What's new

I, Maha Sapta Sindhu

Hypothetical question. There is still a fat chance of Guru Nanak Ji being born and being influenced to form Sikhism even if Islam had not come.

And I am sure you know about one of the main reasons for the establishment of Khalsa.



Why are you getting worked up boss ?? Did I say that Indian Muslims are not equal to Indian hindus/Sikhs/Jains/Buddhists. I challenge you to quote one post of mine where I said so. Indeed in my previous post I had boldly put, Indian Muslims are indigenous as much as any other,but the culture(Islamic) they follow is alien.

A crude example of that would be Red-Indians wearing three piece suits and ties. They were native to America, but the culture they follow will be in that case European(Alien).

Coming to the point you raised, NO they dont carry the burden of apology..

Again many of the Muslims were peacefully converted to Islam thorough the influence of Sufis and why should they need to feel apologetic. ??

Regarding Mother Teresa, it is not the religion that placed her on a pedestal, it was the social services rendered by her.

All I am saying is, Islam as a culture was not native to the sub-continent and though I accept the Islamic history as very much a part of Indian History , there is very little for me to be exactly proud of it.

So you as an individual are not proud of the Mysore Kings..or The Mughal influence..
But should you not acknowledge the Sufi's.. they are responsible for the main population of Muslims in India..and how even today..they are revered by all. The tolerance that they preached far surpasses any previous attempts.
Even though.. it was a religious motivation that inspired that life's work.
The crux of what I am trying to ascertain.. is whether Islam should be taken as a positive influence on India or not?
 
So you as an individual are not proud of the Mysore Kings..or The Mughal influence..

You seem to be mentioning Tipu and he is still considered as a hero by the people of South

My words from post # 36. Does it answer your query ?? FYI I am from the South.

Regarding the Mughals, the only King I find worthy of praise is Akbar for his religious tolerance and his intellectual capacity. You cant possibly expect me to be proud of Babar or Aurangazeb ?? Can you ?


But should you not acknowledge the Sufi's.. they are responsible for the main population of Muslims in India..and how even today..they are revered by all. The tolerance that they preached far surpasses any previous attempts.
Even though.. it was a religious motivation that inspired that life's work.

I am a firm believer in the concept of "freedom to choose one's religion, if one is truly inspired by it". The Sufi saints explained their version of Islam and if people accepted it willingly, then who am I to dispute that ?

The crux of what I am trying to ascertain.. is whether Islam should be taken as a positive influence on India or not?

It cannot be taken in black or white, sort of "you are with us or against us".

it has many shades of grey, of which some are proud of, many are not proud of.
 
the funny thing is when i first visited this forum pakistanis were hell bent on discrediting IVC and never accepted that it was also part of their culture......they considered IVC to some 2nd rated civilization and were claiming to be the successors of islamic invaders......that time they considered indians to be successors of IVC ......and indians were trying to make them believe that it was a shared culture b/w india and pakistan.....

Now look.......once they understood it was a great civilization , they started accepting it and started to disown indians from it.........Now also indians are claiming it to be a shared culture........
 
@Santro

I think your comment was excessive, for reasons that I shall set down, and which I believe you will appreciate and agree with.

Both Wotzis and Wotzat have taken extreme positions, almost laughably unproven positions and are having the time of their lives relieving their excess of testosterone by knocking each other off multiple times. Harmless fun, so long as they don't turn around once they get off their systems and knock the block off some completely unsuspecting passer-by; that has been known to happen.

For the rest of us, we can take positions or we can stay neutral.

I have taken positions in past comments, I hope earnestly and sincerely that I have never taken a position that lacks integrity. It has always been a position that I believed to be accurate, within the limits of historical accuracy relating to times so long past, and to events so poorly and scantily reported.

On other occasions, I have taken a neutral stance, committed more to supplying information, when it seemed to be lacking.

I am in no position to advise you and would consider it an impertinent act to do so; you have more than the maturity and capacity required to gauge what is appropriate and what is not. In the same vein, you will not misunderstand, nor resent an observation, made without rancour, that you are leaning a bit too much to a side.

