Fwd: FW: Harmonising Cultural Diversity: A Scientific Perspective -Thillayvel Naidoo-27 March 2011

> Harmonising Cultural Diversity:  A Scientific Perspective
>
> Thillayvel Naidoo
>
> 27 March 2011
>
>
>
> Swami Prabhavananda's edition of Srimad Bhagavatam contains what for me is an amazing contention on the meaning and purpose of religion and its intellectual counterpart philosophy. Serious students of the two related subjects can never challenge the statement that forms a profoundly beautiful starting point for studies in the science of religion. Srimad Bhagavatam says, "Religion is not for the purpose of securing a place in heaven. It is an enquiry into Truth, and its ideal is the knowledge and the realisation of Truth".
>
>
>
> Statements of this kind always make the science of religion a most worthwhile and meaningful study. I find myself in the fortunate position of being both a scientist of religion and one able to examine the more lasting elements of the subject through Hindu eyes. The study of world religions will only have its value for humanity if it is understood that the basis of such study is the search for Truth. It is the task and intention in the first part of this paper to give some indication of the theoretical foundations of the insights that emerge and some elements of the cultures they give rise to. The paper will refer often to the word Truth. This must be recognised as the intention to distinguish between verifiable insights that challenge us spiritually and intellectually and the many claims to religion that are never verified.
>
>
>
> Comprehension begins with familiarising ourselves with the claims some religions make about their respective origins and reasons for existence. The compelling objective of this paper is to comprehend as meticulously as possible the most essential aspects of religion, their meaning, the cultures they give rise to and their contribution to the cultural heritage of all humanity. Science needs to ascertain how precisely we view the belief systems that arise and the corresponding expressions that emanate from their respective positions on religious truth. A further objective would be to determine how beliefs give rise to religious behaviour.
>
>
>
> The study must place in context our understanding of how they function in society and the nature of their contributions to, among other things, cultural harmony. This paper suggests that a global reconfiguration of the information we have on the truths human beings value most intensively is very necessary. This is particularly true of the ways cultures express themselves and the perspectives we develop on such expressions. From this then arise the structures of our various identities as religious communities and their value for human society. The intellectually rigorous challenges the science of religion offers has to result very crucially in some serious explanations for much that is incongruous and incomprehensible in religion, and more especially, religious behaviour.
>
>
>
> Consider the parameters within which we are allowed to reason to make our study more academically valid. We are sometimes told that it is perhaps in India more than in any other country that the conflict between secular knowledge and religious knowledge raged for many millennia. Religions have a habit of sometimes claiming infallible knowledge in their field. Religion in India has been told that it covers only one aspect of life. Science clings to rational reason to gain knowledge of life in totality.
>
>
>
> Swami Vivekananda held very strongly to the view that the methods that apply in science for intelligent perception of the external world require very much the same rational understanding of the internal world. Stephen Hawking suggested that if a complete theory is to be formulated it should in time be understood even if only in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists. There is need, he said, for philosophers, scientists and if you'll pardon the description 'ordinary people', to be able to take part in the discussion to determine why we exist and why we express ourselves as we do in religion. "If we find the answer to that" says Stephen Hawking, "it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason. For then we would know the mind of God".
>
>
>
> The dialogue between Narada and Sanatkumara in Chhandogya Upanishad epitomises the desire many have for knowing religious Truth at super ordinate levels. Sanatkumara held the view that all knowledge, whether of the Vedas or astronomy or even of philosophy is but secondary. He maintained that all science is secondary and only that which makes us realise Brahman is supreme knowledge. Knowledge of science, we are told, covers only one part of all that humans need to know of themselves and our world. There has to be an attempt to gain the most comprehensive view of the world and the place human life has in it. Hawking wants to know the mind of God. Vedanta wants to know religious truth of comprehensive meaning.
>
>
>
> Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, a former Spalding Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics at Oxford University, made a very profound observation on what religion is. His perspective propounded the view that religion is not so much a revelation to be received by us in faith, but an effort to unveil the deepest layers of man's being and get into enduring contact with them. Swami Vivekananda's succinct explanation is that each soul in our global community is potentially divine and that the goal is to manifest this divinity within.
>
>
>
> Robert Zaehner, who succeeded Radhakrishnan at Oxford, extended the argument to what I believe is one of the most outstanding contributions to our understanding of Middle Eastern religions. He took his cue from Radhakrishnan's description and followed this with a very far reaching conclusion. He regarded the religions that were born in the Middle East as "religions of revelation". Zaehner's conclusion was that Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism were "wisdom religions". This crucial distinction leads us to arguably the most important foundation upon which our understanding of these two groups of religions must rest. One can't possibly imagine a more scientifically valid basis for this classification.
>
>
>
> Christian theology holds that God's revealing activity is intended for the salvation of Christians as much as the revelations in Islam are intended for the salvation of Muslims only. In sharp contrast to this, the nascent elements of Christian and Islamic thought emphasise the need for Christian and Muslim communities to discipline their followers to their respective Semitic ideals.
>
>
>
> Christian theology tells us that the Christian 'revelation' comprises the sum and substance of the self-revealing activity of God for the salvation of Christian peoples. Huston Smith tells us that Christianity is basically an historical religion not founded on universal principles, as Hinduism is, but in visible events, historical happenings. Exactly the same may be said of Islam. The classification of these two groups of religions in this way has been made possible by their origins and content.
>
>
>
> The most important point to concern ourselves with is that five "Gods" "revealed" themselves in one way or another to five prophets in four Middle Eastern countries for the benefit of five Middle Eastern communities. Five "revelations" in the Middle East, and nowhere else in the world! Such highly questionable claims to revelation have never been and will never be verified in any way. If we take their proselytising campaigns into account the questions grow to unimaginable proportions.
>
>
>
> Then take the incredible evidence of violence that emanates from at least one of the revelations and the study of religion becomes a near impossible task. The benefits of identifying these marks of distinction are invaluable in the task of assessing the respective positions the religions assume in their claims to be being valid pathways to their ultimate objectives. God's overwhelming love for Middle Eastern peoples has become a long overdue matter for serious discussion. We have no choice but to confront the difficulties "revelations" as such present in other parts of the world.
>
>
>
> This paper focuses on this distinction and the challenges that arise for the possibilities for cultural harmony of any value. The distinction between "revelation" and "wisdom" forms the starting point for discussion. This paper inevitably concludes that serious examination of these two positions will have to lead us to the conclusion that there is no scientific basis upon which cultural harmony of any kind will ever be possible. The first crucial task if there is to be meaningful discussion is to level the playing fields. Attempts have been made by Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda and Gandhiji who went to extraordinary lengths to do this.
>
>
>
