Secular India

[Naina_Marbus]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

[FONT=&quot]Indian Secularism is not secular[/FONT]

May 2, 2014 · by Maria Wirth

(India’s) TV anchors and panelists are no doubt intelligent, nevertheless their choice of topics is often pathetic.. One such (topic) is ‘secular’ or ‘secularism’. Since secularism is mentioned daily in Indian media and since it is a western ‘invention’, I would like to put it into perspective:

Contrary to the general perception in India, secular is not the opposite of communal. (And) Communal as such is not objectionable either. It simply means ‘pertaining to a community’. In Germany, elections to local bodies are called “communal elections” (Kommunalwahlen).

Secular means worldly and is opposite to ‘religious’. Now ‘religious’ in this context refers to Christianity, i.e. to a well-organized, dogmatic religion that claims that it is the sole keeper of the ‘truth’, which God himself has revealed to his Church.

And what is this revealed truth? In short: the human being is born in sin, which dates back originally to Adam and Eve. ….God had mercy on humanity and sent his only son Jesus Christ to earth to redeem us (Christians) by dying for our sins on the cross…However to be able to get the benefit of Jesus’ sacrifice, one must be baptized and become a member of the Church, otherwise one will be singled out for eternal hell on Judgment Day.

Understandably, such claims did not appeal to those who used their brains, but for many centuries they had to keep quiet or risk their lives. The reason was that for long the Church was intertwined with the state, and harsh laws made sure that people did not question the ‘revealed truth’. Heresy was punished with torture and death. Even in faraway Goa, after Francis Xavier called the Inquisition to this colony, unspeakable brutality was committed against Indians. In many Muslim countries till today, leaving Islam is punishable by death.

Significantly, those centuries, when Church and State were intertwined, when the clergy prospered and the faithful sheep suffered, are called the dark ages. And the time when the Church was forced to loosen its grip, is called the age of enlightenment, which started only some 350 years ago. Scientific discoveries…. played a crucial role for showing the Church her place. Now, more Europeans dared to oppose the stranglehold of religion. Many went to prison for doing so.

Slowly, the idea that reason, and not blind belief in a ‘revealed truth’, should guide society, took root and this lead to the demand for separation between state and Church. Such separation is called secularism. It is a recent phenomenon in the west.

Today, most western democracies are ‘secular’, i.e. the Church cannot push her agenda through state power, though most western democracies still grant Christianity preferential treatment….

---continued

 

[Naina_Marbus]

In India, however, the situation was different. Here, the dominant faith of the Indian people never had a power centrethat ……needed to be propped up by the state. Their faith was based on insights of the Rishis and on reason, intuition and direct experience. It expressed itself freely in a multitude of ways. Their faith was about trust and reverence for the One Source of all life. It was about doing the right thing at the right time according to one’s conscience.It was about The Golden Rule: not to do to others what one does not want to be done to oneself. It was about having noble thoughts. It was about how to live life in an ideal way.

However, this open atmosphere changed when Islam and Christianity entered India. Indians, who good naturedly considered the whole world as family, were despised, ridiculed and under Muslim rule killed in big numbers only because they were ‘Hindus’ (which is basically a geographical term). Indians did not realise that dogmatic religions were very different from their own, ancient Dharma. For the first time they were confronted with merciless killing in the name of God. ……

Guru Nanak left a testimony how bad the situation was, when he cried out in despair: “Having lifted Islam to the head, You have engulfed Hindustan in dread…. Such cruelty they have inflicted, and yet Your mercy remains unmoved…” (Granth Sahib, Mahla 1.360 )….

During Muslim rule Hindus had to lie low for fear of their lives, and during British rule they were ridiculed and despised by missionaries, and cut off from their tradition with the help of ‘education’ policies. Naturally, this took a toll on their self-esteem. In fact, till today, this low self-esteem especially in the English educated class is evident to outsiders, though it may not be so to the persons concerned. Swami Vivekananda’s efforts to give Hindus back their spine did not impact this class of people. Nevertheless, it is a great achievement that Hindu Dharma survived for so many centuries, whereas the west succumbed completely to Christianity and over 50 countries to Islam in a short span of time.