Perhaps the point would sound reasonable if I were to walk through your last observation. Please note that I do so with respect, and with no intention to score points.

And yet Guru Nanak's inspiration was from both religions??.. is it not?
It is the introduction of Islam that changed the course of history..and Sikhism was part of this history..
Would Sikhism still exist in its current form had Islam not come in.

Oh, certainly, this admits of no debate, no controversy. But in his own flamboyant way, Wotzat was saying that Sikhism, influenced in whatever way, was still indigenous to the sub-continent.

I believe that that point is his. It is quite another thing whether we wish to agree with him that it is the location, the place that characterises a feature of culture and of human existence such as religion, or it should be bound to people. That point is certainly not his, if I may say so, and that was also, if I may further say, a criticism which might well have been made.

Also..if you are saying Indians arent proud of Muslim history in the sub continent.. then it seems that every Indian Muslim carries a burden of apology for his ancestors actions..
Since only Muslim rulers in your words were plunderers and conquerors..therefore every Indian Muslim should be apologetic about his existence??
Should he be more "Indian" than the rest??
Christianity is alien too.. so is mother Teresa not to be taken at the same level as other figures?
All those with Alien backgrounds need to sing "Vande Mataram" with more fervor than the rest to prove their allegiance to Bharat?

Two separate issues here: whether those 'not Hindu' should swear loyalty oaths the rest of their own lives, and through the generations to come in future, and about Vande Mataram.

I am myself an agnostic, and not an observant Hindu. Both from that point of view, and from the point of view of my friends who happen to be observant of the practices of another 'not Hindu' religion (or even those who are not observant but still find themselves in the same pound), I strongly protest against any demand, from any quarters, that we should prove our credentials. As a citizen of the country, under its democratic constitution, I shall believe what I consider it appropriate to believe, and I shall resent any attempt to make me feel inferior.

Perhaps you are already aware from the very public displays of plumage and other martial rites on this very forum that there is a wide range of political opinion in India. One shade of opinion has taken its resentment of historical wrongs, none of them felt, knowledge of all of them inculcated through means specially devised for the purpose, to an extreme which is a toxic element in a democratic society. This is a matter which has to be sorted out by Indians themselves; unfortunately, there is no way in which external forces, including friends, can be of assistance to those of us committed to mute or neutralise this trend.

You will notice that this is the exact mirror image of what I have advocated to my liberal Indian friends on PTH: festina lente, it is not for us to lecture Pakistanis, especially not liberal Pakistanis, but not even fundamentalist Pakistanis on how to run their country. We can at best support the like-minded elements in their society, offer them comfort and sustenance, cluck our tongues sympathetically but stop at that; nothing further is permissible, or appropriate. I offer this as an example of what has been done, and of course, it is open to each and every one of us to adopt or to reject this course of action.

I nearly forgot to write about Vande Mataram.

That is an adjunct to the panoply of state; it is not our National Anthem, I am not obliged to rise to it and pay it respect, but it was included at the sentimental behest of the Congress Party, which used it as its slogan and rallying cry throughout the freedom struggle; to the old-school Congressman, it would have been unthinkable to step into an independent India without the comfort of this slogan always with them.

It was appropriated, however, by a most surprising segment of opinion that had never done much of any substance during the actual struggle, but was hugely concerned about the symbology after all the shouting and bloodshed was safely over. As the Congress gradually slid into a mire of corruption, and into the mistaken delusion that the country that they had fought to free was theirs for the taking, other forces objected vehemently to their presumption. One such force, as I have mentioned, turned this uniquely Congress slogan around and against them, and represented it as an anti-Muslim, pro-Hindu slogan.