> Mankind has been blessed with cultural diversity for many thousands of years. Attendance at the Parliaments of World Religions is a pleasant experience.  But it is a never ending source of wonder that despite our experiences with perpetual religious confrontations that so often result in violent conflict we are still concerned with the subject of "harmonising" the cultures of the world. This appears to be an Indian, and more precisely, a Hindu preoccupation.
>
>
>
> My familiarity with the study of world religions at academic level, and more especially at national and international conferences in many parts of the world leaves me with serious doubt that this objective is at all worthy of pursuance. Any attempt we make to understand mankind's cultural expressions evidences the fact that few cultures of the world take the problem of harmonisation very seriously. Some very definitely do not.
>
>
>
> The Hindu position on this matter has been stated for many hundreds of years. And my position is that we need to understand the reasons for conflict and the presuppositions that brought several of the world's religions into existence. Understanding the purport of religions will inevitably present us with the reasons for the failure of the attempts made to make harmony a crying need in world affairs. At the Parliament of World Religions in Melbourne, a very definite decision was taken by the representatives of Judaism and Hinduism to make respect for their respective religions an abiding principle and the rejection of any kind of proselytizing.
>
>
>
> Representatives of Native American religions, Shintoism, African Traditional Religion will probably agree that harmony with them has never been a problem. They function within comprehensible parameters and recognise the need for peace and harmony in our world. But in the case of proselytising religions from the Middle East serious questions arise about their respective origins and the scientific bases of their existence. Add to this the purpose of their missionising, proselytising campaigns and the perpetuation of communal interests and very serious questions arise.
>
>
>
> This however is not the subject of this paper. It merely makes an appeal for the levelling of the playing fields so that some focus can be extended to some of the extreme difficulties we face when considering their claims. If there is to be sufficient application of reason to all that religions contend, then there has to be considerable discussion on precisely what levels of agreement will obtain when religions of the world dialogue. They seldom if ever dialogue to obtain consensus on their most important theological, philosophical and phenomenological foundations. This paper opines that this is a very serious difficulty.
>
>
>
> Islam has no place for the concept of Avatar and the Christian idea of God's advent on earth is reserved for Jesus. Yet Hindus everlastingly fall all over themselves to recognise these two teachers along with many others as avatars. This paper argues that there is no justification for this. Many arguments militate against the classification of any teacher born outside of India as an incarnation of God. The concept needs very seriously to be reviewed. The search for and attainment of Truth, Illumination or whatever else it may be known as, is the Ultimate Goal in Vedantic thought.
>
>
>
> While it may be true that the personality of the historical Krishna forms the heart of the narratives in the Bhagavatam and Mahabharata, we have in Him the basic principles of religious elucidation which transcend any discussion about His message directed at any one community of people. The point to take note of is that it is not His personality that is supreme, but the principle of Illumination that He taught that is. Thus the message of the Bhagavad Gita is that the principle of Illumination is the wisdom that is available to all persons irrespective of race, religion or culture. Krishna then is the Supreme Unity that lies behind the manifold universe.
>
>
>
> One can say much more about this. I did not come here to preach a message, but to point to the basic principles on which we can build the concept of religious and cultural harmony with a greater sense of legitimacy. The point that has to be made is that the need exists for a more tangible basis upon we can agree on the need for cultural harmony, and that any attempt to merely speak of harmony as a convenient teaching will have lasting effect, more especially when religious objectives are so variant as to leave us floundering on what religious Truth really is.
>
>
>
> Refurbishing Hindu Culture
>
>
>
> Allow me now to turn to the second part of my paper which concerns the understanding of culture at its more empirical application and the value that must emanate from it. Many people in India are aware that 150 years ago, the first people of Indian origin landed at what later became known as the city of Durban in South Africa. During the time of the celebration of this historical event, 16 November 2010 to be exact, many things were said on radio and television, many books written and many articles appeared in newspapers and magazines.
>
>
>
> References were often made to the suffering that the original indentured labourers and the subsequent batches of people that emigrated there endured at the seminal period of that history. To my mind, no one, no writer, no journalist, no leader, no politician asked what I regard as the most important question the context raised.
>
>
>
> The question refers very specifically to the contribution that the Indian people should have made to their new country during the course of their one hundred and fifty year history there. Of course, there was much said about economic growth and the fruits of their labours in the form of very good standards of living that came for many through the growth of the sugarcane fields and subsequent economic growth for the whole country. But my question refers very specifically to the contribution that the people, specifically the Hindu community, should have made at cultural level. I will answer this question in just a while to allow you some time to toss the question around yourselves in your own minds.
>
>
>
> Many of us are familiar with Swami Vivekananda's presentations at the World's Parliament of Religions in Chicago. This paper refers to a few pertinent remarks he made in his first public lecture in Colombo in January 1897 on his way home from America. I strongly recommend that you give the entire talk its deserved reading. He started by urging the necessity of keeping religion as the backbone of national life in India. No doubt many have discussed and examined this contention in one way or other. My own understanding of religion after many years of study confirms this assertion with deep conviction, hence the observations and suggestions that follow in this paper.
>
>
>
> Swamiji referred to India as the land of introspection and spirituality and then said quite openly in this regard that the debt the world owes India is immense. "For it is in India, he said, that the founders of religion were born". Many of us seriously acknowledge that many other nations have produced religions of one kind or another and live in relative comfort with them as the foundations of their respective cultures. However two or three of them, to quote Swamiji, "cast abroad their claims through the blast of war trumpets and the march of embattled cohorts and each idea had to be soaked in a deluge of blood while India has for thousands of years existed peacefully. From the time of the remote past when history has no record, from then until now, ideas after ideas have marched from India with every word spoken with a blessing behind it and peace before it".
>
>
>
> It is in this context that we need to understand what we have to do to make these ideas flower for the benefit of the world at large. No other country in the world as far as I am aware holds a similar agenda for the sake of the cultural heritage of mankind. Each race has to make its own result to fulfil its own mission. India's gift to the world is the light spiritual and only from this source is there any possibility of cultural harmony flowing with absolute authenticity.
>
>
>
> Reference was made to Swamiji's inspiring addresses at the World's Parliament of Religions. I have had the privilege of presenting papers at each of the four Parliaments of World Religions that have been held thus far in recent years. After the 2009 Parliament in Melbourne, I paid a short visit to New Zealand. The driver of the tourist bus I boarded in Auckland decided to strike up a conversation with me when we were alone for a few minutes. My answer to his question about what I did for a living was that I lectured in Indian Philosophy and Eastern religions at a South African university. He excitedly responded with a question that got me equally excited. "Then you have read the Upanishads" he said.  His question challenged me to wonder how many bus drivers in India read the Upanishads. Or more correctly how many of India's people do?