----continued

 

[Naina_Marbus]

Coming back to secularism. Though Hindu Dharma survived and never dictated terms to the state, ‘secular’ was added to the Constitution of India in 1976. There might have been a reason, as since Independence, several non-secular decisions had been taken. For example, Muslim and Christian representatives had pushed for special civil laws and other benefits and got them.

However, after adding ‘secular’, the situation did not improve. In fact the government seemed almost eager to benefit specifically the dogmatic religions (for which secularism was coined) and occasionally had to be restrained in its eagerness by the courts.
This is inexplicable. Why would ‘secular’ be added and then not acted upon? And the strangest thing: ‘secular’ got a new, specific Indian meaning. It means today: fostering those two big religions which have no respect for Hindus and whose dogmas condemn all of them to eternal hell.

It is a sad irony. Can you imagine the Jews honouring the Germans with preferential treatment…….? Yet Islam and Christianity that have gravely harmed Indians over centuries get preferential treatment by the Indian state, and their own beneficial dharma that has no other home except the Indian subcontinent, is egged out. And to top it, this is called ‘secular’!

Obviously Indians have not learnt from the European experience. Hindus have not yet realized the intention of the dogmatic religions, though they say it openly: Finish off Hinduism from the face of the earth. Hindus still ‘respect’ them, though this respect is not and cannot be reciprocated as long as those religions claim that their God wants everyone to worship exclusively Him. Hindus don’t realize that an ideology that uses God as a front does not become sacred, but all the more dangerous.

Media and politicians do their best to muddy the water. They call parties that represent a religious group, ‘secular’, instead of ‘religious;’ which would be the correct term. When the state gives in to demands by the big religious bullies it is also (falsely of course) called ‘secular’. But WHY would the government do this? It clearly plays with fire. Does it want to give its citizens a firsthand experience of what the dark ages were like? In the interest of all Indians it would be wise for the state to simply ignore the powerful, dogmatic religions and focus on all its citizens equally. This means being ‘secular’.

However, western secular states are not role models either. There is a lot of depression, drug abuse, alcohol and people are generally not happy in spite of doing everything to ‘enjoy life’. Here, India has an advantage over the west. Her rishis have left a great heritage of valuable treatises not only dealing with how to live life in an ideal way, but also how to conduct economy, politics, management, etc. If those guidelines are considered, and if India becomes a state based on her ancient dharma, she has good chances to regain the lost glory as the wealthiest and most advanced country in the world whose citizen are open-minded and contented. If not, probably the west discovers this treasure trove and adopts it…..first.

by Maria Wirth
[FONT=&quot]http://mariawirthblog.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/indian-secularism-is-not-secular/[/FONT]

 

[Naina_Marbus]

A counterpoise for Wendy Doniger!

 

[CHANDRU1849]

It is a good write-up.

Hinduism is not spread like Abrahamic Religions since some aspects have similarities of Christianity and Islam. Most of the Hindu scholars talk only about Ramayana and Mahabharatha, which deal with war, human sufferings etc. similar to Christianity and Islam which predominantly rise after wars and talk about peace. Hinduism should have met with great success had importance been given to Bhakthi. The rise of Hinduism in Tamil Nadu was primarily attributed to Bhakthi movement.

One of the branches of Hinduism i.e. Vaishnavism may be a predecessor to Abrahamic Religions with lot of similarities. Vaishnavism discusses about Avatars, whereas Jesus and Prophet are messengers of God. Vaishnavism might have its origin or influence from Egypt.

Despite all these, Hinduism still survives due to the fact that somewhere importance is given to Bhakthi.

 

[vgane]

Wherever M is in a majority the word Secular sxxks! It becomes fundamental.....

When M is in Minority the word Secular is their refuge!

