Veil in Islam

29.12.06

The whole idea of veil in Islam seems to be to protect women (and men!) from lustful gaze and more. This appears to be based on the assumption that everyone out there is full of lust. Is this why the Quran has permitted 4 wives a man?

Tramway in Calcutta

19.12.06 Though I have not been to Kolkata, I should imagine that if the tramway is left intact in at least the artery road of Kolkata and cars and busses banned on that road - the number of trams and frequency could increase - it will benefit both the passengers, particularly tourists, as well as the City centre by leaving it free of pollution. In the bargain, good old Calcutta would continue to live.

27.08.06 Celebrating centenaries are natural because memories of things kicked-off a hundred years ago and having gripped imaginations during the period, or at least in some phase of it or other, deserves to be recalled for us to revive the spirit of its momentous climaxes. So to celebrate Vande Mataram's centenary is natural enough. But should there be forced participation? No, particularly not in India, with its culture of freedom.

Presidency

However good Dr. Abdul Kalam is, and I am his fan alright, I feel that our great nation has an endless line of brilliant people to project as the President of India. However, since the President is selected and elected by the political class, we normally get party hacks. Probably it is this fear that makes us not want to let go of Dr. Abdul Kalam, for we know a great person when we see one. I hope a person of the calibre of Narayana Murthy of Infosys or Dr. Kurien of Anand or Nanaji Deshmukh of the RSS (if he is healthy enough) is nominated. Otherwise I too would rather have Dr. Abdul Kalam.

Peter Sinniah

Shashi Kapoor smk.co@hotmail.com Wednesday, May 24, 2006 12:25 PM peter_sinniah@yahoo.com Re: New comment on All Ye La Sallians Dear Peter, How prompt you are. My blog id is: www.kaikulath.blogspot.com I have written a lot of carp in it, but at least it can help you to decipher the kind of nut I am! I can make out that you are a pragmatist and would therefore measure success in terms of material gains. But I have no use for anything material. I have for ages been keeping away from wherever there is a show of material power - like marriages, parties etc. Rather than 'doing' as an indication of how alive we are, I am into 'undoing' to regain my original heritage - freedom. Ah... spiritual mumbo jumbo, I can hear you say. Maybe so, because finally the words we use to express ourselves are itself so limited. In spite of what I am, if you think you can still have some 'return' from a relationship with me, do continue to write sometimes. Otherwise, we again evaporate into the mists of memory. Love, Venu Venu, I am not really as materialistic as you think I am. Having lost a brother when he was 20 (remember Raymond John) and having come close to death the year after his death, I leave my fate in the hands of God. I could have become more than what I am but tend to also float along struggling to maintain a family of 3 kids and a wife. The only luxury I have is my French Citroen car (second hand) and have not had the luck to buy a house yet. We should explore what we could do together in the our golden ages. Send me some pictures of you, your family, the palce you stay etc. Take care Peter

venu, my apologies and i am thankful u wrote me cos i lost ur e-mail address.... i have lost my password for the blog so need sometime before i post your item whats your blog url best regards peter

Dear Peter, We had communicated via e-mail some years back and suddenly the communication came to a dead end. You said at that time you had some financial difficulties and I could understand that we needed to have a break. Now again I communicate through this blogsphere. Since we last communicated I have become more of a recluse. So sometimes I stay back in the office after work and then I have a cave all to myself (eerie with not a soul in the whole huge building and all quiet). I suppose on such nights I shall be able to blog and communicate with you and all the good folks whom I had the honour to study with and be taught by. If you get on to my blog, you might get to know my mind and how crazy I have become since I left La Salle in 69 and Malaysia in 70. May God bless you, Peter, for your labour of love in keeping the memories of class of 69 as a beacon light for the rest of us to reflect on some of the most gorgeous moments in our life. Love, Venu Publish this comment. Reject this comment. Moderate comments for this blog. Posted by Venu to La Salle Brickfields at 5/22/2006 10:46:27 PM

P.M.C. Menon and 70 kilos of gold

Menon's 70 kgs. of gold as an offering to Guruvayoorappan is an affair between God and his devotee. What has it to do with us? Nevertheless, since the temple and its affairs are within the public domain, comments on the acts of devotees are inevitable. Oftimes, commentary or criticism can clarify or bring out the moral lessons of an action. Firstly, thulabharam is a ritual that has been extant since the temple was built and the ritual exists in many other temples too. A devotee offering thulabharam is the natural outcome of the devotee's devotion to his diety. But when amounts involved are unusually high, invariably the public wonders whether the amount spent could not have been spent more wisely. But how could something earmarked for one occasion be used for another? For other needs, other funds - that's all as far as the devotee is concerned. Therefore I feel we ought to in no way criticise Mr. Menon for what he did. It is well within his right to have done so and may Guruvayoorappan bless him for that. But the 70 kgs. of gold, once donated, becomes the property of the temple and at this level, the question should be about the use the temple puts this gold to. Here public questioning must be pursued with vigor. A temple belongs to its devotees. If devotees are kept in the dark about any aspect of the temple management, then that temple would before long be in the hands of vested interests. This we should be cautious against and it should be in this background that Mr. Menon's 70 kg. of gold is talked about.

[This is an e-mail I sent to Terry of Alaya, after reading a talk by Ishvar.] Dear Terry, I have read this, the second message of H.H. Ishvara I've got since joining. I would tend to disagree with one point - that it's natural to have needs. Needs are what we have all the time and thereby our great feeling of inadequacy. Is it possible to be in a situation of having no needs (except at the subsistence level, of course)? I think the whole spiritual pursuit is to come to a situation where we are free from needs. And this is achieved not by any doing, but by a simple awakening to the truth that we are perfect. I say this much as a comment in passing and not to begin an argument or have a debate. As I keep reading Ishvara’s newsletters and maybe offering my comments, I’m sure clarity would evolve. Love,Venu

Continuum

[This is my first piece in Writers.Com] All of us have a life to live! This writer may inadvertently be complicating matters. But patient reader that you are, dear reader, you would realise as you go on, that I am seeking to simplify our living by asking you to meditate with me a single thought. THERE IS NOTHING TO DO. Well, its that simple. We are free. Free to do or not to do, with no doing impinging on our freedom. Dear reader, I believe that all our problems are in effect experienced by us by the restlessness of our mind. If we can get our mind to be restful, hey presto, all our problems shall vanish. So the question of all question is, how do we make our mind restful. I would like to share a technique with you. All you have to do, to make your mind restful, is to talk to yourself. Well, not just in bits and pieces, which we do anyway, filled up, mostly, with fantasies. No, we have to seek, without any effort, to simply keep talking to ourself without a break. The most amazing thing is that whenever we are at it, this talking to ourself (silently, of course) we right away touch the ultimate. It is not that you talk and talk for ages and then you get some results. The moment you start talking to yourself till the moment there is a break, even if it was only a minute, you have actually touched eternity. You will before long realise that there is nothing else to do except talk to yourself (can anything be easier and more effortless?) that you seek to talk without there ever being a break. I have called this process CONTINUUM. The key points to note are that we should speak using impeccable language. The language should be calm and soothing. You will realise too, before long, that CONTINUUM helps you to become detached. You know that you can simply be a witness to all that is going on and be in a grandstand watching the spectacle of life. And greatest of all, your life starts becoming spontaneous. I end here not because I do not have more to write but because I think my dear reader should soak in what I have written (if he finds it sensible, of course) and favour me with a feedback. Then, we can continue.

Monism and Islam

Dear Sir, I read your article "Pantheistic Monism and Naturalism" in "Islam on-line" and think it is very logical and well written. I have the following query. Please favour me with an answer. If Islam teaches that the Creator and his Creation are separate and a Muslim worships Allah, knowing Allah to be absolutely separate from him, then is the Muslim not in practice worshiping an idol? For is not that which is separate from oneself an idol - beheld to be something outside of oneself? Only our own ultimate self we are not able to behold because there is no seer and seen dichotomy. When we reach that stage the worshiper becomes the worshiped. All duality ends. Does not idol worship end only when we reach this stage or awaken to this stage? Awaiting to hear from you. Regards K. Venugopal Mumbai

All the world's one family

[This is a what I intended to paste as a blog comment to a person who wrote rather idealistically about everyone going beyond their limited circles and holding hands as members of one single family and all that. This comment could not be pasted there so I am pasting it here.]

I am with you absolutely in the spirit of what you say. But aren't all of us different? For such an idealistic situation as you wish for to occur, all of us must be of the same temperament. Do you envisage everyone in the world simultaneously becoming alike right away? Till such a situation comes to a pass, if ever it does, we have to hold on to our individual cherished ideals without, of course, seeking to force it upon anyone while at the same time recognizing the right of others to hold on to their cherished ideals. In other words, living and letting live. What must be fought against are transgressions of sacred spaces of every individual and community.

Soul

When we say the soul of man, we mean the essense of man. Soul is not a thing in man. Is there something like, say, the soul of a stone? Yes, if we consider what is the essense of a stone. In the end, the essense of everything must be the same thing. Because the less coarse a thing is, the more pervasive it is and the most subtle of all things is the thing that prevades everywhere and that is the essense of everything and that is God. So everything is God - in its essense everything is because in essense there is nothing else.

To defeat the narrow vision

The only way to 'defeat' the 'my-truth-the-only-truth' religions of Islam and Christianity is to expose the world at large to the Advaitic vision of Vedanta. When we realise that the ultimate in religion is the discovery of our true self as being no different from the God we have been worshiping, peace shall prevail, both at the individual level and at the social level. It is heart-warming that most of the Hindu Gurus since Swami Vivekananda have been preaching this truth, nay living this truth. The result is that the best of minds the world over are taking to the meditative religions of the East and questioning dogmatic Islam and Christianity (Churchianity).

More on M.F. Hussain

Like he drew a nude Saraswathi, should he also draw a nude Mohammad initiating his young bride Ayesha in the pleasures of sex? Would we only then proclaim Hussain as a fair painter not afraid to paint everyone and anyone in the nude? If think if Hussain drew Mohammad in the act with sufficient artistry and contextual justification, he is well within his artistic licence to do so. But if it is done merely to provoke, then it is simply not done. Somehow, I do not think he did Saraswathi in the nude to provoke, though many Hindus seem to think just that.