>
>
>
> My pain rests on the fact that while the indentured labourers who came to Natal in 1860 brought with them many artefacts that cemented their religious and cultural ideals in the new land of their adoption, very few I think brought with them copies of the Bhagavad Gita and even fewer the Upanishads. So my question concerning the contribution that some of those indentured labourers and their succeeding generations could have made to South Africa's cultural life lies in the realm of Vedantic thought. Vedanta is unique to India. My position is that, as difficult as this may be, all of South Africa's peoples irrespective of race or religion should be made aware of the elementary components of Vedanta  If Hindus are to win the respect of peoples the world over, their responsibility lies in studying and teaching Vedanta. I wish this would happen in significant ways.
>
>
>
> Allow me to make what for me is an extremely important suggestion. Two members of the International Centre for Cultural Studies and Shri Vishwa Niketan are selected to visit Washington DC in the United States and more particularly the Lincoln Memorial. They become enamoured with the size of the building, its beauty and more especially the purpose for which it was built. Abraham Lincoln stands as an outstanding role model for many Americans and perhaps others the world over. The two persons return to New Delhi to select a spot in the capital where their organisation will ask the Government of India to build an exquisitely beautiful building of Hindu design that will be named the Gandhi-Vivekananda Memorial. The building will be appreciated for its size, its dignity, its elegance, its serenity and above all its symbolic value. The two men will be recognised as arguably the most outstanding role models India and the world have produced. The statue of Swami Vivekananda installed in the building will carry a plaque bearing an extract of the speech he delivered on the 11 September 1893 at the Parliament which referred to Hinduism's recognition of all the religions of the world as pathways to the Ultimate Goal. The statue of Gandhiji will refer in its plaque to the fact that the Satyagraha movement that he started in Johannesburg on the 11 September 1906 was the Force which is born of Truth and Love and Non-violence.
>
>
>
> While it is true that I will never accept that all religions are true and that they "lead to the same goal", I will argue that the two great men symbolise all that is great and truly remarkable in Hinduism's contributions to harmonising the world's cultural diversity. Their generous views on harmonisation will thus be cast in stone for all the world to appreciate. So while the world's many cultures stand as legacies for all mankind, such recognition must only be accorded to those cultures that reciprocate in meaningful ways. Missionising religions never do the same. We are left then with the conclusion that respect for all cultures is only possible when all cultures agree that harmonisation of cultures has very serious implications for a world that desperately needs to understand what value this has for our world.
>
>
>
> Allow me to make what for me is an extremely important second suggestion. Two members of the International Centre for Cultural Studies and Shri Vishwa Niketan are selected to visit Bangkok in Thailand and more particularly its exquisitely beautiful Ramayana Theatre. They study the venue and attend one or more performances of the stage play on the Ramayana. They return to Bharat's city of Ayodhya to construct a similar theatre where every evening, three hundred and sixty five nights of the year, performances are staged that depict scenes from the Ramayana. The plays are filled with some of the most amazing scenes ever displayed on stage through props of unimaginable beauty enhanced by technology. The young people of Ayodhya from every religion or culture in the area are employed to participate in the plays and stage their skills in flying through the air as the vanaras did in ancient times.
>
>
>
> Ayodhya will then be transformed into a city of outstanding entertainment and people from all parts of Bharat and the world will visit for the sake of seeing theatrical performances of amazing artistry. One of the outstanding rewards of this will be the miracle of transformation. For where at present there is strife about places of worship and their historical origins, the young people of Ayodhya will take part in theatre performances to transform the city into a place of cultural harmony of sparkling proportions. For where religion falls short on peace and harmony, theatre will replace it with the joy of performing artistry of amazing skill and participatory joy.
>
>
>
> Let us return to Auckland and my very happy tour of the city in a bus driven by a driver who was very enamoured by the teachings of Vedanta. One of the stops on the tour was a visit to what must surely be the most beautiful Botanical Gardens in the world. I have visited other botanical gardens in other parts of the world. Ours in Durban is also a very pleasant experience. Please allow me my right to share with you the pain and the humiliation I experienced when I visited Buddha Gardens in Delhi. Am I correct in saying that when we discuss culture, and more especially cultural diversity, we have the obligation to ask how exactly culture manifests in different parts of the world? If you want the culture of Bharat to make an impression on the world you owe it to yourselves to be very aware that it is only possible to speak of such matters when you understand its implications.
>
>
>
> I very strongly suspect that in a country like the United States institutions like the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and other institutions have no hesitation in funding cultural projects. The question then that arises concerns the possibility of the richest families in India funding the transformation of Buddha Gardens into a botanical facility of immense pride. Botanical gardens are a cultural acquisition, a cultural necessity, and funding for such projects are a reflection on the cultural life of a nation. Until appropriate efforts are made to make the finer elements of culture stand out with pride, all talk of culture being appreciated by visitors from abroad is totally meaningless. The plea is that an application for a permanent seat on the Security Council must only be submitted when it is possible to do so with some self respect.
>
>
>
> Let us go to Rio de Janeiro and the famous statute of Jesus at Corcovado. Jesus epitomises all that is supremely beautiful in cultural terms; the very best that western culture offers to itself and to the world. But Jesus was born as Saviour to the Christian world. Nevertheless his life and teachings have given to Christians their comprehensive culture which incorporates everything that is profoundly beautiful in it. It provides them with their moral directives followed by a host of other concerns they associate with their spiritual well being.
>
>
>
> The question must be raised about Bhagavan Sri Krishna's advent in India 3000 years before Jesus, fulfilling a similar role in Hindu society. Bhagavan was not born as Saviour to Hindus but as Jagat Guru. The Bhagavad Gita stands as testimony to the fact that eternal life is an inherent right for all of humanity. Swamiji's words are that "Each soul is potentially divine; the goal is to manifest this divinity within". That these words stand as testimony to the fact that Hinduism has no choice but focus on cultural harmony as one of its fundamental goals, not because God, whoever that might be, revealed himself to anyone, but because the great womb of prakriti cast its seed and from it gave birth to all mankind.
>
>
>
> However nature has decided that the privilege of appreciating this is a gift granted to the Sthithaprajna. A very small number of such people are known to history. The Gita says that when the spirit is content in itself and further enumerates the qualities that make for profound religious wisdom, then such a person is described as one of settled intelligence. The river of life is everyday living with on the one hand the ugliness of life with its pains and sorrows and on the other its joys and delights.
>
>
>
> I don't want to go into Samadhi. I don't want to go to heaven. All I ask for is that the fresh breezes of satyam, shivam, sunderam, prem, shanti and ahimsa would blow about my heart and mind for the sole purpose of understanding what religion is and how that understanding will contribute to the betterment of the world for the sake of peace and harmony. All Hindus have a duty and responsibility to make this known to the world because it is a legacy from our Rishis who lived many thousands of years ago.
>
>
>
> The author is former Professor, Durban-Westville University, South Africa. This is the text of the speech delivered at the Sixth Chamanlalji Memorial Lecture organised by the International Centre for Cultural Studies, on 25 March 2011, at New Delhi