I learnt that in Kanchi where the revered Sankara Mutt exists, it shares a wall with a Mosque! The Mosque has its muezzin Azan (call for prayers) 5 times a day without any hindrance! Just imagine what would have happened had the same been Pakistan...The temple would have been razed to the ground!!

 

[renuka]

Vaishnavism might have its origin or influence from Egypt.

???????

 

[rishikesan]

Let me reiterate, what I have been writing in this forum. Hindus are the most tolerant Race in humanity. Within the Hindus, Brahmins, Esp. Tamil brahmins are Docile/ tolerant/ forgiving/ submissive / No opposition for the sake of opposition/ helpful to all/ ,whereever they may live ? Dushtanai kandal doora vilahu has been the slogan given by elders decades hence. L Had we been different , aggressive Eye far an Eye / vengence, Etc we would not have the pride , we have acquired in our life. People say we lack unity.
I would like the seniors & well known sr. members including Dr Renuka, to give their views for further enlightenment to all Members.
Rishikesan

 

[renuka]

Let me reiterate, what I have been writing in this forum. Hindus are the most tolerant Race in humanity. Within the Hindus, Brahmins, Esp. Tamil brahmins are Docile/ tolerant/ forgiving/ submissive / No opposition for the sake of opposition/ helpful to all/ ,whereever they may live ? Dushtanai kandal doora vilahu has been the slogan given by elders decades hence. L Had we been different , aggressive Eye far an Eye / vengence, Etc we would not have the pride , we have acquired in our life. People say we lack unity.
I would like the seniors & well known sr. members including Dr Renuka, to give their views for further enlightenment to all Members.
Rishikesan

Dear Rishikeshan ji,

Thank you for suggesting I write my opinion.

Actually frankly speaking the word Tolerant is not every accurate.
Tolerant makes it sound as if we do not really like someone or any situation but we are just "tolerating " it becos we cant do anything about it.

So that way I wont want to say Hindus are tolerant..I feel the correct word to describe a True Hindu is peace loving.

Its only when we are peace loving we do not try to impose our believes on others and let others practice their own faith and believes.

But at the same time I am not going to spray paint every Hindu as a saint cos some are so called pseudo tolerant.

Some of us Hindus might not really like a person from another religion/community and might look down upon him/her in many ways and even have the worst possible thoughts but the only thing is the Hindu wont kill anyone on those grounds.

So even the most prejudiced of all Hindus might just still go about his/her life quietly.

So that way we Hindus hardly inflict physical injury on others.

But the same cant be said when the middle caste Hindus handle Dalits..that time the very same Hindu who is scared of a Muslim or Christian will have all the guts to kill a a Dalit!

So I dont really know if we Hindus are all that tolerant actually. Are we??

 

[sangom]

Secularism, in the Indian context should mean a political administration which is capable of keeping itself away from anything to do with religions. This will require that our politicians, judges and all other office-holders who swear on the Indian Constitution should be capable of keeping themselves away from any public display of allegiance to any religion. But so far, this has not happened; even President Rajendra Prasad visited temples and showed off his hindu leanings publicly. Thus it is impossible to visualize a truly secular India.

 

[Kuvalayavalli]

Rishikesan in his post #8 quotes "Hindus are the most tolerant Race in humanity."

Renuka in her post #9 quotes "So that way we Hindus hardly inflict physical injury on others."

Could you please justify your claims in the backdrop of Babri Masjid Demolition, the barbaric, gruesome murder of the Australian Missionary Graham Steward Staines and his sons, who were working among lepers, showing them love, in Orissa, the torching of churches in Gujarat, the mass murder of christians in Orissa in 2008?

 

[Naina_Marbus]

During Muslim rule Hindus had to lie low for fear of their lives, and during British rule they were ridiculed and despised by missionaries, and cut off from their tradition with the help of ‘education’ policies. Naturally, this took a toll on their self-esteem. In fact, till today, this low self-esteem especially in the English educated class is evident to outsiders, though it may not be so to the persons concerned. Swami Vivekananda’s efforts to give Hindus back their spine did not impact this class of people.

