NEW Find your MarriagePartner - Join Free - IndiaSingles.com - search for your Partner.
Create your profile for free and your life mate will soon reach you.. .dont wait! A special site for People of India origin.

Indian Pluralism : Religious Politics vs Political Religions ? Conversions n other frauds

India Culture Disucssion chat forums: Indian Religions & Faith - Organised Religions & Spiritual Purity - Finding Your SELF: Indian Pluralism : Religious Politics vs Political Religions ? Conversions n other frauds



Pyare dost, apka hardik swagat hai. Apke sehyog ke bina yeh vishal project sambhav nahi tha. Kripya baatcheet ke panno ka uchit prayog kare aur likhne vale logo ki sahayta kare. Kripya vigyapano aur suchna prashtho par jaa kar network ko sehyog pradan kare. Indiaculture.net is non-lucrative, indepenent site and we request you to help support the site. Please moderate the discussions of your interest. Your help is really appreciated. You can switch off the background music by pressing ESC key once.

†Christianity F S i k h i s m F || h i n d u i s m ||*I s l a m
By truth on Sunday, November 26, 2006 - 05:56 pm:

I completely agree with the fact that the human race has persistently failed to acquire an impeccable form of government, and that superpowers such as America and rest of the western nations have had an unfair advantage over the weaker nations. But we still have to accept the fact that democracy yet remains unbeaten in this competition of politics. Although we can never implement equality on an extensive basis, under the ruling of a democratic government we have the right to choose who can rule us and yes they can be overthrown if not suited to the hordes. America being the sole power of today does have a say in the political mishap going on around the world, and yes it has make every possible attempt of fulfil its interests, but it is not America that decides the fate of human race. Superpowers have come and gone, but human nature persists to be the same. The truth is that we are unaware of the truth because what we don't realize is that humans strive to have what they want, and democracy gives us this freedom up a limited extent.
Considering the rule within Nepal, in my opinion democracy will grant the people of Nepal with the satisfaction that they live under a fair rule. Coming back to equality, your comparison between Hitler and Bush make sense up to a particular level, but then the whole idea seems to fall apart because the motives and governments in both the cases cease to match. In case of Hitler, racism was a big problem. He never admitted to being guilty for the dying Jews, and he considered them a plague to the German reign. But in case of America, the distinguished sects of people are not being killed on the basis of their religious background. In addition, America is providing aid to Iraq, and under the Saddam rule the people were not living under any better conditions. At least now the Iraqis have a well established government system. It is agreeable that the government is not fully stable, but time will be the best teacher in this case.
One factor I don’t understand is that in a monarchy, the people have no say what so ever in he political decisions of a county, and the same goes for dictatorship. So why shouldn’t I opt for democracy. At least it offers me the right to overthrow the leader I don’t like. In this case democracy takes us closest to being equal to the leader in action. It is a well known fact that countries with democratic government have a high growth rate and are successfully established. Take the example of Britain, France, US, Spain, Germany and many more. These countries are not hollow from within in like some of the communist nations. China for example has a booming rate of GDP just because the western investors see a possibility of producing cheaper goods with the cheap factors of production available easily. On the other hand, the common population lives in constant grieving. The political system of china is pretty mutated if closely looked at because the government is not looked over by any body (no checking system). Whereas in a democracy there is a strong inter checking system. Although corruption doesn’t fully disappear, the people stand equal to the leaders and can take away his power when needed. This is what I call being equal in political terms. In addition taking the example of Hitler is baseless because Germany has transformed into a democracy with a strong infrastructure. During Hitler’s time the power was conserved in a few hands, and thus the people’s opinion had no meaning. The same trend was followed by Stalin during the upheaval of communistic beliefs. As he wanted was to be the ultimate ruler because rather than working in alignment with Trotsky, he assassinated him and claimed the chair. I don’t see how the people benefited or became equal to the government in this case. Rather they were suppressed to the fullest.


By Anonymous on Saturday, August 5, 2006 - 08:41 am:

Wisdom belongs to you…

Wisdom is absolutely individual. You cannot get it from anywhere else – from the scriptures, from other people, from other people’s experiences. If you gather all that, it will be knowledge, not wisdom. Wisdom is possible only if you go deeper into your own being. Wisdom is the experience of your own nature; it is the expression of your self-being. It is the flowering of your own consciousness. It is not information; it is transformation.
The whole effort here is not to make you more informed – about god, about truth, about lover – but to make you more aware of your own potential. My approach is to help b you to be yourself. Anywhere else; you have to seek within, because that entire one needs is already there. It has not to be invented, achieved; it has only to be discovered.
Everybody is born wise, but everybody is behaving as if there is no wisdom in there own being. Everybody is gathering knowledge in order to become wise. That is the most stupid thing one can do. Knowledge will keep you unaware of your wisdom. Knowledge has to be dropped, unlearned, so that you can become purified of all information, so that your nature can express itself in its true form, in its authenticity. That truth librates, that truth becomes your freedom, your bliss.
If you want to find stupid people, you will have to go to the universities: PhDs and D.Litts. There you will find people so burdened with knowledge that they have completely forgotten who they are. They are charring so much rubbish, all borrowed, nothing of their own. And this is one of the fundamental laws of life: truth cannot be borrowed; it is nontransferable. There is no way to give it to anybody.
You have to unburden yourself of all borrowed knowledge. When all that rubbish is dropped and burned, utterly burned, then your nature starts asserting it – and that brings wisdom, insight.
My work consists in helping you to respect yourself, to love yourself, to accept yourself, because that’s the only possibility; you cannot be otherwise. And there is no need to be otherwise – existence has created you unique. I am not giving you a certain character or a certain style of life, but only an insight, awareness. So that you can decide your lifestyle, so that you can live in your own light. And the moment you start living in your own light, bliss is yours….