Statue of vivekanand inaugurated by RSS chief PP Sarsanghchalak MOHANAJI BHAHGAVAT

 

 

 

Conversion not a constitutional right: SC judge

Maintaining that there was no constitutional right to convert a person from one religion to another, justice P Sathasivan of the Supreme Court on Saturday said the right to propagate one's religion was not an unrestricted right.

Delivering the third Dr LM Singhvi Memorial Lecture on "Secularism and Rule of Law in India," justice Sathasivam said the state has a right to pass laws restricting conversions if such activities created public disorder.

Quoting from the SC's 1977 verdict in Stainislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Orissa, he said: "The right to propagate means the right to 'transmit and spread one's religion by an exposition of its tenets'. But…there is no constitutional right to convert a person from one religion to another, because this would impinge on the 'freedom of conscience' guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike."

The Supreme Court delineated the boundaries of the right to propagate in the context of state legislation prohibiting forcible conversions, said justice Sathasivam, who headed the bench, which made a controversial remark against religious conversions while upholding the conviction of Dara Singh in the Graham Staines murder case last month.

But the bench chose to modify it after several Christian organisations termed it uncalled for and demanded its withdrawal.

On state's the right to pass legislation restricting conversions, justice Sathasivam, quoting from an SC verdict said: "the 'public order' provision of Article 25(1) of the Constitution has a 'wide connotation' and that the state could legislate conversions if they 'created public disorder."

While maintaining, "Secularism is the part of the basic structure of the Constitution," he said the term 'secular' has not been defined, presumably because it is a very elastic term not capable of a precise definition and perhaps best left undefined.

He, however, said in Indian context secularism meant "Sarva Dharma Sambhav" ie tolerance for all religions, which springs from due deliberation for one's own happiness and also for welfare of all beings.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/667294.aspx

© Copyright 2010 Hindustan Times

Rajendra  Kumar Chadha
National Joint Convener
Prajna Pravah
A - 161  SURAJ MAL VIHAR
DELHI110092
011-22374518  M +919818603977
rchaddha@gmail.com

--
With kind Regards,
Jagdish

Veer Savarkar and the two-nation theory-Shreerang Godbole-26 February 2011

http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1636

Veer Savarkar and the two-nation theory

Shreerang Godbole

26 February 2011

[Today is the Atma Samarpan Divas of Veer Savarkar - editor]

Congress leader Digvijay Singh recently stated (26 Jan) that Savarkar had the original idea of the two-nation theory which was later adopted by Jinnah. This is not the first (and one may safely assume not the last) time that Veer Savarkar has been blamed for putting forth the two-nation theory. Notwithstanding Digvijay Singh's political compulsions in spreading this piece of disinformation, a factual rebuttal is in order. 

The entire case of the Savarkar-baiters rests on a solitary sentence culled out from his nearly 6000-page literature. Fortunately, Savarkar has himself answered the charge that he had put forth the two-nation theory. The sentence in question can be found in Savarkar's Presidential address to the 19^th session of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha at Karnavati (Ahmedabad) in 1937. Savarkar stated, "India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main; the Hindus and the Moslems, in India."