(India’s) TV anchors and panelists are no doubt intelligent, nevertheless their choice of topics is often pathetic.

IMO, the above quotes from Maria Wirth are very relevant for the reporters and journalists in the English-language print and electronic media. In fact, the Westerners have a derisive word to describe them: coconuts - brown on the outside, white on the inside.

 

[Naina_Marbus]

When I finished reading Maria Wirth's article, what flashed in my mind was the story of the curse on Hanuman by which he is unable to remember his own abilities unless reminded by another person.

Hanuman is relieved of the curse when Jambavan reminds him of his strength and abilities. Note that Jambavan was of a different 'ethnicity' from Hanuman!

In a metaphorical sense, people like Maria Wirth, David Frawley, Konrad Elst, Francois Gautier and others seem to be the Jambavans for the Indian race. And Wendy Doniger the Surpanakha?

 

[tks]

Great reference - well written!

 

[renuka]

Rishikesan in his post #8 quotes "Hindus are the most tolerant Race in humanity."

Renuka in her post #9 quotes "So that way we Hindus hardly inflict physical injury on others."

Could you please justify your claims in the backdrop of Babri Masjid Demolition, the barbaric, gruesome murder of the Australian Missionary Graham Steward Staines and his sons, who were working among lepers, showing them love, in Orissa, the torching of churches in Gujarat, the mass murder of christians in Orissa in 2008?

Dear Kuvs,


I did mention in the very same post that middle caste Hindus even kill Dalits and I ended my post asking "are we all that tolerant?"

So my post was not stating that we Hindus are all that innocent too.

But in the cases that you have quoted ..Babri Masjid scenario both are to blame..Hindus and Muslims.

BTW usually in the South of India there is less religious violence cos South was well protected from invaders to a certain extent and in the North they bore the maximum brunt of invaders of the killing kind so once bitten twice shy and they react more violently than South Indians.

Its not that South Indians are all that peace loving..its just that they had less experience with invaders.

So that is my answer..on a personal note I dont believe in anyone sitting back and being stupid enough not to realize ulterior motives of those from other religions..no doubt I dont condone mass murder etc but at times Hindus need to adopt a "Don't mess with me " stance too.

All this Ahimsa Gumsa Gimsa does not really work most of the time.

 

[Naina_Marbus]

Philip Goldberg is an Interfaith Minister in the USA. Here is an excerpt of his report on what he encountered on a visit to India in Dec 2013:

I just returned from a month in that country….. In the 18 cities I visited, the most frequently mentioned topic was the shady tactics of certain missionaries.

Imagine you're poor and living in a rural area. Your child gets sick. You manage to transport her to a hospital or clinic. …The condition is treatable. But the cost of treatment is not just beyond your means, it's beyond your imagining. Now comes a kindly health care worker who says: “ you can get the treatment free of charge. All you have to do is renounce the centuries-old traditions of your people and convert to our christian religion.

Such offers are being made to desperate people in the villages and tribal areas of India.

Of course. not all of them are ( shady), mind you. There are many who work selflessly to help the poor, the afflicted, and the illiterate, in the spirit of their savior's exhortation to serve "the least of these." Such missionaries have been welcome in India for centuries, and the Hindus I spoke to are grateful for their good works.

What is causing consternation and anger is a new breed of zealots, heavily financed by … fundamentalists, who seem driven to pile up numbers like door-to-door salesmen racking up commissions. Determined, fervent, and creative in pursuit of souls to save, they sound more like the snake-oil hucksters of legend than servants of Christ.

Targeting mainly the impoverished and uneducated, some of their tactics make the hospital bargain I described earlier look … reputable.. I was told of missionaries giving people temporary jobs in return for converting, and then threatening them with job loss -- not to mention eternal damnation -- if they reconvert to Hinduism. Families have apparently been torn apart because the converts are made to disassociate from the(ir) heathen (family members).