M.F. Hussain

[This is an e-mail I sent to a member of the Haindava Keralam yahoo group.] 30.11.06 Dear Vipin, I think we ought to think of nudity as also an expression of spirituality. M.F. Hussain is an acclaimed artist. Surely we can't deny that he is an artist of merit. When an artist expresses, we ought to look for something deeper than ordinary. We should welcome his dipiction of Saraswathi in nude as an artistic expression and accept it as an attempt to potray the mystique yet another way. About M.F. Hussain not drawing personages or symbols of other religions in the nude - well you cannot predict with an artist, one day he might. (Or maybe not, now that he has been sufficiently cornered for his nude Saraswathis.) K.Venugopal

Difference between Hinduism and Islam

When you believe that God is separate from you, you have the relationship of Master-slave or King-subject with God. You are then only called upon to express loyalty to God and your religion begins and ends with this testimony in this sort of believe. In effect, this leads to religion ending up as an activity of aggrandizement to establish political power for one’s own religion.
When you believe that you and God are one, your religion becomes a journey of meditation to realize the God within oneself. External power does not interest you.
In short, if you believe that God and you are one, then your religion is an individual affair between you and God. If you believe that God and you are separate, then your religion is political in nature. This is the difference between Hinduism and say, Islam.

What is God?

I count. I am.
Many Gods are.

I count one. I am this or that.
One God is.

I count nought. I am not.
Only God is.

I don't count. Who am I?
What is God?

Bunch of Thoughts

I quote the first few lines of the Bunch of Thoughts. How wide and deep was Guruji's canvas of vision! Quote "Many people in our country hold the view that any venture that we undertake should be based on a grand world-thought capable of rendering good to the whole of humanity eschewing all narrow limitations of the country, community or religion. In support of this view, some proclaim that in this age of missiles and rockets distance has vanished, boundaries of countries have become meaningless and the whole world has shrunk. They, therefore, feel that the very concept of country, nation, etc., has become outdated, that the spirit of world unity alone should inspire all our activities. They conclude that the modern ‘isms’ which have taken up ‘internationalism’ as their watchword can alone lead us to that cherished goal.Now, the question that naturally poses itself before us is how far is the task of reorganising the national life of Hindus taken by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, in conformity with the spirit of world unity and human good? The First in the Field At the very outset, let it be made clear that it is not the modern thinkers who are the first in the field to think in terms of world unity and universal welfare. Long long ago, in fact, long before the so-called modern age had set in, the seers and savants of this land had delved deep into this vital question. The ideal of human unity, of a world free from all traces of conflict and misery, has stirred our hearts since times immemorial. Our one constant prayer all through the ages has been : Let everyone be happy, let everyone be free from all ills. While the present-day West has not been able to go beyond the motto of ‘the greatest good of the greatest number’, we have never tolerated the idea of a single human being – why, of even a single living organism – being miserable. ‘Total good of all beings’ has always been our glorious ideal."

Commercialisation of Hindu festivals

09.08.06 I am afraid the festival of Raksha Bandhan as observed by the public at large has become hostage to commercial culture, where you are obliged to buy a flashy and costly rakhi to express your bond with your brother. Is a symbolic rakhi really required? A bond is always reinforced when one is in the presence of the other. The Ganapati season is coming up and so would Ganapati Mandals. The other day I passed by a place where annually the Ganapati Mandal comes up. I saw another mandal had already come up displaying motorcycle, fridge, television etc. Contribute to Ganapati Mandal and win prizes! To invoke Ganapati, we have only to recite mantras, but we have commercialised the whole thing to such an extent that we now feel that we are unable to perform pujas without a lot of money! For running a shakha you do not need any money. Only an open ground. Swayamsevaks must ensure that we do not slip into the commercial route by conducting our festivals with unnecessary pomp and grandeur. We need to be so simple that expenses for conducting our festivals would be NIL, shakha-like.

Conversion

08.08.06 Christians might wonder what is wrong in asking people to convert to Christianity. Christians should admit that conversion is based on the concept that Christianity is the only true religion. To Hindus the idea that only one religion is true is sheer ignorance. Everyone should accept all religions as sincere attempts to discover the divinity in us and everywhere. Any vision less than this would only pit everyone into different antagonist religious camps.

Middle East crises

05.08.06 The latest Middle East crisis highlights a singular fact about Islam and the consequences of it becoming the dominant religion in a society. Here is Israel attacking Lebanon and the Lebanese army is a bystander. It is Hezbollah that is engaging Israel. This signifies just one fact – there is no such thing as a national spirit in a nation where Islam is the dominant spirit. When Muslims become the dominant community in a country, they regard their community as the nation. Whatever remains of the traditional nation has to fend for itself.

Muslim conscience keepers

27.07.06 This article gets it bang right on. Arjun Singh’s brothers-in-arms Laloo Prasad Yadav, Mulayam Singh Yadav and last but not least V.P. Singh also deserve the honour of Greatest Muslim conscience keepers.

Terrorism

04.04.2004 Terrorism – its impact on the present day world. Terrorism is not a new phenomenon. If we take it to mean the use of violence to achieve one’s goals, we can see that it has always been an integral part of man’s existence. For how can we deny, whether it is war or an isolated incident of wife-beating, that violence is involved - violence which brings terror to the victim? But in today’s parlance, we would hardly call the wife-beater or a much-decorated war-veteran a terrorist. The definition of terrorism has been confined to the large-scale violent activities by secretive organisations against states and its citizens in order to bring to power governments after its own ideology. The LTTE, Irish Republican Army (IRA), Basque separatists, the various outfits in Kashmir and now, Al Qaida, are all universally recognised as terrorist organisations. But many of these organisations claim to be freedom fighters. In fact, these organisations work hard and ingeniously at winning over public support at grass-root level. So the saying, “One man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter” makes sense. Whatever the public perception, the terrorist eventually relies on wanton violence. It is here that the common man must pause to ask an all important question. What causes man to take to the path of violence? While many would believe that the New York Twin Towers’ destruction is a prime example of terrorism and the unfolding scenario of America avenging itself militarily against its perpetrators is the sort of answer that would solve the problem of terrorism. I think this is only a superficial response. We must realise that the root cause of all terrorism, nay violence, is a restless mind. Even if we liquidate all proven terrorists, today’s saviours may be tomorrow’s totalitarian regime. It is not difficult to imagine an anti-terrorist America tomorrow setting out to structure the world according to its vision, and backing it by its own form of terrorism (economic, maybe). An end to this vicious circle can come only at the individual level, when - if not all individuals, at least the most influential ones - take to the path of calming one’s restless mind. This brings us to the subject of spirituality, which is the art of self-realisation – meaning, we discover peace in the truth of our essential self. Unless we discover peace, it is a truism to say that we would be restless. So long as we are restless, we would be a breeding ground of all forms of perceived lack or hurt. Thereafter we, in our agitated state of mind, seek external causes for our problems of lack or hurt. We, in our hallucination, conjure up the enemy and thereby we are born again as a terrorist to avenge our hurt. Unless we understand that all the so-called macro (social) problems of this world have a solution only at the micro (individual) level, we would simply be beating around the bush attempting erroneous solutions to an imagined problem. Our relationship with today’s world, thereby, would become a violence-ridden one.

Writing

16.07.02 What prompts an individual to put pen to paper and what does he expect to come up with? In my case I would say that much reading maketh a man try the game of writing himself. Just a natural reaction to reading, you may say. Whatever, I do hope much writing, even those forced by reading, would finally result in the capacity to create literature. Do I have anything to sell, or, should my writing be purposeful? Or should it simply be a laisser faire sort of rumbling along, all in the hope that it would result, one day, in the capacity to purposeful writing, if need be? Would such need ever arise? Well, considering my background and the type of passion that flows within me, it is obvious that no sooner I feel I am able to churn words effortlessly, I would find myself dressed to go in for the kill. So there I have no doubt, whatever my motivations for reading (enjoyment what else?), my motivation for writing is not that innocent. It would turn out to be nothing less than activist writing. This being so, let me get right way into the act.

Meditative Hinduism

13.12.99 No one’s going to be wholly comfortable anywhere except in themselves. And no one’s going to be wholly comfortable with anything either – they would be comfortable only when they are within themselves, being free to truly observe the objects. Unfortunately, the observer becomes dependent or involved with the observed even before the observation truly beings. Happiness or lasting peace is the state only the free enjoy. And the sine-qua-non of freedom is the freedom from bondage (of relationships) and burden (of activities). Meditative Hinduism is all about unburdening the burdened. Meditative Hinduism is only one aspect of Hinduism, the Hinduism that prepares the ground for the manifestation of the Gnostic man. Popular Hinduism, meanwhile, evolves the Hindu to the meditative stage.

Kamla Das

13.12.99 Kamla Das’s is a last hurrah act. An urge to be once more in the limelight before the final curtain fall. Watch for Prasannarajan’s essay. He would bare it all. Kamla Das says she felt lonely and fearful that she would have to pay for her sins. Alas, she hasn’t seen that loneliness is a consequence of material living. And Islam, as a religion, does not have an answer for the soul’s loneliness. It can at best distract man from his loneliness through external comradeship or brotherhood of the believers. Till the problem is solved, the individual becomes restless, which is why the Muslim community is a restless community. Kamla Das’s disillusionment with Hinduism is probably because she could not go deeper than its ritualistic aspects. In fact, it appears that she has not understood even the basic aspects of either Hinduism or Islam. Hinduism has the inexorable law of Karma. This is not a reward/punishment law. It is simply the law by which life is organised. Actually, it is Islam, with its day-of-judgement belief, that sees Allah in the reward/punishment mode.

Conversions

13.12.99 Conversions are anathema to the Hindus because the only ‘conversions’ the Hindus believe in is the conversion from the materialistic to the spiritual. But for Islam and Christianity, conversions mean ‘adding to the flock’. Religions ought to be lessons towards spiritualism, not a means of political mobilisation.

The sensitive one

13.12.99 The temptation to flee from a place where there is uncouthness is natural. Particularly when one is sensitive. Yet the real victor is one who remains unaffected and cool. For is it not the fate of the materialistic to ever be in fragments? In any case it would be well to remember that one is in this place only for the money. One does not depend on the external for any other security. Do not expect any sort of comfortable behaviour towards you. You are already comfortable by virtue of your presence within. You have no ego to be hurt. You have a ego only if you place yourself outside. When you are within, where’s there a place for an ego? When you say you are here for money, it doesn’t mean you are bothered abut it al all. Once the salary has been agreed upon, why bother about it ever again? So, in short, during your work here, you would have no problems. Be fearless. That is, don’t fear losing your job.

Materialist's happiness

13.12.99 Don’t be fooled by the materialist’s happiness or good mood. It’s eminently transient. We would say, they have no hope, except that they turn spiritual.