If critics read the entire speech (http://www.savarkar.org/content/pdfs/en/hindu-rashtra-darshan-en-v002.pdf), it shall be evident to them that Savarkar had not advocated the two-nation theory. Savarkar was one of the few Hindu leaders who made a deep study of Islam from its scriptures. He had read a translation of the Quran even while he was a student in England. In the Andamans, Savarkar had read the Quran first in its English and subsequently Bengali and Marathi translations. Responding to the opinion of his Muslim friends that the real beauty of the Quran lies in its original, Savarkar asked them to read each page from the original and then had them translate it for his benefit into Hindi. As Savarkar describes, he heard them recite the Quran with great concentration and after keeping his mind clean and pure as a devout Muslim. In later life, Savarkar read several books written by Western authorities on the Quran. His deep study of Islam is evident from his numerous articles such as those on Kemal Pasha, Khilafat movement and various Islamic sects. Savarkar had learnt to read and write Urdu. Thus, Savarkar's views on Islam and Muslims are not those of an ignorant bigot. 

The context

Savarkar's Presidential address is not a run-of-the-mill political speech. After dwelling on the definition and significance of the word 'Hindu', the status of Hindus as a nation unto themselves, the mission of the Hindu Mahasabha, unified Indian State and the cooperation of the minorities, Savarkar turned his attention to the attitude of the Muslims. He stated. "As it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India, several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing that India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could be welded thus for the mere wish to do so. Our well-meaning but unthinking friends take their dreams for realities… The solid fact is that the so-called communal questions are but a legacy handed down to us by centuries of a cultural, religious and national antagonism between the Hindus and the Moslems. When time is ripe you can solve them but you cannot suppress them by merely refusing recognition of them." 

It is in that context that he made that statement. The Islam-scholar, historian and hard-headed realist in Savarkar was simply stating a bland fact and not endorsing it. This is further confirmed two sentences later when he referred to the options before Hindus under the circumstances. He stated, "…to form an Indian State in which none is allowed any special weightage of representation and none is paid an extra price to buy his loyalty to the State. Mercenaries are paid and bought off, not sons of the Motherland to fight in her defence. The Hindus as a nation are willing to discharge their duty to a common Indian State on an equal footing." It is noteworthy that the President of the Hindu Mahasabha was not seeking any rights for the Hindus that he was not willing to grant to the Muslims! Throughout his life, Savarkar advocated equal rights for all citizens in a unified Indian State. 

Savarkar's defence

Misunderstanding was created after Savarkar made the above utterances. Hence, Savarkar clarified his statement to journalists on 15 August 1943 in the office of the Marathi weekly Aadesh in Nagpur. He also clarified his position in an interview given in Mumbai on 23 August 1943, and published in Aadesh on 28 August 1943 [English translation below]:

"I had clarified this (my statement that there are two nations in Hindusthan) in my Nagpur interview. But instead of reporting this, journalists simply reported that I accept the two-nation theory. This has resulted in the whole misunderstanding. I am surprised that a storm has been raised now on this issue. Because I have always been referring to the two-nation theory right from my Ahmedabad speech. It is a historic truth that the Mussulmans are a nation.. I had clarified the historical and racial background of this theory in Nagpur. Islam is a theocratic nation based on the Koran right from its inception. This nation never had geographical boundaries. Wherever the Mussulmans went, they went as a nation. They also came to Hindusthan as a nation.. Wherever they go, Mussulmans shall either remain foreigners or rulers. As per the Koran, those who are not Mussulmans are kafirs, enemies of Islam. Even today, after praying in the mosque, Mussulmans ask for atonement for committing the sin of living in a kafir-ruled state. As per the principle of Mussulmans, the earth is divided into two nations: Dar-ul Islam (land of Islam) and Dar-ul Harb where Islam does not rule (enemy land). As per their religious command, their campaign on Hindusthan was as a separate nation. They conquered the Hindu Nation as a enemy nation, not as One Nation. The Hindu Nation arose again and having defeated the Mussulmans at various places, saved the whole of Hindusthan to establish Hindu Padpadshahi also as a separate Hindu Nation opposed to the Muslim nations. This history certainly cannot be denied. In the recent past, the educated class among the Hindus mostly through the vehicle of the Congress tried its utmost to champion territorial nationalism by saying that at least in Hindusthan, Hindus and Mussulmans are one nation because they reside in one country. Though the effort was well-intentioned, the Mussulmans never gave up their principle of theocratic or scriptural nationalism and the feeling of being a nation separate from the Hindu Nation. And they never shrank from stating this right. Seizing the right opportunity and taking advantage of the Congress policy of surrender, the Muslim League once again emphatically put forth that same old theory of the Mussulman nation being a separate nation. If one turns a blind eye to this reality, the Hindu Nation is bound to be divided. So we do not care if you consider yourself to be a separate nation. The effort towards Hindu consolidation is to emphatically state that the Hindu Nation is a self-evident and unified Nation. The Mahasabha came forward as a separate and mighty national organization of the Hindu Nation. Hindu Nationalism gave a cutting edge to the effort of consolidation.

People still do not understand the important thing that stating the fact of Mussulman and Hindu nations being present in Hindusthan is not to accept the Pakistani adamancy of carving a country of the Mussalmans. If I call someone a grihasta (householder), it does not make him a resident of my griha (house). Whether the Mussulmans consider themselves a separate nation or not, at least as far as Hindusthan is concerned, they are a minority compared to Hindus. Like the English, they have come here as foreigners and if they want to stay in Hindusthan, they should do so only as a minority community. An independent, unified, indivisible and single State should be established in Hindusthan. Hindusthan is the Fatherland and the Holyland of Hindus and even today they are an overwhelming majority in this their country. Hence, even if there are in this country, by force or tyranny, the English, Portuguese, French or those invaders such as the Americans or Japanese who call themselves a nation., Hindusthan should be considered politically a nation of the Hindus as per the principle of peoples' power. If they want, minorities may stay here merely as minority communities. This is the objective; this is the oath of Hindu consolidation. This objective should be achieved through consensus if possible. Else, by strength and should opportunity arise, by force, this or the next generation of Hindus shall achieve this objective. While two or two hundred nations that consider themselves separate from the Hindus have presently entered Hindusthan by force and are demanding Partition of Hindusthan, it is not by a woolly-headed and cowardly denial of this fact but rather by understanding, facing and changing it shall an independent, undivided and indivisible Hindu nation alone shall without doubt, remain in Hindusthan. But as in our history when the Hindu Nation successfully rallied under the Hindu Flag, the Hindus should come forward and rise unitedly." 