I heard about missionaries who dress in orange robes to look like swamis. Gullible and desperate villagers are told that their traditional gods are actually corrupted versions of Christ; that the venerable saints and sages of India's past were really Christians; that the three horizontal stripes traditionally drawn on the foreheads of Shiva devotees stand for the Holy Trinity; that the Upanishadic prayer that includes "Lead us from darkness to light" was meant as a cry for Jesus to save them.

A mother is sick? A father loses his source of income and can't feed his family? The bus filled with youngsters suddenly "stalls" on a dangerous mountain road? Well, say the missionaries, try praying to your Hindu gods. Hmmm, imagine that: nothing changes. Well then, see what happens if you pray to Jesus. Wow! Lo and behold! The mother receives medicine. The father gets a one-day job that puts rice on the table. The bus engine starts again! If one prayer to Jesus produces miracles like those, imagine what converting will do!

I heard about people being told that their misfortune derives from their worship of Hindu deities, because the idols are really forms of the Devil; about village strongmen being paid to coerce conversions from other villagers; about women given a choice of walking a mile to haul water from their usual source or using the new well conveniently dug in front of a church. The price? Conversion, of course.

I don't know if these egregious actions are commonplace or rarities. I do know that they are dishonorable. They're about coercion, not spiritual conversion; extortion, not the exchange of ideas. And, if I may say so as a non-Christian, they are an affront to Jesus, whom every Hindu I've ever met regards as a holy man of the highest order if not an incarnation of God. I can't help thinking that he would be as outraged by the deception being perpetrated in his name as he was about the moneylenders in the temple.

I told people in India that most American Christians would be appalled if they knew what was being done by their overly aggressive brethren. ….Is there some cosmic war for souls going on, in which anything goes? Or are there rules of engagement that civilized people should observe? What would Jesus say?

Philip Goldberg

 

[renuka]

BTW whatever said and done we can not deny that we Hindus do not much to improve the life of the down trodden.

So that is why the missionaries takes advantage in the loop holes of our own religion.

Conversion to Christianity does not get rid of a caste tag of a Dalit but it does confer some amount of dignity to him/her at least in the religious text he is not looked down upon.

Partly we Hindus are also to blame for the present situation.

Someone should revamp the scriptures..but no one would or no one would dare!LOL

I personally feel the best teachings for any self respecting person is Buddhism..it caters for everyone without creating a hierarchy.

We have to read Hindu text from the point of view of a Dalit..just imagine seeing and reading how subhuman a Dalit is considered as polluting etc..which totally belies all the cock and bull that the humble sage sees everyone from a Brahmin to a dog eater as the same and also a few friends from Discovery Channel(the cow and the elephant)..give me a break yaar...no one has equal vision if they follow Hinduism.

Imagine the very mention of a person's name is banned in forum cos he was anti Brahmin..and the very mention of his name makes emotions and tempers flare ..so just imagine how Dalits feel seeing day in day out how they are ill treated by the very religion they were born in??

So we Hindus as usual we only know how to talk and get excited when some white writer supports Hindu Dharma and praises India blah blah blah..that is all we are good for..to hear praise and gloat !LOL

I know my post might not be well taken but who cares!LOL

 

[Naina_Marbus]

[video=youtube;aGns_QEUPTw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGns_QEUPTw[/video]

 

[renuka]

[video=youtube_share;8WePyWhMF6o]http://youtu.be/8WePyWhMF6o[/video]

 

[vgane]

IMO, the above quotes from Maria Wirth are very relevant for the reporters and journalists in the English-language print and electronic media. In fact, the Westerners have a derisive word to describe them: coconuts - brown on the outside, white on the inside.

How true! The MSM thinks that if they can speak in English then it is better for term to be on the left side and belittle anything associated with Hinduism as communal !