Naming

13.12.99 Who am I? I am not any of the identities I gain through intercourse with society, primarily because man cannot gain knowledge except by labelling or naming differences. If there were no differences in what man perceives, he wouldn’t need the use of his mind. His mind comes into play only when he notices differences in what he perceives. The first thing he does about those differences is to name each difference differently. Thus as he keeps on naming the various differences he perceives in nature around him, his vocabulary burgeons. But we must realise that naming a thing is not necessarily knowing that thing, except that he knows it the way he understands it. It is this understanding that become the naming of words given in dictionaries. But often, the understanding could turn out to be a misunderstanding.

The resolution experiment

13.12.99 The resolution experiment. We have heard of resolutions when talking of PC monitors. We of course are familiar with table fan resolutions. Viewed against normal background, we cannot differentiate the reaction of the three blades of a table fan, but when viewed against switched on PC motor, we can easily differentiate the slow-moving’ blades. Why?

Materialists

13.12.99 The materialists are moved by power and the less ‘educated’ among them kow-tow to power. In fact, they can be moved only by power and not their innate sense of righteousness. They lose their sense of righteousness when power ‘shines’ on them. For example, when the boss is around, they fail to see others in their blind subservience to the boss. They are on their toes and blanketed by fear when ‘serving' boss. Why? Lack of spiritualism, of course.

Hindu vs. Islamic terrorism

24.07.06. The time has come for the Hindus to rise to the occasion. Hindu institutions are under attack, both from within and without. The time has come for the ordinary to show the world that he or she has the will, determination and ingenuity to protect its institutions and attack its enemies so that it is no longer under any threat. 20.07.06 Vis-à-vis Islamic terrorism and the need to go into its roots to exterminate it, it is time we differentiated between the Muslim and his religion Islam. I feel that we should not make Muslims in general the villains of the piece as far as Islamic terrorism is concerned. The ordinary Muslim has grown up to believe that the tenets of Islam are Allah’s words and they are inviolable.

On Islam

20.07.06 Dear Anwar Hussain saab, I read your letter in the Asian Age of 19th July where you said all are Muslims who want to follow Islamic teachings and calling some Islamists who want to live according to the Islamic Shariah would suppose there are Muslims who are non-Islamists. What you say is, by experience, true. All consider themselves Muslims, including Ahmediyas who are not allowed to consider themselves so by the Pakistani government. Then again there are the Sunnis and Shias, all Muslims but who still consider each other different. So probably the writer sought to call the more conservative Muslims Islamists. These are nomenclatures and could be useful to differentiate the heterogeneity that Islam has actually turned out to be. If you would be kind enough, I request you to please enlighten me on why Prophet Mohammad had to cleanse Mecca of its idols in order to begin his religion? Does this not prove that Mohammad was intolerant of other religions? (You might say that he only reclaimed the Grand Mosque, which was defiled by the idols, for Islam. This implies that Islam existed before Mohammad taught it. If it indeed existed and traces its origin to Prophet Ibrahim, all I have to say is that Prophet Ibrahim too was an iconoclast, who started off by breaking the idols his father worshipped. Anyways, intolerance!). Awaiting your comments.

Mid-term elections?

15.06.06 Mid 2006 - The state of affairs in Indian politics. The UPA government keeps going only to keep the BJP out. The most intent in keeping the BJP out are the leftists. So long as the left sees any possibility of a BJP comeback, they will continue backing the UPA under all circumstances. The moment they are sure that the BJP is down and out, they will withdraw support to the UPA government and force a mid-term election, hoping thereby to become the main opposition party. They can then aim to be the ruling party in the subsequent election, by which time they would have hustled up a third-front. The Congress, on the other hand, is concerned only about regaining power all by themselves. Their OBC-minority appeasement policy vis-à-vis reservation is part of their strategy to get a thumping majority and form a single-party government. The moment they are confident their calculations won’t go awry, they will call for snap elections, regardless of whether the opposition slot is occupied by the Left or BJP. Thereby hangs the tale of the ‘support-withdraw support’ politicking by the CPM. The Congress may, from the Left point of view, call for an election prematurely. That is, they might call for an election when the BJP is not totally down and out and may beat the CPM to the opposition spot. Unless the BJP is completely in disarray, the CPM would not want the Congress to think of mid-term elections. This is the state of affairs of Indian politics mid 2006.

Rahul's Press Conference

16.06.06 Rahul’s press conference. Rahul Mahajan’s press conference highlights the fact that he is not a run-of-the mill charge-sheeted accused. All men are equal, but some are stars in their own right. Those around him obviously see a political role for him. Otherwise why was a press conference necessary? The most important thing for a politician or a budding one is image. Since Rahul’s image has been tarnished, he has to take steps to re-burnish it.

Childhood memories

24.07.02 The earliest vivid memory I have of myself is of my waking up one morning and looking for the gun on the table by my bedside and then crying because it was not there. There I was, confused between dream and reality. I am unable to date it but such memories in Beraddin Estate would have been before I was seven. I remember Thomas, my class master and me rushing towards Teachers’ Room to exclaim, upon meeting him midway, that some had “bell ringing” and then being embarrassed that I was not able to properly express myself. How quaint, I remember him tucks my palm into his hands and leading me back to where the action was. Then there was a period when I was in the house of Mrs. Mathews and I remember the day I was hit by a car and thrown off to a drain by the road. Nothing happened to me and it must have relieved the driver of that car.

Dr. Kalam's inauguration

27.07.02 Today Dr. Kalam is taking over as India’s President. It would be great if we can hear his speech live on T.V. Could it be the first time a president is addressing the nation so quick after inauguration? I feel deeply that this president would do a lot through his speeches and interactions, to enlighten the masses about the need to have a spiritual view about religions and thus would in fact be rooting for perennial Hinduism – the vision of truth being one and expressed variously.

Quran and Shariat

27.07.02 To: ib@I-g.org Dear Mr. I.A. Ibrahim, I have just read your book “A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam (2nd edition) brought out by Darussalam, Houston. I am impressed by its contents. However, you have not mentioned anything about shariat. I have the following query: Is shariat that which is culled only from the Quran or does it also include texts which are from sources other than the Quran? I ask this question because I see that on matters like talaq, some countries have altered its interpretation under certain circumstances. I doubt if any injunction from the Quran can be tampered with and therefore I was wondering if some injunctions in the Shariat could be from sources not as sacrosanct as the Quran. Please clarify or guide me to a site on the internet where I would get the answer to my query.

Shoot on sight anti-nationals

29.07.02 I think India is restraining herself vis-à-vis Pakistan because of America’s pleading: Give time and opportunity for Mushraff to deliver. However, that chap is not going to deliver - he will have his own agenda. Maybe I am being simplistic, but why can’t India simply have a policy of shooting on sight anti-India nationals? Maybe there is a genuine fear that in this guise innocents might be killed. Moreover, any leader ought to know that real victory is the winning over of hearts. It must be noted however that if India is going to be victorious, we can’t have anyone and everyone strut about as if they are the arbitrators of India’s destiny. The arbitrators of India’s destiny ought only to be those who love Mother India and are determined to live for Mother India.

Praful Bidwai

04.07.06 Hear Praful Bidwai, the great secularist. [Here’s what Praful Bidwai, the Frontline columnist, had to say in the vein of secularism.] The party’s (BJP’s) gut-level instincts remain deeply Islamophobic and hawkish on questions of security.An instance is Mr Vinay Katiyar’s offer of a Rs 1 lakh reward to anyone who kills a terrorist in Kashmir. This was no different from Uttar Pradesh minister, Mr Yaqoob Qureshi’s offer to anyone who kills the Danish cartoonists who insulted Prophet Mohammed. [Only an avowedly Marxist Islamist like Praful Bidwai can say that Katiyar’s sentiments and Qureshi’s sentiments are alike. Katiyar’s was a sentiment of nationalistic frevour whereas Qureshi’s was a display of Islamic intolerance. While the former mindset will strengthen India, the later will destroy India – as it did partially in the creation of Pakistan.] It must be condemned equally strongly.

Consciousness

18.10.98. The quality of an individual’s life depends on the level to which he has been able to raise his consciousness. All individuals are endowed with consciousness. This consciousness comes to each individual at birth at a pre-set level, which level may be determined by his previous births. Or could be, his consciousness finds its level in the first 3 years or so of his current life – his pre-memory period. From this ‘level’ his consciousness can either rise or plunge. Rises and plunges would occur under positive or negative external influences (often internalised) respectively. But dramatic rises can begin to occur only when the individual seeks to be conscious of consciousness itself.

Anti-national Kashmir leaders

18.08.06 Mirwaiz Umar Farooq: We are more than willing to discuss all available options to arrive at a negotiated settlement, but no solution within the framework of the Indian constitution is acceptable, nor would we settle on the division of the state. Why is such an anti national, anti constitutional idiot being treated as a legitimate leader of Kashmir by the Indian government? Also note, he will not allow the division of Kashmir but he has no qualms about dividing India. And he is glossing over the fact that two regions in Kashmir are Hindu/Buddhist majority and his writ does not run there.

Chalo Kashmir

[This is a would-have-been e-mail to a blogger who was my collegue. Unfortunately I could not mail him this.] Dear Manvendra Vartakji, I read your blog CHALO KASHMIR on NDTV's Blog. I have commented on it. I think we have actually met. My name is Venugopal and I was at Desert Line in Azaiba (the camp near Seeb airport) in Oman around the early 90s. If I remember correctly, when you arrived in Desert Line we stayed together for some time in the container-type accommodation in Desert Line. You told me then that you were staying in Shankar Peth in Pune. Subsequently I think you were sent to one of the sites in the interior and we may not have met after that. I left Desert Line and joined Al Hassan Corp. in Ruwi and then altogether left Oman around 1996. Have been in India since (my village is in Kerala) and for the past 9 years I have been in Mumbai working as stenographer in a CA firm in Fort . How did life go with you since we last met? Please do write. It would be good that we keep in touch. You may visit my blog site. It is at: http://www.kaikulath.blogspot.com/ There is no doubt that we are on the same wavelength as far as the situation in our country today goes. Regards Venugopal My e-mail id: venu1005@hotmail.com

Let the dogs bark but the caravan goes on.

[This is a comment following new reports about swayamsevaks in government services being banned from participating in Shakha.] Swayamsevaks, no doubt, will continue participating in the shakha and other activities of Sangha, whether they are in government service or out of it. Let the government start its persecution and we will see what the courts have to say. I am reminded of the proverb: THE DOGS BARK BUT THE CARAVAN GOES ON. Let anti-RSS folks do their utmost, but Sangha will continue its Dharmic mission.