The sad part is that people, Hindu and Muslim alike, Indian and Pakistani alike, fall for this creative fiction. The author, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, wrote a number of novels, some of them as historical romances, in the style of Walter Scott, but with a wealth of local detail pertaining to Bengal which cannot have been inspired by anything else but an ardent love of the country and an intimate and comfortable knowledge of local lore. This particular song occurs in a book named Ananda Math - the monastery of joy - and the song is put in the lips of a near-deranged fundamentalist sadhu, as almost a spontaneous outpouring of extreme religious feeling. It hardly represents the sentiments of all sections of the characters in the book; only the sadhus in rebellion against the British, a rebellion known in history, ironically, as the Faqir Mutiny. This was one of the last outbursts of the out-of-control factions of sadhus and faqirs against any kind of civil control, and their desire to retain their unfettered right to wage war on the country at their sweet will and plunder at will. The setting in the book was Hindu fundamentalist; the historical circumstances, of which Chatterjee knew very well, were equally rooted in Hindu and in Muslim fundamentalism. Perhaps fundamentalism is the wrong word; there was little religious in this incident. It was more a case of a rebellion.

Was this intended to offend Muslims? Was Chatterjee a Hindu apologist? No, and yes. He had no intention to offend Muslims, if we are to take the evidence of his oeuvre in general. In Durgeshnandini, the chieftain's daughter, his hero is a Rajput prince; in vain combat against him, in a display of poignant chivalry, in the best sense of the term, is an Afghan princeling, who nurses the wounded hero back to health in his own home, at the hands of his own beloved sister. The sister herself is a character of the depth of passion and sacrifice of Rebecca from the novel Ivanhoe; nobody who reads about them can think for a moment that Chatterjee despised Muslims. He was a consummate character-painter. There is a plethora of minor characters swirling about, good people, ordinary people, scumbags - he distributes them among factions, camps, ethnicities, religions with an even hand. Not totally even; he was a Bengali Hindu, recovering from the days when his contemporary, traditionally trained in Persian, represented the Great Mughal at legal proceedings before the Privy Council in Britain. The reaction from this, the clear and evident dependence on the new methods of Macaulayite education - Chatterjee was one of the first graduates of the elite Presidency College - were quite evident as a sub-stratum in his writing.

What I am trying to argue is that it was never intended by the author that Vande Mataram should be a Muslim-baiting song. It became one at the hands of those who are ever-alert to find ways in which to bait Muslims; a phoo-phoo band, a hunk of pork, a muttered remark in a crowded market-place, all will serve the purpose. And have done so, each on its own bloody day, each along with its mirror equivalent aimed at over-sensitive Hindus.

Should the song be imposed on any section of the population? Of course not! the whole issue is a non-issue, created out of thin air to pull some votes, 'to catch some votes', to use Jinnah's scathing phrase.

With regards,
 
Oh, certainly, this admits of no debate, no controversy. But in his own flamboyant way, Wotzat was saying that Sikhism, influenced in whatever way, was still indigenous to the sub-continent.

I believe that that point is his. It is quite another thing whether we wish to agree with him that it is the location, the place that characterises a feature of culture and of human existence such as religion, or it should be bound to people. That point is certainly not his, if I may say so, and that was also, if I may further say, a criticism which might well have been made.

Either way , be it the people or the location, wasnt Sikhism indigenous to the sub-continent. :rolleyes:
 
Joe, Bankim had his faults too. I think in the second edition of Ananda Math he replaced the word 'Jaban' with 'Musalman' as his British employer wasn't too happy with the wordings.

Vande Mataram as a song strictly describes the beauty that is Bengal, which in later period used as anti-Muslim slogan by Hindu fundamentalists.
 
.Now also indians are claiming it to be a shared culture........

Ignore all that, the more important part of history rather than the cherishing part is learning from it,especially avoiding same mistakes part.
 
Vande Mataram as a song strictly describes the beauty that is Bengal, which in later period used as anti-Muslim slogan by Hindu fundamentalists.

Wasnt it the Muslim clergy who was allergic to this song because of the invocation to Maa Durga in it ?