Savarkar was then asked that if Hindus and Mussulmans are two nations, how will they form a single nation?  He answered, "We should not confuse between Nation and State. Even if the State goes, the Nation remains. When the Mussulmans were ruling over us, the government (State) was theirs. But the existence of the Hindus was most certainly intact. Even so, there is no problem in a common State of Hindus and Mussulmans. In the past, we had nations (rashtra) such as Maharashtra, Saurashtra, Devrashtra (near Berar). Where are these nations? They mingled with each other. The Shakas and Huns came to Hindusthan as nations. But what is the evidence of their existence today? We digested them. So if the Mussulmans want, they could amicably stay with Hindus as a minority community. In the past, nations such as Prussia, Bavaria etc. existed in Germany. But today, they have all together formed the German nation. By law, no one in Germany may call himself Prussian or Bavarian but German only.

"Regarding the Mussulmans in Hindusthan, it may be said that you (Hindus) are trying to rope them with you but do the Mussulmans so desire? In the end, desire is the most influential and important factor for a nation. If they consider themselves separate, what is achieved merely by saying that you consider them your own? And hence, we need not worry whether they come with us or not. And there is no reason why we should sacrifice Hindu interests and plead with them to perforce say that they are not a separate nation. Hindus are a nation unto themselves. Considering this, the Hindus should continue the freedom struggle by consolidating themselves irrespective of whether the Mussulmans come with them or not. If they so desire, they may stay here, else they shall go where it pleases them."

Savarkar's consistent view on this subject was best summarized by him in his Presidential address in Nagpur in 1938. He said, "It is absurd to call us (Hindus) a community in India.  The Germans are the Nation in Germany and the Jews a Community. The Turks are a Nation in Turkey and the Arab or the Armenian minority a Community. Even so the Hindus are a Nation in India - in Hindusthan and the Moslem minority a Community."

It is undeniable that Muslims consider themselves as a nation or Ummah. It was not Savarkar's invention nor did he ever endorse this Islamic concept. It is noteworthy that the Afro-American religious movement started by Wallace D. Fard Muhammad in Detroit, Michigan, in 1930 was named 'Nation of Islam'. 

Jinnah's inspiration

To say that Jinnah adopted Savarkar's idea is arrant nonsense! Can Digvijay Singh or his ilk quote a single sentence from Jinnah's speeches or writings where he has named Savarkar as his source of inspiration? In a letter to newly elected Congress President Badruddin Tyabji (1888), Sir Syed Ahmed wrote, "Is it supposed that that the different castes and creeds living in India belong to one nation, or can become nation, and that their aims and aspirations be one and same? I think it is quite impossible." The answer given by Tayyabji, the former President of Digvijay Singh's Grand Old Party is even more revealing. Tayyabji writes, "Now I am not aware of anyone regarding the whole of India as one Nation and if you read my Inaugural address, you will find it distinctly stated that there are numerous communities or nations in India…" (Source Material for a History of the Freedom Movement in India, Vol.2, pp 70-73).  

The idea of an independent, sovereign Islamic State carved out of India was first publicly stated by Sir Muhammad Iqbal in his Presidential address to the Muslim league in 1930.  Iqbal said, "I would like to see the Punjab, the North West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-Government within the British Empire or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to be to me the final of the Muslims at least of the North-Western India." Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto accurately observed that "the starting point of Pakistan goes back a thousand years to when Muhammad-bin-Qasim set foot on the soil of Sind and introduced Islam in the sub-continent".

It is a travesty that Congressmen who accepted the Islamic demand of a separate State on the basis of religion and Leftists who fervently believe India to be a hotchpotch of multiple nationalities, should hurl the charge of advocacy of the two-nation theory on Savarkar, a lifelong champion of a unified India.

 (The writer is a Pune-based specialist in diabetes and hormone disorders. He has authored books on Islam, contemporary Buddhist-Muslim relations, and played a major role in developing http://www.savarkar.org/)

--
With kind Regards,
Jagdish

Maa narmada kumbh's Gallery

 

You are invited to view maa narmada kumbh's photo gallery. View maa narmada kumbh's Gallery

FW: {satyapravah} Hindutva: The Primacy of Culture -Sandhya Jain-15 February 2011

 

http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1632

Hindutva: The Primacy of Culture

Sandhya Jain

15 February 2011

 

Great Britain, mother of Western colonialism whose footprints still deface the world, admits it cannot cope with citizen-adherents of a sister faith unless they accept the primacy of her Anglican Christian culture, while practicing their religion in private. In other words, national identity will be determined by the 'core values' and political concepts of western liberal democracy as upheld by the Anglican majority; lateral entrants from the Islamic world will not be allowed to challenge or disturb this system.

 

The British Prime Minister's confession that multiculturalism has 'failed' (The Telegraph, 5 Feb 2011) vindicates the Hindu concept of Hindutva, which asserts that India's natal, primordial and still living civilization must determine her national character. India has long suffered at the hands of Islamic and British-Christian invaders, and continues to be stifled by an elite comprised of soulless atheist-Marxists, hostile minorities, and fellow travellers, all of whom advance the power of the two millenarian trans-national faiths.

 

Today Britain, which welcomed Diaspora groups for use against ex-colonies, and hosted virulent Islamic doctrines in UK mosques for export elsewhere, finds the kitchen too hot. Western nations like Germany, The Netherlands, France, are also feeling uneasy with their Muslim populations.

 

Much of the West's economic and political domination in the era between and after the two World Wars derives from occupation of the land and resources of almost the entire Muslim world (read oil/gas). To facilitate this loot, an interesting trick was to covertly encourage radical clerics to oppose west-propped dictators who, in turn, would rely even more on the West to suppress their domestic enemies. The partition of India was wrought by offering its humiliated Muslim elites a 'soft' target – Hindu non-monotheists, but Pakistan could never become a viable nation and is even today dependent on US doles. Indeed, nowhere in the last two centuries has resurgent Islam won territory or political autonomy for Islam. The Shia Revolution in Iran, which deposed a hated American stooge, is probably the sole Islamic victory against the west; everywhere else it has been dismember-and-rule (or corner-neutralize), East Timor and Sudan being the most recent examples.