Corruption-free living

The following is an unsolicited comment I gave a person who had e-mailed and asked me to format an introduction letter of an NGO that had last conducted a seminar titled "Corruption-free Education". Corruption in education, or elsewhere for that matter, will end only if a child starts with proper education - an education awakening him (or her) to the truth of himself - that he is a perfect being in a perfect creation. Any teaching less than this is only training, training to run along with the crowd - a sure invitation to corruption!

Pravin Togadia as PM?

Tell me, Mr. Pratik Pandey, [a NDTV blogger to whose blog this comment is, but this was not published ] without the Hindus would there be the Vedic teachings of everyone being the manifestation of God etc? Therefore is it not our sacred duty to awaken and unite the Hindus to protect the Hindu culture so that the light of such liberal religious thought is not extinguished from the world? This is just what Sangha Parivar is doing. They are only putting things in proper perspective in criticising Islam and Church activists for holding a vision which is detrimental to a liberal world – the vision of “My religion the only true religion”. I think Pravin Togadia, a courageous man who could have, being a cancer-surgeon, migrated to USA and made a pile of money, but stayed to lead the Hindutva forces to call the bluff of the Semitic mindsets, should be the Prime Minister of India rather than Manmohan Singh, who went to Afghanistan, with Rahul Gandhi in tow, and visited the mausoleum of Baber to honour Congress vision of pseudo-secularism.

Cutting new pathways to God

What do Christians mean by "there is only one true living God?" Has anyone claimed that there are dead Gods? Has anyone claimed that there are many Gods? And has anyone associated untruth with Gods? If a Hindu says there are many Gods, he would only be meaning many are the manifestations of God. By Christians saying there is only one God they are actually meaning that others ideas of God are wrong and only the Christian idea of God is correct. (Ditto Muslims.) Conversions are pernicious because they are carried on under the conviction that your religion is the only true religion and others' religions are false. Conversions are based on ignorance and they would bring no light but only darkness. Let us rejoice at the many paths to God and honour as heroes those who cut new pathways to God.

Freedom of expression and Freedom of privacy

19.02.06

Freedom of expression is subject to non-disturbance of public peace. This means that freedom of expression has only been restricted, it has not been done away with. If someone draws a picture of Prophet Mohammad or a nude Saraswati in his own privacy or for circulation amongst his like-minded friends, they would have had all the freedom to do so. But there is also the question of intrusion into another’s space. No one can break into my house and make public my drawings which I have not meant for the public. No one can intrude my private space just as I cannot violate the public space.

Exchanging views over the blog

Dear Venu u r rigid. Dear Ruzan Shah, Thank you for your response to my posting “Muslims doing pooja, much less reciting Vande Mataram, is not un-Islamic” You say I am being rigid. I am not being rigid; I am only trying to see the logic of things. I do not think, when we communicate in written language, anything other than logic can direct the course of the discussion. I shall retain your response intact and colour my response in red so that we have at hand our flow of thoughts. I am a muslim & I know what is universal brotherhood. I am not questioning that you are a Muslim, that’s something between you and Allah. But the universal brotherhood you claim to know, if based on Islam, is illogical because Islam propounds the theory of Kafir and if I am not mistaken, a Kafir is one who does not accept Islam to be his religion. The celebrated verse in the Quran, where it says “Onto you your religion and onto me my religion”, unfortunately did not develop into a culture that accepted that there are many paths to God but led to the attitude “mine is the true religion and if you are not joining it, then go the hell your way”. This is evidenced in Islam’s greatest display – at the Hajj in Mecca where only Muslims are allowed. This is the ‘universal brotherhood’ that is on display – the brotherhood of only the believers. Its for all the mankind & not only for muslims. I am glad you recognize that the Quran is for all mankind and not just for Muslims. I too recognize that it is part of mankind’s heritage. Therefore it gives me a right to seek to understand and explain it from the Hindu viewpoint (or rather a Hindu’s viewpoint, that is, my own viewpoint). So it will be better if you stop twistings facts. I know my religion better than you my friend. Not just your religion but mine too. Its for all mankind, remember? (I know I don’t qualify to be a Muslim just because I accept the Quran to be mine also, because according to you folks I have to circumcise and all that.) Either you concieved it wrong or u just dont want to accept the fact. If thats the case nobody can help you. I dont understand why are you lieing ? Please don’t call me a liar just because I have a different view on matters. So me where in Quran it says its only for muslims ? I challenge you. All religious books are the heritage of all mankind. While for the others Quran is but one of the many sacred scriptures extant in the world, for the Muslims it is the only religious book of any worth. Quran may not be only for Muslims, but Muslims are only for the Quran. Even in your earlier post how many times you backedoff when asked to prove your mis-conception ? Everytime you gave a standard reply I am not a scholar of Islam.If you dont know Islam than why are you speaking lies ? Being ignorant is not tantamount to being a liar. I do not remember backing off but I do concede the possibility because I am a mere blogger, not the Shankaracharya! Ask somebody who knows Islam better or just stop propagating lies. But tell me, do you know Islam? If there are people who know Islam better than you, does it not mean that you have still more to know about Islam? So, my friend, it’s all a matter of degrees, in knowledge (no pun intended). We live and we learn. Vasudhev Kutumbakam ok If the whole world is one family why you dont even want to touch dalit ?why ? Mercifully, the so-call upper castes only kept the so-called lower castes at arms length or even out of sight, but they never massacred them. That is, there was no ethnic cleansing in Hindu history. But that’s not so with Islam. Just as Mohammad cleansed Mecca of idols, the Muslims cleansed communities which, for instance, believed in idol-worship. Where are the idol-worshiping communities in Arabia today? (Don’t include the present generation Hindu expatriates there.) Dont lie man come on speak the trueth......lol I know Hindus never get tired of talking about vasudhev kutumbakam but in reality they never practice it its a hypocracy my friend. Surprise, my friend. The Hindus are the only people in history who spread their inclusive culture in peace around the globe. It was the Hindu culture of learning that the Greeks picked up and later transmitted to the Arabs, who passed it much later in history back to the Europeans, who had long since lost it. Ironically, it was the Islamic culture of exclusiveness (not a dot of the Quran shall change stuff) that was the greatest cause of shattering of this Vasudeva Kutumbakam vision in the world. But in today’s world, when Hinduism’s vision of acceptance of multiple cultures is a beacon light to world unity, Vasudeva Kutumbakam will become a rallying banner across the world. Like they never forget to mention that all converted muslims were hindus originally if so why u are killing them ? That the vast majority of Muslims are children of converted forefathers is a fact. Hindus are not killing Muslims. Though only 20% of the population, the Muslims in India are safer than the Muslims in Pakistan. Bombs go off in mosques as routine there, whereas Malagaon is an exception in India. Maybe Pakistan does not want the Muslims of India to feel so safe and it might therefore be they who have begun targeting mosques in India too. Who you are fooling around with ? Indeed some of them were hindus but then why they converted to Islam ? why ? You know better than me Venu. They converted to Islam only because there was freedom to do so. If there were freedom in Saudi Arabia, then I am sure if somebody like Sathya Sai Baba goes there, thousands will become his disciples. Why, there are many Arabians who are already disciples of Hindu gurus but because of the atmosphere in Arabian countries, it is largely kept under wraps. Why u guys never discussed pain & suffering & exploitation & cruelty inflicted on the dalit brothers by ur ancestors ? Pain and suffering all humans go through. But exploitation and cruelty are phases different groups seem to go through at different times in different parts of the world. They are a recurring phenomenon in the world – only the communities and the perpetrators change. What about, for instance, the slave trade famous in Arabian history? Much of the social flaws have been corrected from within the Hindu community itself. But it will take some more time for Islam to correct its greatest flaw – insisting that it is the only valid expression of Truth. From this view has resulted much of history’s bloodshed. The Dalits have lived to tell the tale, for they were no enemies of the Hindus – they were and are the mainstay of the Hindus. But have the ‘dalits’ of Islam (the unfortunate ones who did not abandon their religion for Islam) survived? No, they were Islam’s enemies and have either been forcibly converted to Islam or killed. Consider the partition of India, which resulted in the death of lakhs of people, all because Muslims insisted that Hindus and Muslims are separate nations – the two nation theory. If u have no guts to accept the trueth u better keep quiet You are the people who preach one thing & practice another, This accusation is more apt for the Muslims, for we see during the Eids, in the name of Allah the most merciful, massacre of goats in their millions. Preaching peace but not for the animals! well no wonder coz u guys r so obsessed with changing expressions like 33 crore....lol To be expressive is to be alive and Hinduism has been alive the longest on this planet and will continue to last long. Islam, unfortunately, is today the terrorist fount of the world (because of the way the Mullahs interpret it). It is, thus, surely not going to survive in its present form. Await a ganging up of the rest of the world against it. These kind of intellectual bankruptcy is the root cause of ur frustration I at least am not frustrated. Only someone who has a sense of lack feels frustrated. I have no sense of lack because I have dipped into the Vedanta philosophy. But then what do you know about Vedanta? so dont blame muslims for that sickness my friend. If anybody is responsible for this turmoil thats ur own karma, Ruzan Shah, what have you done? You bring up the subject of karma. It’s a big subject, which Islam has given a total go-by. We will discuss it some other day. Inshallah! well about time to take a holy dip in sacred water... wow what a simple solution for all those gigantic sins. Just like bringing Zam Zam water back home from Mecca?

From my NDTV blogs

Sunday, September 3, 2006
Dear Ruzan - on Muslims doing pooja and all that
My dear Ruzan,
You ask, if a Muslim does pooja, what does he do - is it not to pray to someone (other than God) as a God and in a different way (a way not prescribed by God)? How can you, as a devote Muslim, frame such questions? To whom can Man pray but to God? No Hindu offers prayers to anyone else other than God. Just because his way of offering prayers to God is different from a Muslim’s, does it mean that the prayer is per-se different? If man has so many ways to communicate with one another, that is, many languages, why wouldn’t he have many ways to communicate with God? Does Allah say in the Quran, “You shall pray to me in this way and no other?”
If Islam says there is only one God, than how can a Muslim believe that it is possible for anyone to pray to a God that Islam says is not there? Hinduism does not say there are many Gods - but it does say that the one God is expressed variously. (It means both – that the one God expresses Himself variously – which Islam somewhat accepts when it says that messengers were sent before Mohammad too – and that the devotees express their divine experience variously). This is probably the big difference between the Islamic vision and the Hindu vision – the Hindus have been given the freedom to express their religious experience variously whereas the Muslims are to express themselves only in the officially prescribed manner!