Pardon me for citing wiki:

This is the core of the letter Rabindranath Tagore wrote to Netaji in 1937,
"The core of Vande Mataram is a hymn to goddess Durga: this is so plain that there can be no debate about it. Of course Bankimchandra does show Durga to be inseparably united with Bengal in the end, but no Mussulman [Muslim] can be expected patriotically to worship the ten-handed deity as 'Swadesh' [the nation]. This year many of the special [Durga] Puja numbers of our magazines have quoted verses from Vande Mataram - proof that the editors take the song to be a hymn to Durga. The novel Anandamath is a work of literature, and so the song is appropriate in it. But Parliament is a place of union for all religious groups, and there the song cannot be appropriate. When Bengali Mussulmans show signs of stubborn fanaticism, we regard these as intolerable. When we too copy them and make unreasonable demands, it will be self-defeating."

In the end though Personally I believe It is not mandatory to sing it if someone finds it objectionable.
 
@Santro

I think your comment was excessive, for reasons that I shall set down, and which I believe you will appreciate and agree with.

Both Wotzis and Wotzat have taken extreme positions, almost laughably unproven positions and are having the time of their lives relieving their excess of testosterone by knocking each other off multiple times. Harmless fun, so long as they don't turn around once they get off their systems and knock the block off some completely unsuspecting passer-by; that has been known to happen.

For the rest of us, we can take positions or we can stay neutral.

I have taken positions in past comments, I hope earnestly and sincerely that I have never taken a position that lacks integrity. It has always been a position that I believed to be accurate, within the limits of historical accuracy relating to times so long past, and to events so poorly and scantily reported.

On other occasions, I have taken a neutral stance, committed more to supplying information, when it seemed to be lacking.

I am in no position to advise you and would consider it an impertinent act to do so; you have more than the maturity and capacity required to gauge what is appropriate and what is not. In the same vein, you will not misunderstand, nor resent an observation, made without rancour, that you are leaning a bit too much to a side.

Perhaps the point would sound reasonable if I were to walk through your last observation. Please note that I do so with respect, and with no intention to score points.



Oh, certainly, this admits of no debate, no controversy. But in his own flamboyant way, Wotzat was saying that Sikhism, influenced in whatever way, was still indigenous to the sub-continent.

I believe that that point is his. It is quite another thing whether we wish to agree with him that it is the location, the place that characterises a feature of culture and of human existence such as religion, or it should be bound to people. That point is certainly not his, if I may say so, and that was also, if I may further say, a criticism which might well have been made.



Two separate issues here: whether those 'not Hindu' should swear loyalty oaths the rest of their own lives, and through the generations to come in future, and about Vande Mataram.

I am myself an agnostic, and not an observant Hindu. Both from that point of view, and from the point of view of my friends who happen to be observant of the practices of another 'not Hindu' religion (or even those who are not observant but still find themselves in the same pound), I strongly protest against any demand, from any quarters, that we should prove our credentials. As a citizen of the country, under its democratic constitution, I shall believe what I consider it appropriate to believe, and I shall resent any attempt to make me feel inferior.

Perhaps you are already aware from the very public displays of plumage and other martial rites on this very forum that there is a wide range of political opinion in India. One shade of opinion has taken its resentment of historical wrongs, none of them felt, knowledge of all of them inculcated through means specially devised for the purpose, to an extreme which is a toxic element in a democratic society. This is a matter which has to be sorted out by Indians themselves; unfortunately, there is no way in which external forces, including friends, can be of assistance to those of us committed to mute or neutralise this trend.

You will notice that this is the exact mirror image of what I have advocated to my liberal Indian friends on PTH: festina lente, it is not for us to lecture Pakistanis, especially not liberal Pakistanis, but not even fundamentalist Pakistanis on how to run their country. We can at best support the like-minded elements in their society, offer them comfort and sustenance, cluck our tongues sympathetically but stop at that; nothing further is permissible, or appropriate. I offer this as an example of what has been done, and of course, it is open to each and every one of us to adopt or to reject this course of action.

I nearly forgot to write about Vande Mataram.