 

Despite political successes in containing Islam, Western nations have become nervous over rising Muslim populations and their failure or refusal to accept western values. Multi-culturalism was an attempt to cope by living in mental and cultural ghettos within a western polity. It failed because Muslims used their citizenship rights to try to alter the socio-cultural and political landscape; neither the established Church nor polity could accept this. This reinforced the mutual suspicions of Islam and Christianity, and has tacitly triggered the quest for totalitarian control by one or the other.

 

India's sanatana dharma is a religion and living civilization, inspired by the ideal of universal welfare of all beings, human and non-human. Dharma is not fixed in time or space, and eternally renews itself in response to the Age; it is always contemporary… Dharma respects all faiths, for it is not given to any human agency to arbitrate a final truth for mankind. Hindus believe the Vedas are the 'revealed' truth 'heard' by the Vedic rishis (Sruti). Yet that is no reason to impose them on the world by human regents. Hence, despite the belief in One Supreme Being (Parabrahma), non-monotheism is the hallmark of all Indic traditions. Our polity and innate secularism flow from this understanding; Aristotle noted centuries ago that Hindus were the only people to have successfully made dharma the basis of their public life.

 

This generous tradition made India the perfect refuge for all – the Parsi community fleeing persecution in Persia; the Dalai Lama and his followers; the now controversial Karmapa; the Bahai community... Christians and Muslims established beachheads here centuries ago; Jews believe they came after the destruction of the Second Temple of Solomon in AD 70. Our political culture is equally accommodative - the first cabinet of independent India included Maulana Azad and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.

 

Mother India regards her minorities as strands in a multi-strand civilization, who interact with each other at will. Traditionally, they automatically positioned themselves around the core culture based on her ancient and native traditions. They were not accorded inferior status, but they did not determine the nation's identity and ethos.

 

Post-independence India, however, has been forced to cope with trans-national Islam and Christianity, funded and mentored by foreign regimes and agencies to promote conversions and non-assimilation with Hindu culture, and demand political and economic sops to maintain a deliberately separate identity. The Christian community especially rages against all attempts to protect native culture and faith, particularly among vulnerable tribes, as an assault on freedom of religion. Despite explicit judgments of the Supreme Court, it repeats the canard that freedom of religion means freedom to convert others to Christianity!

 

A recent instance of Christian bigotry is the furore against the annual Maa Narmada Samajik Kumbh (Feb 10-12, Mandla district, MP), on grounds that it will bring converts back to Hindu dharma. Bishop Gerald Almeida of Jabalpur approached the high court, while Father Anand Muttungal asked Chief Minister Shivraj Chouhan for security. Hindu sadhus serving tribals in remote areas are gunned down with sophisticated weapons, but merit no state protection; what a farce.

 

Now the West is cracking under the strain of living with Muslims who reject its values and force deferment of its cultural-civilizational framework. Mr David Cameron has honed in on the two issues that have long plagued Indian society and polity, viz., common citizenship based on a uniform civil code (now a concern of the Indian Supreme Court), and curtailment of the awesome powers of religious leaders.

 

Reflecting intelligence concerns about terrorists attacks on British soil (London never cared about attacks outside), Mr Cameron says the State will henceforth actively confront those who hold extremist views, and refuge engagement with and public funds to groups that fail to promote British values. Rejecting the idea that different communities may live according to their own values and traditions, he said immigrants will have to integrate, speak English, and all schools teach a common culture and curriculum.

 

Mr Cameron would realize that the pigeons raised in India have come to roost in Britain. He should move to end his country's funding of the Human Rights and Conversion industries, or watch them make Britain the next target of their rage.

 

The author is Editor. www.vijayvaani.com

 

Life of Ishwar kaka

 

_____________________________________________

The life and death of Ishwar Patel

Posted by Nipun Mehta on Jan 27, 2011

When Ishwar Patel, a long-time inspiration of our service family, passed away on Dec 26, 2010, Guri and I sat for meditation.  Right after, I told Guri, "I think I should head to India."  Getting online to get my tickets, I received an unexpected email from a friend who tagged me with a round-trip ticket.  The timing was so uncanny, that I accepted it and soon left for India.

Ishwar-kaka is the father of my dear friend, Jayesh Patel.  He started volunteering with Gandhi's Sewadal at the age of 12.   When he encountered a painful experience around the taboos of scavengers who gathered human waste, Ishwar-kaka consciously dedicated his life to the work of sanitation and raising consciousness around related issues of "untouchability".  He was 16 years old.  To this day, more than 2.6 billion people in the world don't have toilets; the Ganges river has 1.1 million liters of raw sewage dumped into it every minute.  And that number would've been a whole lot higher if it weren't for a lifetime of Ishwar-kaka's service.  He built more than 200,000 toilets through 'Safai Vidyalaya' at the Gandhi Ashram and helped launch 118 organizations that would elevate the work of sanitation around the country.  

 

Being scientifically oriented, Ishwar-kaka surveyed habits of rural Indians and subsequently created unique toilet designs that served their needs.  For instance, he noticed that village women didn't use four-walled toilets because they could no longer walk together to the farms and have private, women-only community time; so he introduced small windows across the toilets and an "oatlo" (a community space) outside the toilets.  In the front yard of his office headquarters, he put up a "Toilet Park" that showcased many of these designs.  "People have rose gardens, but we have a toilet garden," he would proudly announce to his many visitors.  Commercial entrepreneurs made millions from his designs, but he refused to patent it because he always wanted it accessible for India's poorest.  From the Padma Shri to Mahatma Gandhi Award, Ishwar-kaka has received practically every major award in India.  After his passing, TV stations replayed many of his old interviews; I caught one statement that summed up his philosophy: "To build toilets is easy, but to shift people's mind and hearts is the real work.  Software is more important than hardware."