My friend Ruzan, one day I would like to tread into new territory with you and open up the subject of spirituality. When I start talking about spirituality, then actually it will be a talk from an individual to an individual. Religion has today come to mean religious identity. You identify yourself as a Hindu or a Muslim. The truth is that all religions are teachings seeking to take man to his core - his soul – and awakening him to his spiritual nature, thereby awakening him to freedom. But most of us seem to have missed it. Religion has come to be our identity tag, one more badge upon our chest of ego.

Meanwhile, let me continue in response to your blog. You say Islam forbids idolatry. I had earlier pointed out that using the word Allah in worship is itself idolatry but you said you do not think so. Well, lets agree to disagree on this.

You say you can’t be a Muslim by force. But this is not true in application. All Muslim or Hindu children are brought up as Muslims or Hindus. However, the Hindu is allowed the freedom to choose his religion when he grows up whereas there is no such choice granted by Islam. Death is the punishment if you leave Islam. (The law of apostasy.) Can you deny this?

When you say you can’t accept Islam in part but have to take it as a whole faith, it implies that once you enter, there are to be no more questionings. The consequence is not spiritual growth but blind faith.

Quran, you say, says faith (Imaan) is a must to be a Muslim. Well, the Bhagwad Gita too talks about faith (Shradha). But in the Hindus’ case faith is only the beginning of a journey that ends in Self-realisation – that you are God. (It is a long journey, over many lifetimes.) Am I right in saying that for the Muslims, faith remains just that - that for obedient behaviour God will reward you on the day of the Judgement?

Dear Ruzan, you appear to have made a very un-Islamic statement when you said, “A believer is free to do whatever he thinks right.” I am afraid Islam does not permit such liberty to the Muslims. If in any Muslim country a Muslim is caught performing Ganesh pooja, he would be tried for apostasy and in all probability executed - it is not left to Allah for deciding his fate on the day of the Last Judgement!

You ask what good a pooja would do to a Muslim who would have no faith in it? Why, it will only fortify his faith in Allah, showing him in what wonderful ways he can approach Allah. You would of course ask, “But how can any Muslim do anything that Allah has prohibited him to do?” Well, this is the crux of the Muslim dilemma – being trapped in a narrow interpretation of the Quran – it is time at least Indian Muslims sought to see Islam in the light of the Sufis. (I think your statement that Sufis are not Muslims would be contested by the vast majority of Muslims in India who throng to Sufi shrines like that in Ajmer.)

You say Muslims are not scared of fellow humans but only of Allah. I say, don’t be afraid of Allah either – why do you fear that which you actually are?

Love,
Venu
6:39:38 AM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (4) Politics


Saturday, September 2, 2006
Let there be a flashpoint on 7th September!
No, I do not mean of the violent kind. First, let’s see clearly that this ‘compulsory’ business of singing Vande Mataram is restricted only to educational institutions. Let us also understand that educational institutions wouldn’t be educational institutions if there is not an overwhelming aspect of compulsoriness in its affairs, right from seeking admission within a specified time, to attending classes punctually up to home work, sitting for exams and all that. Actually, this compulsory stuff at schools leads to discipline. And this discipline it is that leads us to true freedom. Without discipline freedom is only licentiousness.
Insha’llah, this generation of ‘forced’ September 7th Vande Mataram singers would sing it voluntarily when they leave schools. Then, patriotism in-bred, we need not even talk about it – it would simply be a natural phenomenon for all Indians. Let thus 7th September be a flashpoint of patriotism. OM TAT SAT!
Insha’llah, this generation of ‘forced’ September 7th Vande Mataram singers would sing it voluntarily when they leave schools. Then, patriotism in-bred, we need not even talk about it – it would simply be a natural phenomenon for all Indians. Let thus 7th September be a flashpoint of patriotism. OM TAT SAT!

9:49:47 AM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (0) Politics


Friday, September 1, 2006
Muslims doing pooja, much less reciting Vande Mataram, is not un-Islamic.
Muslims' justification in refusing to sing Vande Mataram is that Islam does not allow worship of any other than Allah and by bowing to the Motherland they would be breaking the Quranic injunction.
This is illogical because the Quran has prescribed the ritual of worship of Allah and any other form is not recognised by Islam as worship of Allah. Therefore even if a Muslim goes to a temple and performs puja, since it is not worship of Allah in the prescribed way, it is, according to Islam, no worship at all. Then where is the problem? He is asked to worship in the prescribed manner 5 times a day and only if he fails to do this is he breaking any injunction. If this be so, then reciting Vande Mataram would not make a Muslim any less a Muslim.

7:00:58 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (11) Politics


Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Ruzan Shah - Venugopal Hindu-Muslim dialogue continues
Dear Ruzan Shah,
Unless we define the word ‘idol’, we are getting nowhere. In our context, discussing religion and all that, including Hinduism, idol simply means a reflection or representation of the divine or God. Allah, the word as uttered by man, represents Allah who is the creator and who is beyond our grasp. Therefore, Allah the word for man is an idol, in the form of sound and language. The Ka’aba, the Quran and Mohammad (with some special prayers after his name every time you utter his name) are all idols because they represent the divinity of Allah. You might be worshiping only Allah, but since you cannot worship Allah without the aid of Kabaa (for direction), the Quran (for the words of prayers) and Mohammad (for without him would you have known Allah?), they are all idols you worship in Islam, without you conceding it, because it is said in the Quran “Thou shall not worship idols.” Hindus too are only worshiping the creator or the ultimate or whatever they choose to call him through various idols. Therefore, I say, the Hindu and the Muslim, both being human beings, have no escape from being an idol worshipper.
That Islamic culture is intolerant is easily proved by the fact that in most Muslim countries, non-Muslims are treated as second-class citizens. And Islam itself is intolerant is proved by the fact that Islam teaches that it alone is the true religion and that all other religions are of lesser value and its followers are Kafirs.

You say Shariat is there to show all the people how to live a peaceful civilized life. Saudi Arabia, which is being run on the basis of shariat, as was the Taliban regime, are hardly the epitomes of peaceful or civilized societies. Saudi Arabia is more a police state than a peaceful state. And the Taliban was hardly a civilized entity, its greatest triumph having been the blowing up of Buddha idols in Bamian.

I agree the Shariat has been intact in its original pure form, but it is an obscurantism in the modern world. Instead of adjusting the Shariat to cope with the modern world (which you can’t, as it is part of Quran and not a world can be altered), Muslims are attempting to change the world according to the laws of Shariat! It is simply unfeasible because the Shariat has not taken into account the progress the world has made since the middle ages. On the other hand, the Shariat portion of the Hindu religions, called Smriti, is not a collection of dead laws being sought to be imposed on the world. The Hindu culture allows new elements to be incorporated in its ever living Smiriti, so much so that we have now come from Manusmirti to Ambedkar smirti, as we could call the Indian constitution. I would go the extent of saying that the greatest failing of Islam is that it is stuck with the Shariat. Islam without being stuck with the Shariat would be more like Sufism.

If you say the Shariat says that “idols can’t even help themselves because they are dead stones and have no life” and thereby proof that idols are useless, I ask you, isn’t the Quran also a dead thing without life. Would you thereby consider the Quran as a useless thing?

You say Allah ordered stones to recite the Quranic verses and sure enough it did so. This is a logical fallacy. Allah you say has no shape or size or anything of that sort. So who saw or heard Allah ask the stones to obey His command. Actually, Allah spoke only to Mohammad. Did anyone else hear even the Quranic verses that Allah spoke to Mohammad. Even Mohammad cannot claim that he saw Allah. (Or can he calim so, having flown up on a flying horse to heaven to meet Allah?) He at best only heard Allah. So please tell me how this story of stones reciting Quran arose.

Henceforth I think you should say “Mohammad said, as was recorded in the Quran”, and not “Allah said”, because nobody else has heard Allah speak except Mohammad, and we have only Mohammad’s word for it. Am I right?
It is quaint that you say of anything that the Quran does not explain, like as to why Mohammad was the last prophet or why Allah sent the last message to the Arabs, with the words “that’s Allah’s wish, nobody can question that”. At least you are modest.
You talk of the contradictions in Hinduism, failing to understand that the so-called contradictions are only the One Truth being expressed variously. Islam, the One Truth being expressed in a single way, is actually full of contradictions. I of course came to know about it from some Internet sites. If you wish to know which Internet sites are saying so, I shall inform you.

There are many ways to God and each way is a particular religion. Hinduism is the culture that endorses the various ways to God. Hinduism is not just one religion. It is a culture of many religions.
Love,
Venu

10:12:49 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (5) Politics


Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Vande Mataram - do not recite, but at least stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the rest
I must congratulate one of our bloggers Mr. Ashram Prasad for raising the point that Muslims have no compunction about reciting the Azan 5 times a day, 365 days a year, thereby forcing the Hindus also to compulsorily hear it. But they are not willing even for once to stand in line with the Hindus while Vande Mataram is being recited.
Indeed, if singing the Vande Matram is tantamount to worshiping another instead of Allah, is listening to it being sung as bad?
I think Muslim school children ought to at least be instructed by their elders to attend to the function and stand with the others while the song is being sung, even if not actually reciting it themselves. This way Muslim children will eventually come to appreciate Vande Mataram.
Is this asking too much of the Muslims of India?

11:48:07 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (4) Politics


Tuesday, August 29, 2006
The Ruzan Shah correspondence - Hindu-Muslim dialogue - Part VI

Dear Ruzan Shah,

You missed my question. My question was, can you think of Allah without using the word Allah? Of course you cannot. Thereby, you cannot deny that you are also onto idol worship. If the Hindus worship an idol made of stone, you worship an idol made of sound. I did not say Allah is sound, just as no Hindu would say that the stone is God. It is just made of stone so that we can conceive God by the sense of our sight; likewise there are the names of God made out of sound so that we can conceive of God by our ears. So partner, we are all idol worshippers.

For your information (because you seem to be forgetting these things) you have the granite idol of Aswath placed in the giant cubic idol of Kaaba. You say you do not worship the Kaaba or the Aswath. Unless we define the word ‘worship’, we are going nowhere. But I know that it is obligatory at the Haj pilgrimage to kiss the Aswath. Because of the crowds, it would be good enough to touch the person in front of you who would be touching the person in front of him upto someone touching the person who is actually kissing the Aswath! As a matter of fact, the entire pilgrimage of Hajj is made up of rituals that we Hindus perform in our temple 365 days a year but which Muslims perform in Mecca only, and not in any other mosque in the world, in the few days of the Hajj.