That is an adjunct to the panoply of state; it is not our National Anthem, I am not obliged to rise to it and pay it respect, but it was included at the sentimental behest of the Congress Party, which used it as its slogan and rallying cry throughout the freedom struggle; to the old-school Congressman, it would have been unthinkable to step into an independent India without the comfort of this slogan always with them.

It was appropriated, however, by a most surprising segment of opinion that had never done much of any substance during the actual struggle, but was hugely concerned about the symbology after all the shouting and bloodshed was safely over. As the Congress gradually slid into a mire of corruption, and into the mistaken delusion that the country that they had fought to free was theirs for the taking, other forces objected vehemently to their presumption. One such force, as I have mentioned, turned this uniquely Congress slogan around and against them, and represented it as an anti-Muslim, pro-Hindu slogan.

The sad part is that people, Hindu and Muslim alike, Indian and Pakistani alike, fall for this creative fiction. The author, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, wrote a number of novels, some of them as historical romances, in the style of Walter Scott, but with a wealth of local detail pertaining to Bengal which cannot have been inspired by anything else but an ardent love of the country and an intimate and comfortable knowledge of local lore. This particular song occurs in a book named Ananda Math - the monastery of joy - and the song is put in the lips of a near-deranged fundamentalist sadhu, as almost a spontaneous outpouring of extreme religious feeling. It hardly represents the sentiments of all sections of the characters in the book; only the sadhus in rebellion against the British, a rebellion known in history, ironically, as the Faqir Mutiny. This was one of the last outbursts of the out-of-control factions of sadhus and faqirs against any kind of civil control, and their desire to retain their unfettered right to wage war on the country at their sweet will and plunder at will. The setting in the book was Hindu fundamentalist; the historical circumstances, of which Chatterjee knew very well, were equally rooted in Hindu and in Muslim fundamentalism. Perhaps fundamentalism is the wrong word; there was little religious in this incident. It was more a case of a rebellion.

Was this intended to offend Muslims? Was Chatterjee a Hindu apologist? No, and yes. He had no intention to offend Muslims, if we are to take the evidence of his oeuvre in general. In Durgeshnandini, the chieftain's daughter, his hero is a Rajput prince; in vain combat against him, in a display of poignant chivalry, in the best sense of the term, is an Afghan princeling, who nurses the wounded hero back to health in his own home, at the hands of his own beloved sister. The sister herself is a character of the depth of passion and sacrifice of Rebecca from the novel Ivanhoe; nobody who reads about them can think for a moment that Chatterjee despised Muslims. He was a consummate character-painter. There is a plethora of minor characters swirling about, good people, ordinary people, scumbags - he distributes them among factions, camps, ethnicities, religions with an even hand. Not totally even; he was a Bengali Hindu, recovering from the days when his contemporary, traditionally trained in Persian, represented the Great Mughal at legal proceedings before the Privy Council in Britain. The reaction from this, the clear and evident dependence on the new methods of Macaulayite education - Chatterjee was one of the first graduates of the elite Presidency College - were quite evident as a sub-stratum in his writing.

What I am trying to argue is that it was never intended by the author that Vande Mataram should be a Muslim-baiting song. It became one at the hands of those who are ever-alert to find ways in which to bait Muslims; a phoo-phoo band, a hunk of pork, a muttered remark in a crowded market-place, all will serve the purpose. And have done so, each on its own bloody day, each along with its mirror equivalent aimed at over-sensitive Hindus.

Should the song be imposed on any section of the population? Of course not! the whole issue is a non-issue, created out of thin air to pull some votes, 'to catch some votes', to use Jinnah's scathing phrase.

With regards,

Joe

There should never be point scoring involved in such discussions..
This is not a debate on pros or cons.. but rather a cumulative discourse on what was the identity of Indian Muslims pre partition..and what is the identity of Pakistani and Indian Muslims now ..I appreciate you stating it.

One leans only after being exposed to a certain attitude continuously....whatever the degree of the shift in opinion..it takes actual knowledge to stay unbiased..and not rhetoric.

