Sulekha.com

Hi Vaj

 

[From this standpoint, sanctioned by the experience of shrewd old nations, the foreign races in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language]

[My take:]

[YOUR take, right? Not worth used toilet paper.]

 

So what is YOUR take?  You’ve avoided stating it, again.  Do you think nobody noticed?

 

[must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e. of the Hindu nation, and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race]

[My take: become Hindus.]

[I take all of that mean one simple thing: Golwalkar's warning against the consequences of following a German model.]

 

How did you get that from ‘merge in the Hindu race’?  Maybe you have been confused, and that is why you neglected to provide your own understanding of Golwalkar’s quotes.  WHERE did he warn of the 'consequences'?  Where did he even speicifcally  MENTION the 'consequences' in a disapproving manner?  'Highest' is approving, not disapproving, btw.  Anyway, since you've clearly forgotten to respond, for your convenience:

 

[or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment -- not even citizen's rights. (We, p.47-48/p.55-56)]]

My take: be forever second class and subordinate, not even having citizen’s rights.

 

What do you think ‘not even citizen’s rights’ mean, Vajbhai?

 

(Please note, the question of the majority having the moral authority to take away citizen’s rights from fellow Indians just because they are DIFFERENT doesn’t even occur to Golwalkar.  And apparently not to you.  But Vaj – for someone who speaks up – rightly – when you see a situation where non-Muslims are treated as Dhimmis in Muslim majority countries (Hindu in Bangladesh, for eg), you are strangely silent on the MORALITY of Golwalkar’s prescriptions.  Which seem, btw, like the worst Hindutvawadi caricature of ‘semitik’ religiosity in saffron garb.)

 

[To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races -- the Jews.  Race pride at its highest has been manifested here.]

 

My take: ‘Highest’ means’ well done Germany!’

What do you think it means, Vajbhai?

 

[Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by. (We, p.35/p.43)]

My take: Hindus should act like Germans did with the Jews.

 

What do you think ‘a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by’ means, Vajbhai?  Especially after that laudatory ‘race pride at its highest’ as opposed to ‘lowest’?

 

To me it looks a lot like an agenda to ‘obliterate all national identities other than those recognized by the RSS as The Hindu’.  At least that’s what the content of his writing says, despite the RSS ‘bravely’ withdrawing the book from circulation after Independence.

 

But how do you ‘interpret’ it Vajbhai?  What do you think it means?

 

 [‘Foreign races’ in Britain are asked to adopt Britishness and learn English.  Last heard, nobody is calling it cultural genocide.]

 

Who are the ‘foreign races’ in Britain?

Immigrants?

The British-born children of Immigrants?

All non-English speaking people (eg Welsh, Scots Gaelic)?

 

Why are you backing away from this statement you made implying that it was applicable to the Indian situation?  Had second thoughts?

 

[this whole point about "foreign races" is moot, because the RSS repeatedly says that Indian Muslims are not descendants of Indian Hindus and not the progeny of Arabs.]

 

So who was Golwalkar talking about then?

 

[You keep bringing up Hadith when confronted with evidence of the Parivar’s ideological fascism and racism.]

[Well, I "bring them up" no matter what you say, Secualruddin. Because nothing, and nothing illustrates better than Islam's resolve to obliterate all religious identities other than the Muslim as the Hadith does.]

 

But what does this have to do with the Parivar’s ideological racism and fascism?  What is the connection?  You know, by this time, that I have no interest in ‘defending’ Hadith or Koran, as such.  I am not going to get sidetracked by your random statements and arguments about them.  Why do you always try to change the subject whenever evidence of the Parivar’s ideological racism and fascism is discussed?  Do you really believe that people don’t notice that you run away from these discussion?

 

[Do you sincerely believe that the ONLY reason I would be opposed to the Parivar’s racist and fascist subtext is the urge to promote Islam?]

[Of course! Islam is intrniscally racist and fascist, and its promotes the ideology of  'Taqiya', simply put,  "opportunism".]

 

EVEN if we hypothetically grant your position on Islam, why do you believe that the ONLY reason I would therefore oppose racism and fascism is to promote Islam?

 

Again, there is no logic to your case.  Only your narrow minded assumption that any questioning of the Parivar’s racism and fascism can ONLY be motivated by the urge to make India Darul Islam.  On reflection, doesn’t that seem a bit nutty to you?

 

[ If you are certain in your knowledge that those who claim to be Hindus' representatives are NOT]

 

A neutral measure – the Lok Sabha election results – tell us the communal Hindutva ideologies are not supported by India’s Hindu majority electorate.  The election results aren’t something I just made up.

 

[why waste your breath?]

 

You keep making ambit claims here to inflate your own views as ‘representative’ of Hindus.  If you didn’t do that, I certainly wouldn’t be contesting the point.

 

[But if Muslim couples register their marriages under the Special Marriages Act (as my parents – both born into Muslim families - did, many years after getting married by nikah btw) then MPL does NOT apply to that family wrt divorce or inheritance.]

[Did your parents divorece under SMA?]

 

Not yet, thank you for asking.

 

But my uncle, who similarly registered his marriage under SMA, passed away and inheritance did not follow MPL but SMA. (He was survived by his wife and daughter and three brothers).  Under MPL his estate would have largely been divided up between his brothers, with a smaller share going to his wife and daughter.  What actually happened was that it all went to my Aunt, as he intended.

 

[If the point of "opting" for SMA is to be governed by its divorce and in inheritance provisions, then the real test of the "option" of SMA is when its applicability is challenged in courts by a triple-talaaqed Muslim wife. Cite Case Law showing us that the court overruled 3-talaaq and granted relief to the petitioner]

 

The point of Muslims getting married under SMA is that triple talaaq is not an option.  If YOU think that Muslim men who get married using SMA then turn around and try to use triple talaaq to divorce their wives (and are supported by Shahabuddin?), then YOU please provide some case HISTORIES (with references).  Otherwise you are just blowing a lot of hot air with no substance. (What a surprise!)  Or rather squealing ‘noooooo, don’t puncture my illusions, my prejudice against Muslims is all I have to live for’. 

 

Honestly, Vaj.  Shouldn’t there be more to your life than this self destructive wallowing in bigotry?

 

Warm Regards

Oh boy, that was a touching story...

people write coz the paper wod never comment on whatever u wrote or never interrupt u when ur trying to convey something...it wod never argue or contradict what u say.. and people like me write when our mouths start aching after continusly blabbering n people have turned they ears away from us

not always true dude......i am waiting for the day my bro would get a decent gal fren and we could u knw run a kinda filmy chaakarr around my folks.....n its funny though my folks   treat my bro(who is 2 yrs ynger) as the elder one where as i am treated like the kid bro(though i am technically a married daughter )..fuuny huhhh...i   knw

thanks brij. and about the english part..i was 19 when the intrenet/mobile boom hit india. From the day i first chatted with a friend on yahoo to till today i have always used these shortcust. first because the internet was so costly and u had to type real fast , then SMS's where we had long conversations with character limits n the main reason, it was not approved by my family and teachers... so i started writing this way more for the teenage rebel reason than anything else   and now have got soo used to it that its hard to change. Anyways will try my best to stick to regular spellings and not short cuts. you should be proud of me already when you see this message..