Please quote me the Agni Rahasya or tell me the site I can go to to learn about it. If I cannot understand, I shall ask for your guidance.

You say we are discussing religion and not culture. What is there to discuss about religions? If you have known one religion, you have known all religions. The so-called differences are only in external ornamentation and not in the spirit. We have indeed to be talking about cultures – the Islamic culture of intolerance of other religions and the Hindu culture that believes that there are many ways to God.

By religion is meant teachings of a particular way to God. As there are many ways to God, there are bound to be many religions.

I used the term ‘systems’ to mean the various laws that societies have had to live under in different ages. Like the laws of Manu in an earlier age, for instance, which eventually rigidified the caste system. Or the laws of the Shariat under which Muslims are bound to live, but is today a cause of conflict with other civilisations.

We both agree that God sent messages to all peoples and in all languages. My question is, why has God suddenly decided to stop doing it and sent the last message to the Arab people through Mohammad?

There is nothing like an original version or later version of Hinduism. You are alluding to such things only because you continue to hold that Hinduism is just one single religion. Hinduism is the collective of all the divine experiences of man and his spiritual expressions. It is not just the expression of a single man named Mohammed, which is what Islam is.

Love,
Venu


10:30:41 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (1) Politics


Saturday, August 26, 2006
The Ruzan Shah correspondence - A Hindu-Muslim dialogue - Part V

Dear Ruzan Shah,

Muslims quote the Quran to say that Allah has no family. But I think Muslims have by and large chosen to read the Quran literarily. The Sufis appear to have got more into the spirit of the Quran and they would certainly say that Allah has a family and we, his creation, are his family.

If you believe that the Vedas prophesied the birth of Mohammad thousands of years before his birth, I have no problem. Do tell me, what exactly did they say about Mohammad? That he would be the final messenger of Allah? Muslims are really stretching their imagination on this one!

When you say God has no pratimas or pictures, what you are saying is that Islam prohibits man from having pratimas or pictures of his concept of God or the divinity. Hindu culture does not restrict anyone from expressing his religious or spiritual experiences. Thus, Hinduism - the colourful culture.

You say that Allah has spoken not just to the Arabs but to peoples of all races and ages. He would have certainly spoken to the Hindus too, largely in Sanskrit though. And since God is unlikely to have contradicted himself and yet we see so much differences of approach to God, we have to conclude that religions are more about Man’s hearing than God’s speaking. This must surely be so, particularly since Muslims have only one Quran - of which not a comma has changed since the prophet first uttered it - and yet so many sects and sub-sects are flourishing. If Hindus have manifoldly more sects and sub-sects, it is only because their religions are older.

Praying to man’s expressions of his divine experience is just another way of praying to God. I challenge you to pray to the creator or the ultimate without using the word Allah. If you can’t, you are also in the idol worshiping category. If you can, then get rid of the idol made of sound called Allah. You will then come to the Hindu concept of Nirguna Bhraman.

Let me make it clear. When I say Hindu culture, I mean the general atmosphere of acceptance of many ways to God and by religion I mean the special way you choose for yourself to reach God. Hindu culture has nurtured and nourished innumerable religions down through the ages.

Love,
Venu


12:29:20 AM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (1) Politics


Friday, August 25, 2006
The Ruzan Shah correspondence - A Hindu-Muslim dialogue - Part IV
Dear Ruzan Shah,

Please do not pressurize yourself to reply urgently. Please get to my correspondence only when you are free. Otherwise, before long you would consider me a pest for writing on and on.

You repeat that Islam was there since day one. Was the Quran also there since day one? Now please don’t tell me that Mohammad was also there since day one! Allah of course was there since day one. If you say that all the four were there since day one, then you are talking in Advaitic (non-dual) language – that there is no separation between God the creator and his creation – both are one and the same, just like the ocean and the waves. If all the four entities came at different times, then you would be talking about Dvaita (duality). From the Vedantic (Vedic) point of view, Islam is a dvaitic teaching and the ultimate teaching is the advaitic teaching. Mark, I have said ‘the ultimate’, not ‘the only’. To reach the ultimate you have to travel through ‘lesser than ultimate’ teachings. So the Hindu would never say that Islam is a false religion or anything like that. He would only say that it is not the ultimate, just as he would say that idol worship is not the ultimate. And this travelling to the ultimate is not a happening of just one lifetime. It is a passage through many lifetimes. (Remember, the Hindus believe in reincarnation.)

About everything being there in the Quran, the Hindus also believe that everything is there in the Vedas. The Christians too say the same about the Bible. So what’s new?
That difference of “ ‘s ” between Islam and Hinduism is a difference between the penultimate and the ultimate. Beyond the Islamic thought that God is different from you lies the ultimate knowledge that you are God – ‘Aham Bhramasmi’ or ‘Ana Al Haque’. (The great Mansoor Al Hallaj lost his head for saying this, thanks to Islamic intolerance!)
Sri Sri Ravishankar is absolutely right in saying that there is only one God and no other. But the Vedas also say that that this God is expressed variously by the brightest of men. In Islam all expressions of God other than that authorized by the Quran is prohibited.
If the Vedas forbid idolatry, that is fine for the Hindus, because the Hindus have the choice of taking up a religion or scripture that exults in idol worship.

It is this freedom given by the Hindu culture that has produced the 33 crore Gods and more. The issue is not whether there is one God or innumerable Gods, whether God is masculine or feminine, or neither, as in the case of Allah. The point is, how can man realize the truth about himself. This is the entire striving of the Hindu culture and its spiritual teachings.

Of course Allah is there in the Vedas because the Vedas do nothing but glorify God. For the Hindu Allah is simply Arabic language for God. And God is simply English language for Ishwar. But Mohammad would certainly not be there in the Vedas. How can a man born in the 7th century AD be there in the Vedas which was written much earlier? (Was Mohammad born when Ganapati was taking his dictation from Vyasa?) Unless it was prophesying, which is actually reading what we want to read in a so-called prophecy?

You make it sound sad when you say that God has nobody! Of course, God, defined as the Absolute, can have no one else quite like him. But God being God, you never know. He may well be having a world all of his own where he has family, friends, neighbors etc. Quite like Shiva and his family or Vishnu and his family!

I would not be uncharitable to call Islam an ideology. I would like to think Islam is an endeavour towards spiritually. (Spirituality = a state when man no longer depends on anything for his survival. A state quite like God’s)

It is possible to be on the straight path with clear mind and vision in ways not spelt out by the Quran.

If by Hindu Hriday Samrat you mean Bal Thackray, I must say that I admire him because he is perhaps the only politician in India who has the guts to call a spade a bloody spade, whatever the consequences. However, I feel there is no need to bring him in in a talk about religion and spirituality. However, as a Muslim you might be prone to do so because, as I said earlier, Islam is not just a religion, but it has political ambitions.

Whatever Brahmins may have preached about killing whoever, it is not valid today. Today we live under the Indian constitution and no killing is allowed. Muslims are stuck with the Shariat and would wish to live under the Shariat and not under the Indian constitution if given a choice. Hindus have no such problems because they have separated Smriti from Shruti, but the Muslims are limited to an anti-Indian-constitution Shariat.
Talking about temples being desecrated merely by the entrance of a dalit, Hindus do not follow the Manusmiriti now. As a proof, the foundation stone for the Ramjanmabhoomi Temple was laid by a Brahmin. This again is an example of the Hindu genius in distinguishing between Smriti and Shruti.

I understand, when you say that the Caliphate is part of your faith. This is the main difference between Sufism and Islam. Islam has a political goal, unlike Sufism. This political goal has been the undoing of Islam. It is this political goal that is breeding terrorists. All Muslims say that Islam is the religion of peace. It truly would be, minus its political element. Then what else would Islam be, but Sufism? If Islam has produced terrorists, Sufism has produced the most spiritual savants in the history of the world’s religions.
I know Shariat is part of the Quran. And that’s the problem. You don’t make a distinction between Shariat, which deals with temporal matters and the Quran, which deals in spirituality, which is eternal, like Hindus make the distinction between Smriti and Shruti.

I am not a scholar and therefore I do not want to be provided any reference about what you say. As long as you say it, it is good enough for me.
Bridging the gap for peace between the Hindus and Muslims, or with anyone else for that matter, would succeed only if we cease identifying ourselves as Muslims or Hindus or Christians. Spirituality is the very anathema of identity. In the Indian context, we can easily become united if we base our basic identity as Indians. This is nationalism and this is what the RSS actually strives to do. In the universal and ultimate context, man must learn to identify himself with Ram or Rahim or whatever he calls God, with the understanding that Ram and Rahim are one. Any lesser identification will not bring peace.

About dalits not being allowed to perform pujas, it is interesting to note that even in the worst periods of caste discrimination, the lower castes were never exterminated by the upper castes. They were at worst kept at arm’s length. That is why the dalits still have their own temples and rituals. Where are the people in Arabia who worshipped idols? They were not shunned - like the Hinuds, maybe, did the Dalits. When Mohammad destroyed the idols, it was the signal to his followers to destroy the idol worshippers too.
Ram is as important to Hinduism and Mohammed is to Islam. (Though in Islam there is only one Mohammad, whereas in Hinduism there are many Rams.) As the Hindus are also idol worshippers, the Ram Temple in Ayodhya is most important to them. There would have been no fuss if Baber, the founder of the Mughal Empire, had chosen not to destroy it, like Mohammad destroyed the idols in Mecca.

Ekalavya should not have been denied entry to the school. (Note, today the RSS names its schools Ekalavya Vidyalayas). Nevertheless, Ekalavya turned out to be a better pupil than Arjuna, learning from the idol of Dronacharya. This story is from the Mahabharatha. By cutting off his thumb to give his guru, Ekalavya becomes one of the greatest characters of Mahabharatha. The presentation of such incredible characters is what makes Mahabharata an immortal classic. There was no whitewashing of any events to make the book ‘politically correct’.

If you say Sufism is not Islam, you take away whatever spirituality there is in Islam away from Islam.
If you disapprove everything that is not approved by Islam, then you will see that only Muslims would be acceptable to you. No wonder you are always at war with non-Muslims!
The Nobel Laureate Sir Vaidya Naipaul, for one, wrote about Arabian Imperialism dominating Islam.
Islam may be the fastest growing religion in the world now, but there is no saying which religion will overtake which religion tomorrow. Communism at one time was the fastest growing phenomenon, but where is it today?
It is to the eternal glory of the Quran and Mohammad for having said, “Killing a single human being is like killing the whole humanity.” I must tell my fellow Hindus to paste this verse in all Hindu temples to indicate that this is the Islam that the Hindus look forward to. But the Quran in its entirety would not be acceptable because there are many verses therein that call for the non-believers to be killed.