The highlighted parts I could not agree with more, I feel the same way about my nation..
Coming to the issue of Vande Mataram.. I wasn't actually critiquing the subject matter.. rather its use..which you so eloquently pointed out was based on religious politics... but rather the need for the Indian Muslim to somehow identify themselves as more "Indian".
Again my experience is limited to what I observed in person..and what I hear from the section of my family across the border.
Compared to any other Indian I have met of other/no beliefs .. they are more defensive of Indian policy..more overtly "patriotic"..and more propagative of what I now sarcastically tease them with..the "all is well" mantra.
Generally Indians are more private and guarding about their national issues.. but there is a fine line where one can tell.. in the words of Kaifi Azmi.."Tum itna jo Muskura rahe ho, kya ghum hai jo chupa rahe ho"...
And this observation was not confined to just those related to me..
(although it is possible.. that the issues may not just be confined to the community.. but rather the whole area..as pointed out elsewhere to me the Northern states are less developed).
 
Wasnt it the Muslim clergy who was allergic to this song because of the invocation to Maa Durga in it ?

Pardon me for citing wiki:

This is the core of the letter Rabindranath Tagore wrote to Netaji in 1937,


In the end though Personally I believe It is not mandatory to sing it if someone finds it objectionable.

It is indeed. Maa Durga is primary deity of Hindu Bengalis.

It is for this reason only, the first two verses(I guess) are considered as National Song.

However I have never seen it to be used to portray Maa Durga during my lifetime. The contemporary meaning of the song is Vandana to the country. Actually I came to know that Muslims have a beef with the song quite later, usually it is considered as patriotic song once used by freedom fighters.
 
Last edited:
I, Maha Sapta Sindhu

Salman Rashid

(The writer is author of Jhelum: City of the Vitasta)


I am Maha Sapta Sindhu, the Great River (comprised) of seven rivers. That is what I was called by the earliest ancestors of those of you who claim to be of Aryan origin. ]

Btw, what the heck is the Maha Sapta Sindhu?
 
Either way , be it the people or the location, wasnt Sikhism indigenous to the sub-continent. :rolleyes:

It was, didn't I admit it? It's just that I have my own take on place vs. people. You should be asking me to explain that. :-(

Joe, Bankim had his faults too. I think in the second edition of Ananda Math he replaced the word 'Jaban' with 'Musalman' as his British employer wasn't too happy with the wordings.

Vande Mataram as a song strictly describes the beauty that is Bengal, which in later period used as anti-Muslim slogan by Hindu fundamentalists.

Yes, he didn't want to risk his coveted sub-Deputy Magistrateship.

On the song, it was a personification of the country, and could be - and was - reinterpreted as a hymn to the universal mother. So what started with the Congress adopting a song addressing the country became a song to the great mother.

Even for the first interpretation, even in the early days of the struggle, for instance, during the first partition of Bengal, Muslims objected to this. They didn't object to many others. This was too close to the bone.

Try to remember that for a Mussalman, idol worship, worship of any divinity other than Allah is hellfire. For them, the stakes are higher, unbearably high. This was not about aesthetics, it was about eternal damnation. My own reactions, or yours, don't matter; for the people objecting, this was a hideous reality.
 
Wasnt it the Muslim clergy who was allergic to this song because of the invocation to Maa Durga in it ?

Pardon me for citing wiki:

This is the core of the letter Rabindranath Tagore wrote to Netaji in 1937,


In the end though Personally I believe It is not mandatory to sing it if someone finds it objectionable.

Now wasn't that a brilliant letter? Look at the humanity, the balance, the reason which permeates it; look at the selection of words, look at the understanding, the maturity.

I agree with you, it should be sung only by the willing. I, personally, sentimental, damp-eyed Bengali that I am, am more than willing.
 
The Great River of Seven ?

Never heard of it before today. If the reference is to the Sapta Sindhu of the Rig veda then it revolves principally around the great river Saraswathi & her sister rivers not the Indus(though included as a sister river of saraswathi) as the gentleman who wrote the article thinks. Can't find a reference to Maha Sapta Sindhu. The guy probably just made that one up.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom