamated Sikhism into Hindu religion. The demand of separate status for Sikhism under the Constitution has been supported by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) headed by the former Chief Justice of India, Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah which in its report has recommended amended to Article 25 of the Constitution to restore the status of Sikhism as separate religion.

Panjpani Radio » Blog Archive » India – Sikh Identity Issue: Rights Group to Launch “Amend Article 25” Campaign

At present, Article 25 of the Constitution of India describes Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as parts of the Hindu religion. Sikhs have long been seeking amendment to this Article to grant Sikhism an independent identity under the law.

In a significant move, Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar today allowed Shiromani Akali Dal’s Khadoor Sahib member Rattan Singh Ajnala’s private member Bill to amend Article 25 of the Constitution to meet the community’s pressing demand.

The Bill titled ‘Constitution Amendment Bill 2012’ seeks to drop Explanation II in Article 25, which — while guaranteeing a right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion — defines Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as components of the Hindu religion.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News

Seeking a Constitutional amendment to provide independent religious status to Sikhs, Buddhist and Jain communities, SAD MP from Kadoor Sahib (Punjab) Rattan Singh Ajnala met Law Minister Salman Khurshid on Friday and him to bring a bill in this regard. Ajnala, who has been allowed by Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar to introduce a Private Member Bill in the House, said Sikhism have been established as a separate religion.

Bring bill guaranteeing separate religious status to Sikhs: MP - Indian Express

@Joe Shearer and the deans of this forum as Joe describes them, "rest in peace".

Why you are worried dude - even many Sikhs consider Sikhism a sub-sect of Hinduism, their country, their religion, they can do whatever they want.

 

[Nassr]

No you didn’t.



Don’t know what you mean by P.15. If it is a reference to the page number of the verdict, then I am not sure if a 9-page document can have a 15th page.

I had one of my friends forward to me the soft copy of the verdict. I will post it later. Before that I want to see just how much of a fool you are willing to make of yourself.



Next time try not to pass off your specious arguments as some Indian lawyer's, just to give it some legitimacy. It's just embarrassingly juvenile.



We have our share of fools, most are willingly so while rest are just born that way. If you are not careful and don't let go of that chip on your shoulder, you will be taken for a long, long ride by these fools.

And by the way, it is only a very miniscule section of the Sikhs, that are finding rudimentary English too difficult to grasp, just like you. Not the Buddhists or the Jains.

Here is the Central Govt. notification declaring Sikhs and Buddhists as minority.

Jains are declared minorities according to individual state minorities' acts.

Basically you are stating that the Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists who are asking the Indian government to grant them separate religious status are fools. What you also are stating that those Indians who are members of Indian Lok Sabha, and represent the people of these three religions do not understand the Indian constitution and have wrongfully moved a bill in the Lok Sabha to amend the Indian constitution and are therefore idiots. What you are also implying that the Indian Hindus are correct and others are stupid.

Another fool, according to your definition, named Dr. Daljit Singh, (LL.M., Ph.D) Professor of Law and Principal of Khalsa College, Amritsar, states the following:

Now, it is a matter of surprise, when the [Indian Governmental] Commission headed by Former Chief Justice of India Hon’ble Justice N.N. Venkatachaliah and other 10 legal luminaries had recommended the amendment in Article 25 of the Constitution of India, particularly to delete Explanation II of Article 25 (2) (b) II, which is considered to be the most objectionable provision by the Sikh community, how the people demanding amendment to this provision can be considered anti-national…………….If Sikh succeed in getting this amendment implemented, it is only then that Sikhs can proclaim their ‘true victory’, it will be ‘historic decisions’, it will be a ‘praiseworthy step of Union Government’ and the ‘Sikhs independent identity will be established’.

Truth about amendment to Anand Marriage Act – achievement for Sikhs or fraud with Sikhs | Sikh Siyasat News (in English)

Why would the Indian Supreme Court issues notice in Ms Kaur’s case filed in Nov 2012, on the question as to whether the inclusion of people professing the Sikh, Jain or Buddhist faiths could be included in the enactments relating exclusively to persons professing the Hindu religion, within the ambit of Explanation II to Article 25(2) of the Constitution.

Can Hindu law cover Sikhs, Jains, asks SC - Times Of India

As I was going through certain similar decisions by India’s higher courts, I found this interesting text of Indian Supreme Court judgment, given in a different case in 1986, yet states the same that Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains are part of broader Hindu religion.This therefore is not the first time it has happened.

The following is the complete text of the judgement of the Supreme Court of India in the matter of the Ramakrishna Mission's petition to be declared a non-Hindu, minority religion, under the Indian constitution.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 4434A-34D OF 1986

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 4937/85, 5676-78/85

WITH

I.A.No. 1 in C.A. Nos. 5676-78/85 and CMP
No. 23111/86 in C.A. No. 4937/85

Bramchari Sidheswar Shai & Ors. etc. .... Appellants

Versus

State of West Bengal etc. .... Respondents

J U D G M E N T

VENKATACHALA, J.