About Godhra and post-Godhra, it is a case of action and reaction. Majority reactions are always horrendous. What’s the need for justifying it, facts are facts.

Buddhism never died in India, because it is also a product of the Hindu culture.

Buddha taught the higher teachings. Buddha-idols in no way stopped, for example, the Dalai Lama from attaining great spiritual heights.

Your analogy of food to children would also be a good analogy of the Hindu scheme of things, where the culture permits so many religions and religions at so many levels - from the child-like idol worship to the ultimate formless meditation.

You said about gradual revelation of the Quran. This has happened in India too under the influence of the syncretism Hindu culture. In Arabia, however, nothing today exists except the Quran. All the earlier revelations have been destroyed by Islam after Mohammad.

If Quran is the full and final set of divine revelation, it must mean, according to your theory of gradual unfolding of teachings from Allah, that man has reached the pinnacle of his growth. But many thinkers do not think so. Aurobindo Maharshi spoke of higher dimensions of living yet to come for man and of man evolving further.

You ask why Shankara is different from other Gods. Whatever the reason, what does it matter, except to symbolize some philosophy? Our approach to religion and all its symbols should be for our attainment of higher and higher spiritual states of unfolding and insights. Does it matter whether God is called Allah or Krishna? Anyway, to answer your question about Shankara and Vishnu being so different in appearances – it only indicates that the ultimate can be achieved regardless of the external appearances.

Looking forward to hearing from you, Ruzan.

Love,
Venu
12:36:40 AM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (2) Politics


Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Again, to Ruzan Shah

Dear Ruzan Shah,

You are pretty fast in your replies. It means you are ready with facts on your fingertips. Congratulations. Excuse me if I am slower, but I shall definitely strive to keep our conversation going. I can see that you are a very sincere person.

1. I said that you ought to judge a religion by the best of its followers, not the worst. You have only to compare Maulana Mawdoodi and Ramakrishna Paramahans to know the difference between the best of Islam and the best of Hinduism. The former was intolerant of differing religious views while the later was an epitome of accommodating all sorts of religious views.

2. I would say that Umma is a community of not just any good people, but those who believe in Islam. Umma means universal brotherhood of the believers, i.e. Muslims, only.

3. Caliphate was simply and purely a political entity. Where is the Caliphate today?

4. Translation by Mr. Picthall is the very one I read. I have always admired the brilliance of his language – comparable to the King James’s version of the Bible.

5... You say that if you want to understand the Quran perfectly you have to read it in its Arabic original. This might be so. But what of us poor folks who are not Arabic or did not have the opportunity to learn Arabic? Can we never know the Quran perfectly? Do we have to take the word of an Arab to know its meaning? No wonder someone talked about Arabic Imperialism in Islam.

6... Of course there are no words like Shia or Sunni in the Quran. This is because these phenomena appeared after the appearance of the Quran. Sunnis and Shias are really the consequence of the battle for Mohammad’s throne after his demise. Nothing religious about it. Purely political in the name of religion. (We have a lesson here vis-à-vis the terrorists of today. There are a purely political phenomena in the name of religion.)
7.. I said Hinduism is a culture – a culture of religions and spirituality. Systems are what could come under the term Smriti – the changeable, like Manusmriti. Shruti is that vision which is eternal as of the Vedas. A parallel could be the Shariat and the Quran. (Though Muslims say that both are one and the same, they will sooner than later realize the difference between both, what with all the Talaq, Talaq, Talaq debates going on.)

8. If you say your God gave His final word to you, that is OK. But you have no right to say that God gave the final word. God is so many things to so many people. What it is to you is only your own little faith, wholly valid for you as others’ faith are wholly valid for them.

9. Look, I think you are missing the whole point of spirituality when you speak of final authorities. Krishna, Rama, Budhha, Jesus, Mohammad etc. are only people who have had a high level of spiritual experiences and they have expressed it variously and they have been celebrated by the followers each in their own way and culture. No Hindu expects all Hindus to take any of them as the final authority. That is upto the individual Hindu’s experience and preference. Still, if asked to say what has been the Hindu culture’s final authority, I would say that throughout the ages it has been the Vedas(with its ultimate message to man – thou art perfect!). But even here, those who have rejected the Vedas have also been accepted as Hindus.

10. Muslims keep saying that there is only one God. I think the Hindus go one step better by saying that everything is God, or there is only God. (I have always felt that the famous verse of Quran – La illah illa-Allah actually means this - that there is only God - and not that there is only one God.)

11. Islam is not the refinement of all religions. The refinement of all religions is spirituality and spirituality is better represented by Sufism than Islam, certainly.

12. When you talk of the last prophet, what you mean to say is that the clock stopped in the middle ages with Mohammed.

13. Quran is not the updated final version for all mankind, as you say. It might be so for the Muslims - for within the Muslim world you disallow the coming up of any new religions. There is a blanket ban on any other religions, actually. But outside the Muslim world, many spiritual savants have come after Mohammad. What about the founder of the Bahai faith, of the Sikh faith, of the Sai faith etc? Why, Sai Baba claims he is an Avatar (a whole lot more than a messenger) or even God, and his followers believe so.

14. I must confess I do not know what is the Agni Rahasya of Vedas or that “Vedas was there in Vedas 5000 years ago”. You might want to enlighten me, if you may please.

15. You talk about Sufism taking on Islam. Why would anyone want to take on Islam. It is quite possible that Sufism pre-dates Islam and they wanted nothing but the freedom to express themselves, which Islam did not allow. However, to the greatness of Sufis, they never confronted Islam but instead sought to merge into Islam, and spread their radiance from within.

16. If Quran was there from the beginning, then why did Allah have to dictate the whole thing again to Mohammad? Does it mean that the Quran we have at present will be lost once more and Allah will have to find a new Mohammad to dictate it to again?

Please do write.

Love,
Venu

11:13:26 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (3) Politics


Tuesday, August 22, 2006
To Ruzan Shah again
Dear Ruzan Shah,

Thank you for your response.

1. You say you cannot judge a religion from its followers. But how else can a religion be judged except by its effect on at least the best of its followers, that is, the most ardent of its followers? It is, unfortunately, a general phenomenon that the most ardent of Muslims are the folks who gang up to create a Taliban, Hizabolah, the Wahaibi movement, the Jamait-e-Islami and suchlike institutions, who tolerate no divergence of views.

2. You also say that you cannot judge a religion by the policies of a Muslim. You are missing the point. Creation of a universal Islamic State is very important in the scheme of things of Islam. If not, why was Mohammad trying to create a state? Or what about the Caliphate? Most of all, what about the concept of Umma in Islam?

3. Further, you say that you can’t understand Allah’s words in translation. Does it mean that Allah’s words are not universal but meant solely for the Arabic speaking folks?

4. About the non-translatability of the Quran, does it mean that many Muslims, not knowing Arabic, are not able to understand the real meaning of Quranic verses? Could it also be the reason why the leadership of Islam is generally seen to be with the Arabs?

5. You say that the words of the Quran should not be changed. This I agree because this is logical. If you create anything new, it would be different from the old. We cannot have something else and pass it off as Islam. But my question is, even with an unchanged Quran, why the difference between Sunnis and Shias?

6. I did say "over a period of time all systems get corrupted”. Remember, I said systems. The Hindus would identify as systems all that is born of ‘smriti’, that is, laws like Manusmriti etc., or like our Indian constitution, which has been amended many times. That which is eternal is called ‘shruti’, which is the basic vision or spirit, like the Vedas and Upanishads, not merely the words. In the case of the Muslims, I would say that the Quran is ‘shruti’ whereas that which goes by the term Shariat is smriti. But Muslims do not differentiate this and mistake the letter for the spirit, which is why Muslims say that the Shariat is also inviolable.

7. The Quran says, "La kum di nakum wal ya din" - for you your religion and for others theirs, do yours and let them do theirs. Isn’t this, you ask, equality and even respect for all? I say it would have been equality if the Quran had accepted all religions as true. The Bhagawad Geeta does so, with Krishna saying that whichever way we choose it leads to Him.

8. You say Sufism is not Islam and it has nothing to do with Islam. By saying so, you are proving that you are also an ardent Muslim, like those I mentioned above and therefore you are also likely to be intolerant. (I say this as a principle, not to attack you personally.)

9. You say Islam is the only religion which talks again and again about Logic. But I must say that Quran itself is being illogical in saying that Islam is the only way to God. If it was so, the Quran would have been there since the beginning of history. But it came into being only after Mohammad. If you say that it was there even before Mohammad, then why did it perish? Would this Quran also in the course of time perish?

10. You ask if someone can convert to be a Brahmin. But Brahmin is not a religion so how can you convert to it? In any case because you are a Muslim, Allah has prohibited you any conversion.

11. Of course, as Islam says, you are superior by good virtues. But the point is, if you are of real good virtue, you would not consider yourself any superior to anyone else. All are equal to you.

12. Some Caliphs were considered out of sync with Islam. Were they not the reasons for many wars between Muslims?

13. As an Indian you don’t have to accept my culture but to accept your own culture, which is Hindu, just as mine. As Muslims of India, you did not come from abroad. Once your forefathers were Hindus. Therefore by culture you are a Hindu, which you cannot change, like you cannot change your father.

14. Hindu does not denote any religion but the culture of this land. And it is the culture of this land that made so many religions flourish, unlike Arabia after Mohammad, which became a wasteland as far as religious plurality was concerned.

15. Vedanta is just one of the many ways of understanding and taking to the spiritual path that India has produced. This culture of India, which we today call Hindu, was always known as Sanaatana Dharma.

Regards
Venu

11:07:54 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (2) Politics


Monday, August 21, 2006
Reply to Mr. Ruzan Shah

Dear Ruzan Shah,

You say Islam gives even and equal rights to all the religions. It does not. In the Quran 3:85 it says: “And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers.”

Also you say Islam gives you the choice of following it if you like it or following another path if you don’t. If it really did, it would not have the concept of apostasy in its teachings, i.e., if you leave Islam you will be put to death.

Is Saudi Arabia an Islamic state? Anyone who has been there will testify to the fact that Saudi Arabia does not allow Churches or Temples to be put up in public places, while every nook and corner has a mosque.