 

[vgane]

This is the CPS study of Indian religions (Source Shri S.Gurumurthy)


1951 Indian Religions [IR] 87.2% 2001 Muslims [M] 10.4

2001 [IR] 84.2%; M 13.4%. IR down by 3% M up by 3% meaning by 30%

2011 study is withheld on account of elections..M growing like cockroaches indeed!

 

[renuka]

This is the CPS study of Indian religions (Source Shri S.Gurumurthy)


1951 Indian Religions [IR] 87.2% 2001 Muslims [M] 10.4

2001 [IR] 84.2%; M 13.4%. IR down by 3% M up by 3% meaning by 30%

2011 study is withheld on account of elections..M growing like cockroaches indeed!

Dear Sir,


When I was an intern in India once I spend my half a day just going thru tubal ligation records of patients..I was making a note of the statistics of tubal ligation(family planning sterilization on females) done on patients based on their religion.

The Specialist in that rural set up was very sweet and nice guy... so I asked him permission to look thru the records..so with the statistics I saw the rate of which tubal ligation is done on mainly Hindus..I am not surprised with what you wrote..and this was way back in 1996 when I saw the records.

 

[sarang]

Since countries like UK, Russia, France, Germany, Australia, Spain have started explicit avowal of their status - Christian, we too must express the state religion - sanatana dharma.

 

[Kuvalayavalli]

Dear Kuvs,

.....BTW usually in the South of India there is less religious violence cos South was well protected from invaders to a certain extent and in the North they bore the maximum brunt of invaders of the killing kind so once bitten twice shy and they react more violently than South Indians.

Its not that South Indians are all that peace loving..its just that they had less experience with invaders.

....

There exists violence of great magnitude in South also but it does not get publicized.

 

[Kuvalayavalli]

BTW whatever said and done we can not deny that we Hindus do not much to improve the life of the down trodden.

So that is why the missionaries takes advantage in the loop holes of our own religion.

Conversion to Christianity does not get rid of a caste tag of a Dalit but it does confer some amount of dignity to him/her at least in the religious text he is not looked down upon.

Partly we Hindus are also to blame for the present situation.

Someone should revamp the scriptures..but no one would or no one would dare!LOL

I personally feel the best teachings for any self respecting person is Buddhism..it caters for everyone without creating a hierarchy.

We have to read Hindu text from the point of view of a Dalit..just imagine seeing and reading how subhuman a Dalit is considered as polluting etc..which totally belies all the cock and bull that the humble sage sees everyone from a Brahmin to a dog eater as the same and also a few friends from Discovery Channel(the cow and the elephant)..give me a break yaar...no one has equal vision if they follow Hinduism.

Imagine the very mention of a person's name is banned in forum cos he was anti Brahmin..and the very mention of his name makes emotions and tempers flare ..so just imagine how Dalits feel seeing day in day out how they are ill treated by the very religion they were born in??

So we Hindus as usual we only know how to talk and get excited when some white writer supports Hindu Dharma and praises India blah blah blah..that is all we are good for..to hear praise and gloat !LOL

I know my post might not be well taken but who cares!LOL

Your post cannot be more true.

Most Hindus do not know what the Vedas, Upanishads, Brahmanas, Gita etc contain. Mainly bcoz the language is Sanskrit, which is no longer spoken but exists only in literature. There are few who can interpret the sanskrit texts correctly for anyone. Besides most of the so-called hindus are not interested in knowing their religion. for them roti kapda aur makaan is all that they want. furthermore the contents of the sanskrit texts are too complicated, you need to exercise your brain (which harldy any common indian would love to) taking it through an intellectual gymnasium. for any text/scripture to appeal, it has to be simple, translated in a language familiar to you. hence the bible, which is translated in almost every language of the world, has impacted the global population. nevertheless, the contents of the bible, especially the new testament, are very simple to understand. whereas when it comes to sanskrit texts, gone are the likes of chinmayananda et al who can give a captivating discourse on gita to a large audience. the current indian population does not want philosophy. they want instant miracles. hence a benny hinn could draw a large crowd in india than a vivekananda could in US.