Excerpts

However. dealing with the development of the Hindu religion and philosophy from time to time, it is observed thus:

"(37). The development of Hindu religion and philosophy shows that from time to time saints and religious reformers attempted to remove from the Hindu thought an practices elements of corruption and superstition and that led to the formation of different sects. Buddha started Buddhism; Mahavir founded Jainism: Basava became the founder of Lingayat religion, Dhyaneshwar and Tukaram initiated the Varakari cult; Guru Nanak inspired Sikhism; Dayananda founded Arya Samaj, and Chaitanaya became Bhakti cult; and as a result of the teachings of Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, Hindu religion flowered into its most attractive progressive and dynamic form. If we study the teachings of these saints and religious reformers, we would notice an amount of divergence in their respective views; but underneath that divergence, there is a kind of subtle indescribable unity which keeps them within the sweep of the broad and progressive Hindu religion."

Complete judgement of the Supreme Court of India - In-Depth Issues - Publications - Hinduism Today Magazine

 

[Nassr]

Why you are worried dude - even many Sikhs consider Sikhism a sub-sect of Hinduism, their country, their religion, they can do whatever they want.

I am sorry if I offend you in any way. I did not intend to upset you by my posts. I thought this was a discussion forum and I learn from what others comment here.

The discussion actually started when a poster commented about constitutional equality in India. There was a gentleman who stated that it was denied to minorities in India and I agreed with him. Least did I realise that the whole Indian Hindu community would go after me. They also had close air support from the eminences and the exalted ones and the deans of this forum, as Joe Shearer called them, including some Pakistani conscientious objectors.

Again I apologize for causing any offense.  

If Sikhs and Jains where Hindu then why in the Census are they classified as separate religious groups?

Because they are not accepted as a separate religious group by the government of India, according the edicts of Indian constitution.

 

[Joe Shearer]

We have our share of fools, most are willingly so while rest are just born that way. If you are not careful and don't let go of that chip on your shoulder, you will be taken for a long, long ride by these fools.
And by the way, it is only a very miniscule section of the Sikhs, that are finding rudimentary English too difficult to grasp, just like you. Not the Buddhists or the Jains.

....since we are confused about what is being implied.

 

[Nassr]

....since we are confused about what is being implied.

Arrey Joe, this was not my comment. It was posted by one of your eminences. Please remove the fog from your specs and then re-read - I know you are located in a cold place.

 

[Sugarcane]

I am sorry if I offend you in any way. I did not intend to upset you by my posts. I thought this was a discussion forum and I learn from what others comment here.

The discussion actually started when a poster commented about constitutional equality in India. There was a gentleman who stated that it was denied to minorities in India and I agreed with him. Least did I realise that the whole Indian Hindu community would go after me. They also had close air support from the eminences and the exalted ones and the deans of this forum, as Joe Shearer called them, including some Pakistani conscientious objectors.

Again I apologize for causing any offense.

LOL!!! Why i have to be offended - carry on

 

[Capt.Popeye]

They didn't.

I have the copy of the verdict.

Hey @toxic_pus and @Joe Shearer; Guys just tell me, did the Supreme Court of India just set up its Circuit Bench on the the other side of the Wagah-Attari Border Gate? You know that Gate where all the 'peacock-strutting' takes place.
Or did India's Constituent Assembly just get re-convened in another part of the world?
Funny 'Heat and Dust' being churned up around here!
But then; I was never the kind who cottoned up to the powdered wig kind of blokes; but thats just me.

 

[Trev]

I am sorry if I offend you in any way. I did not intend to upset you by my posts. I thought this was a discussion forum and I learn from what others comment here.

The discussion actually started when a poster commented about constitutional equality in India. There was a gentleman who stated that it was denied to minorities in India and I agreed with him. Least did I realise that the whole Indian Hindu community would go after me. They also had close air support from the eminences and the exalted ones and the deans of this forum, as Joe Shearer called them, including some Pakistani conscientious objectors.

Again I apologize for causing any offense.  


Because they are not accepted as a separate religious group by the government of India, according the edicts of Indian constitution.

You have just been proven wrong by another member, I think Indians will know their constitutions better then you. Btw you are talking to someone who has a Sikh father.

 

[Nassr]

Hey @toxic_pus and @Joe Shearer; Guys just tell me, did the Supreme Court of India just set up its Circuit Bench on the the other side of the Wagah-Attari Border Gate? You know that Gate where all the 'peacock-strutting' takes place.
Or did India's Constituent Assembly just get re-convened in another part of the world?
Funny 'Heat and Dust' being churned up around here!
But then; I was never the kind who cottoned up to the powdered wig kind of blokes; but thats just me.

Oh my …. A citizen of Republic of India which emerged a mere 65 years ago is telling the heirs of 9000 old Meluhha civilization, whether there was any of their circuit bench functioning across Atari. Heat and dust churning from the numerous age old and newer slums that your India populates must have had an opium like affect on you. Even Savarkars ashes would be blushing crimson with pride.

The problem is that majority of so-called Dharmic religions do not want to be part of Hinduism any longer and that hurts, despite the constitutional coverage.

Ah, and I forgot that you still wear the famous powder, less the wigs ofcourse, to reduce the smell that wanders in the Indian prairies. 

You have just been proven wrong by another member, I think Indians will know their constitutions better then you. Btw you are talking to someone who has a Sikh father.

I didn't know that I have been. I think the Indians do not know even their religion well enough, what to talk about their constitution. Please do ask your father to be honest with you.