While the BJP is a political party functioning well within the constitutional parameters of our country, VHP is an organisation working to instil Hindu consciousness among Hindus, who are by and large a disunited lot. RSS, on the other hand, is not a religious organisation. Its aim is to arouse patriotism in the hearts of all Indians so that we will not fail to identify the traitors amongst us who work for foreign agents trying to dismember the nation.
Godhra, as per the sequence of events reported alike in all the media across the globe, began after Hindus were burnt alive by Muslims. When the majority reacts against the minority, naturally the effects will be monstrous, whether there is a Modi or not.

About the caste system, over a period of time all systems get corrupted. Likewise, the caste system too got corrupted. In the modern times, the best of Hindu savants have always called for Hindu unity not on the basis of caste, but on the teachings of spirituality.
As you said, not all Hindus are bad and not all Muslims are bad. It is the bad folks amongst us who cause all the trouble. In fact, both Hindus and Muslims and Christians and Jews and Chinese and Americans and who have you are all basically alike because we are all human beings. Even all the scriptures of the world are only for the good of man, if properly interpreted. The problem is with people who interpret the scriptures narrow-mindedly. It is the broad-minded interpreters of Hinduism who have left the deepest influence on Hindus (like the teachers of Vedanta) and therefore today we have the legacy of a broad minded Hindu culture, whereas it appears that it is the narrow-minded Muslims who have had the deepest influence among the Muslims (like the Wahaibies instead of the Sufies) and therefore the Islamic culture today has become a narrow-minded one. The Hindu culture is very broad minded and democratic, accepting many ways to God and expression, whereas the Islamic culture is very narrow minded and undemocratic, saying that Islam is the only truth.

So you see, my friend, it is a matter of culture. I respect your being a Muslim, but that is only your religion. As an Indian, you ought to accept the Hindu culture and teach all Muslims to be broad-minded.

I am ready for any more discussion on this subject. My e-mail id is venu1005@hotmail.com.

With best wishes,
Venu
9:58:09 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (1) Politics


Saturday, August 19, 2006
Was Vavar a Muslim?
Will any of my fellow-bloggers in the know please enlighten me as to when Lord Ayyappa of Sabarimala was born? It is said that Vavar was a Muslim. Was Islam extant at the time of Ayyappa?

2:58:47 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (2) Politics


Thursday, August 10, 2006
Intolerant Mohammad?
When Mohammad founded his religion, one of his first acts was to cleanse Mecca of idols. Was he not being intolerant of the religious beliefs of idol worshipers? Can Muslims' justify Mohammad's act by saying that Allah is against idol worship and therefore it was his duty to destroy idols? At best, Muslims can avoid idol worship (which they really don’t,), but what right have they to destroy idols of non-Muslims? This act of Mohammed was surely the inspiration for renowned idol smashers like Babar who destroyed Rama's temple at Ayodhya.

Muslims, if they are to come into the fold of tolerant practitioners of religion, must disown this act of Mohammad and accept the multiplicity of paths to God. Otherwise their intolerant psyche will only breed more and more terrorists in their community and tar the entire community as terrorists (this is what is happening in the world today)..
6:45:08 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (8) Politics

Comments
JudgementDay Thursday, August 10, 2006 7:15:30 PM
Mr. Venu,Kindly read the Hindu religious scriptures like the vedas (all four), Upanishads, Puranas etc. Idol worship is forbidden in hindu religion. The rig veda says that God does not have any images or there is no one like him or God does not have parents. All these are there in various religious scriuptures of hinduism. Kindly read the translated versions done by Dr.S.Radhakrishnan if u don't understand sanskrit. What the Prophet did was correct as all religions whether Hinduism,Islam, Christianity, Jewism, Sikhism, Zorastrarism etc talk of ONE GOD and not of multiple hand made idols and only ONE GOD to be worshipped and no idol worship.If u need more details about the quotations and details about all the religious scriptures kindly let me know ur email id, I'll gladly mail it to u :)

shyam Thursday, August 10, 2006 7:11:51 PM

The same holds good for all christians who say that only Jesus can offer salvation.Anyone subscribing to this view Publicy should be hanged to death.Same with preachers of other communities who say the same thing.For islam to survive they must stop interpreting their holy book and also stop saying that only Islam provides solution to all problems and all non believers are infidels.Secondly they need to control the Popuation and ensure thta all children study well in Schools which do not preach hatred.

JudgementDay Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:37:29 PM
Mr.ShrikkanthThe concept of judgement day is correct...then how can u justify the punishment of evildoers? People like Dawood, Osama, Bush, Blair, Saddam, Modi, Advani etc who do all kinds of evil and mischief on this earth and get away. There has to be a place for final judgement of one's deeds. Every soul shall have a taste of death and his deeds whether good or bad will be judged. There is God to judge what all the people did on earth and the good have to be seperated from evil..otherwise all the life on this earth is meaningless.

shrikkanth Thursday, August 10, 2006 7:38:48 PM

Judgement day .Queer anyway the concept of judgement Day LIKE Fathers DAY MOTHERS DAY VALENTINES DAY is a rubbish concept.So the sould will wait till it gets salvation and it will eb prmanetly hell or heaven is it ?Well hindus belive in idol worship not because of foolish reason.It gives them concentration (if they do it right)and it is from known to unknow my dear .How can u belive in a unknown entityy which i scolurless oudor less unseen unperishable.Moreover GOD IS ALL PERVADING .So why turn west and say hello to allaha ? Can u answer that ?

JudgementDay Thursday, August 10, 2006 10:22:43 PM
Hi brother amused,the symbol of 786 & moon star...no muslim treats it as God..according to shariah it has no meaning..only some deviated muslims who are influenced by the idol worship culture of hindus do it...it came into being since the time of mughal emperor Akbar whose wife was a rajput...hence many hindu cultures are imbibed into muslim culture in India...I didn't call anybody terrorists...I mentioned people who do wrong or mischief on earth leading to loss of life and property....There should be a point when they are questioned for their actions..not in this life but atleast in hereafter otherwise people will continue doing evil...same applies to any muslim terrorist or hindu terrorist or any wrongdoer...they must be punished for their actions and similarly rewarded for goodness....Out of a billion muslim population hardly a fraction of a decimal are terrorists and killers....blaming the billion muslims is not wise or sane.... and I agree that eyes closed in a still posture leads to concentration but no where the hindu scriptures say "concentrate in front of idols"...the point is idol worship - is prohibited in hindu scriptures like rig veda, yajur veda, upanishads and manusmritis. vedas are supreme books of hindus and they must follow its intructions otherwise they will be going against its teachings....peace.

JudgementDay Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:22:07 PM
mr. Shrikkanth,No muslim worships the kaaba (black stone). It is the direction for unity. People in the west turn to east and people in the east turn to west. kaaba is the centre of earth (according to geographers). All muslims turn towrds the kaaba..its a direction.When ur religious scriptures says that idol worship is forbidden and God has no images and u still follow it...then sorry to say u r going against ur religious scriptures.And moreover by praying without idols, the muslims have a higher level of concentration.No human being has seen the creator..so how can a man made idol be God? In south India we have temples and idols of filmstars..do u mean to say they r Gods? A few centuries from now no one will know who was NTR, Khusboo or Rajinikanth and the idols will be treated as Gods.

stdrgy Saturday, August 12, 2006 10:38:59 AM
Judgement Day..what is the problem with u? as per u one has to follow the religous book strictly to consider oneself religous person..why is it so? why can't an individual decide, whome he would pray in any form? i have every right to worship my God the way I want..not like some morons who wants to follow one book which was written in seventh century..every religion has to evolve with time otherwise how they would remain compatible with time? u r so proud of your religion and u feel that Islam is the only religion who follows Quran strictly..so how it benefits Islam? don't u feel that focusing on the narrowest interpretation of Quran has led muslim youth towards the path of terrorism? and for the same reason..everwhere in the world muslims are under suspicion..and you can't blame people whodon't trust you..because the whole world is facing the problem of Islamic terrorism..Islam don't want to introspect..why terrorists are getting martyr status? when everyone starts pointing fingers toward Islam..then there must something which Islam has to rectify to restore the sanity..otherwise how long one would tolerate killing of innocent people in the name of Islam?


Saturday, August 5, 2006

Political Islam

05.08.06
The biggest threat facing the world today is Islamic terrorism. It is flourishing because the world at large is not ready to face the truth that Islam, alone among all the religions of the world, is political in nature. The Islamic enterprise is incomplete till it has subjugated the whole world to the rule of the ‘QAUM’, that is, till the whole world comes to be ruled by an Islamic government, with the Shariat as the constitution.
A concerted educational effort should get underway to educate the world to the danger of Islam taking cover of a religion to fulfil its political ambition. This is the same education that Christianity went through to separate the political Church from Christianity proper, giving rise to the concept of secularism.

Instead of undertaking this basic venture to secularise Islam, mere bombarding of Muslims in the name of terrorism will only be hitting at the branches. Islamic terrorism will not be uprooted till project secularism to expose Islam’s political ambition is underway.

05.08.06

In the light of growing ‘Islamic terrorism’ world-wide, there is anguish amongst Muslims that terrorism involving Muslims are labelled as Islamic terrorism, thereby suggesting that such terrorism is religious in nature. They can see clearly that all terrorisms extant in the world today are political in nature, due to some group or the other carrying notions of being given a raw deal by the powers-that-be. The Muslims are right here. Actually, blaming Muslims for behaving the way they do is unfair because they are human and they only behave the way all humans are wont to do. Why, are’t LTTE, Naxalites, ULFA, Khalistanis all called terrorist groupings and aren't they non-Muslim? The Naxalites or ULFA, for instance, are all Hindus. Can they therefore be said to be indulging in Hindu terrorism?

Having said that Muslims are just like the others, we ought to also consider the Quran. The Quran, like other scriptures, is a document of dead letters till it is brought to life by its adherents suitably interpreting it. We must realise that there is no end to the interpretations we can have of any scripture. Why, aren’t there many schools in Islam and why so? Because each school chooses to interpret at least some aspects of the Quran in its own way.

Thus, we come to the question -where lies the blame for Islam, particularly, being associated with terrorism? The answer, of course, lies in the way the Quran is chosen to be interpreted by recoginised leaders who interpret it. For instance, while Jehad is interpreted as something about fighting wars within our own selves to overcome the debilitating weaknesses in us, many Mullahs and Maulanas interpret it as a political duty to reek vengence upon their political enemies and so on and so forth.

Therefore the solution to wriggling off the tag of terrorism attached to Islam is to have a fresh breed of Mullahs and Maulanas who interpret the Quran spiritually and not politically. Then Islam will be seen in the Sufi light and its teachings will truly bring peace upon the world at large.

10:57:53 AM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (0) Politics