Well over ten thousand people attended Ishwar-kaka's funeral at the Gandhi Ashram.  Government officials had to shut down the street to manage the flow of traffic.  As everyone silently stood in line to pay the final respects, the magic of Ishwar-kaka was evident -- the richest men in the country stood next to human-waste scavengers next to powerful politicians next to reknowned Gandhians next to vegetable sellers next to his next-door neighbors next to kids who had merely read about him.  For a vast cross section of society, Ishwar Patel was a hero.

Also to be found in the funeral procession -- the *entire*  hospital staff, with whom Ishwar-kaka spent his final 12 days.  Although they encounter patient deaths everyday, something about this man propelled them to pay their respects.

When Ishwar-kaka was submitted to the hospital, on the morning of Dec 14th, doctors knew it was the beginning of the end.  His body had four kinds of stage-4 cancer.  He couldn't lie down at all.  "Imagine climbing up a steep mountain, and being out of breath.  That was his state 24-hours-a-day for the last 12 days," the doctor said.  And yet, no negativity.  At all.  Instead he was smiling, cracking jokes, and meeting hundreds of people who streamed through his room for one final interaction.  Instead of losing his clarity, he became more and more lucid towards the end.  When people asked him for his blessings, he frequently said a sentence or two that went straight to the heart of their spiritual journey.  Outside his hospital room, as many as twenty people would hold vigil throughout the nights.  Well wishers would come in and repeatedly do acts of kindness.  One person gave out flowers to every patient in the hospital.  Another swept the floors as a tribute.  A group of youngsters, painted the walls and decorated the terrace as a thank-you to the hospital.  Some sang songs.  One person gave away 1500 apples, because Ishwar-kaka loved apples.  "Create heaven wherever you are," Ishwar-kaka said once.  And that was exactly what was happening.

At one point, the 12 punctures on his body weren't responding well to external fluids, so the doctor had to cut a slit through his neck.  When asked for anesthesia, he simply said, "Oh, there's no need.  Go right ahead."  A rather surprised doctor did as instructed and noticed that Ishwarkaka didn't even blink an eye as he performed his operation.  After repeated encounters of utter detachment from the body, one of his caretakers asked Ishwar-kaka: "Your body is in shambles. Don't you feel any pain?"  He promptly responded: "In a young coconut, its shell and its inner substance are intertwined and can't be separated.  In a ripe coconut, they can be easily separated.  So I'm like a ripe coconut.  My mind is separate from the body."

Wise men say that you die the way you have lived.  Like a true Gandhian, Ishwar-kaka lived his whole life in service to others, and not in service to his senses.  As a result, when it was time to depart from his senses, he had no fear.  In fact, when Jayesh-bhai (his son) asked him, "Dad, are you afraid of death?", he said: "Not at all.  If it has to come tomorrow, let it come today."  He also didn't have much concern of his own legacy.  When Jayesh-bhai reflected on his concern that he may not be able to match his father's spirit of service or the carry on the organization in the same way, Ishwar-kaka was similarly free: "Don't worry about what others say. Always do what your inner voice tells you to, even if it upends an entire tradition. You have to bloom wherever you are planted.  Keep serving through small acts of love."

Ishwar-kaka carried himself with such boundless freedom precisely because his life was one giant practice in small-acts-of-love.  On Dec 13th, at his living memorial, Anar-ben (his daughter-in-law) moved everyone to tears with her first-hand stories.  In the early days of her marriage, Anar-ben recalled a time when she was doing the chores of her house despite having fever.  While she was sweeping that day, she turned around at one point to see Ishwar-kaka silently mopping the floor behind her.  Not only was it drastically counter-culture for a father-in-law to mop the floor in those days, but it was an act of subtle sensitivity.  No words were exchanged, but Anar-ben silently wept that day many decades ago -- and on Dec 13th when she retold the story.

That's the kind of life Ishwar-kaka lived.  Silent, effortless service.  "If an act leaves residue, it is not an act of service," he told one of his hospital guests.

As a profoundly filial son, Jayesh-bhai spent practically all of the last three months in unconditional service to his Dad.  He recalled: "Papa always thoughts of others first, his whole life.  It was no surprise that he passed away after the kids celebrated Christmas with him on 25th.  And he passed away on a Sunday, to make it most convenient for everyone to handle the final rites.  Many of us sensed that he endured the last several days of extreme physical pain, just so everyone felt satisfied and full.  His favorite phrase was "subbhecchha", meaning best-wishes.  He would smilingly yell that phrase everytime he walked into the house.  Constantly, he was giving his best wishes to everyone."

In early morning hours of Dec 26th, Ishwar-kaka's body gave in. All the machines in the hospital room showed a flat line.  Immediately, Jayesh-bhai summoned close family members and friends.  Perhaps about 20 folks were in the hospital room.  Jayeshbhai painfully closed his father's eyes.  Among those in the room, was Vasuda-kaki, the wife of Ishwar-kaka.  Perhaps irrationaly, Vasuda-kaki speaks to her husband: "For the last 52 years, every time we have parted ways, we have said Jai-Jalaram (an ode to the divine).  Please open your eyes to say Jai-Jalaram."  His body had practically no strength, doctors had declared him dead, his eyes were closed.  Yet, almost miraculously, Ishwar-kaka opened his eyes.  He smiled.  With deep compassion in his eyes, he looked at everyone.  Then he looked at his wife, one final time, and uttered,  "Jai-Jala" as he spoke his last words.

With the same gentle ease that he served, a 77 year old left his body on Dec 26th at 8:10AM.

Traditionally, the eldest son offers the cremation ashes to a holy river.  "He is everyone's Dad," Sanjay-bhai (his eldest son) declared.  Hence, in an absolutely unprecedented move of decentralization, a bus-load of 70 people carried his final rites to the Narmada river.  Ishwar-kaka would sometimes say, "You clean the outside world as a way to clean your mind."  In place of rituals, all seventy of us took our brooms to clean up the filthy river banks.

As our minds purified, our hearts swelled in gratitude for having known a noble person like Ishwar Patel.