By Deepak on Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - 09:57 am:

I would never hire a PhD from infereior race.


By PLEASE READ on Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - 03:36 am:

Alot of African Americans have seemed to have felt a ahte towards them by Indians. Not true. Indians don't actually care about race: ( what they want in a person)they care about:who is moral,highestdegree, and is the man or woman making enough money- i see nothing wrong with this, id ratheri not like some one becuase of how much they make than his or her skin color- we happen to like any man or woman that is not a coward.if you both have phds whether your black white indian, then youll be good.


By Anonymous on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 03:36 pm:

How to get a white guy to notice me


By Anonymous on Friday, February 3, 2006 - 03:41 pm:

Im black and I need to know how to make a white guy like me so if there any white guys out there can give me some tips please respond


By Fabian on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 09:30 pm:

Sunil and people who think along the same lines. We need to be proactive and take the initiative to change anything. I would firstly like to know how many people are there who think our political system can't be changed without us the "Younger-Generation" doing something about it. Our Netas are fit for nothing but dirty politics and personal gain. We need people who care who are effective who can contribute in their own unique way to change Indian Society and politics if India is ought to become a world leader. Either you can do something about the situation or just die away quietly with much fuss about the occurings and hope that someone else accomplishes what you initially wanted to do but couldn't because you just didn't try!!!!


By Manish Lakhawat on Friday, July 8, 2005 - 10:20 am:

Myself Manish Lakhawat. I'm the student of Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur. When we talk about maintenance of woman then a question arises in our mind that whether the step-mother is entitled to claim maintenance from his step-son? In section 125 of the code of criminal procedure it has been stated that a person has to maintain his dependents if they are unable to maintain themselves as old parents, wife,children. Section 125 of CrPC entitled a step-mother to claim maintenance from her step-son. But Hindu personal law deter a step-mother to claim mantenance fron her step-son.


By Manish Lakhawat (61.0.206.103) on Wednesday, June 15, 2005 - 05:30 am:

Myself Manish Lakhawat and I'm the student of Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur. I wanna be a proffessional and good lawyer.


By SUNIL on Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 04:50 am:

my self sunil kumar patel. i am student of HNLU raipur.my ambition is to join active politics. i want to serve my nation,to clean the present politics.

suggest me the path


By Lisa (205.188.116.214) on Friday, October 22, 2004 - 11:13 pm:

what is the big deal if a indian person marry a black person. you know what i notce i notice people from the outer race who is treated badly by white peole think they are white. Like spanish people and indians! i mean even if you date your own race people will have somthing negative to say. u do the right thing ppl will even judge you and get jelous. this world is full with hate im black (lightskin) and i dont find no indians better than me every one is a human being and religon teaches you hate people. why should u marry someone just becasue it makes your parents happy! i mean i dont give a hell if its is a religion its stupid but hey wat da hell i still wanna marry a indian guy a brown skin one they r sexy! and if his parents dont like it they need to jump off!! i mean the white men doesnt give a hell about indians black ppl r da most hated race its not our fault we r pretty


By Mili (63.158.249.13) on Wednesday, August 4, 2004 - 06:37 am:

Should you live unhappy just for trying to please your parents? Why is it that you can only marry the girl your parents pick out for you? What's wrong marrying someone from a diffrent race or religion? I've been seeing this Indian guy and everything was going great until we started to get very serious. His family opposed and we are now forced to see eachother secretly. What is relion? Who is the true god? Isn't everything either myths or legends? How can someone prove their relion is the right one? Is impossible, so why do we follow our religion, when one is unsure how it began the first place? So, why is someone force to marry someone they don't know or love? Why can people be free and make their own lives?


By Yashcheritsiy (207.69.140.33) on Saturday, April 10, 2004 - 05:56 am:

Dear Anonymous,

"No one can change the history of Aryavarta read this: "India was the mother of our race and Sanskrit the mother of Europe's languages. She was the mother of our philosophy, mother through the Arabs, of much of our mathematics, mother through Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity, mother through village communities of self-government and democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all."

Unfortunately for your position, Will Durant's writings (outdated as they are) were also noted more for their flights of fancy and sentimentality than for any serious intellectual content.

Fact of the matter is, the Indo-Aryans are no more than another group of Indo-Europeans who broke off from the original stock which was located somewhere in Southern Russia. To claim that Sanskrit (which didn't even exist in anything approximating its classical form until around 4-500 BC) is the "mother tongue of Europe's languages" only shows that this author had no clue when it comes to philology.

Indeed, it was Europe which likely gave to Hinduism (in its present form) the doctrine of transmigration (from Pythagorus, who got it from the Celts).


By BOB TAYLOR (209.191.130.130) on Friday, December 12, 2003 - 09:08 am:

A REQUEST BY A PROUD NEGRO TO THE INDIANS

I am also a Negro. We Negroes have self-respect and in North America the Negro is still treated worse than an animal. Many Indians marry a Negro-girl to adjust their status and then ditch them for Indian brides. Couple of Indian girls have married a Negro. This has resulted in a disaster and many of these women have commited suicide. They blame the looks of the mixed race children for this. No good Indian girl wants to marry a Negro. The ones who have married are mostly Sirens with a past history. Indians who are a good people must be more liberal. I write this as a North American Negro.


:I am an African-American (a Negro) and resent the manner in which the Negro is being portrayed by the Indian Zee TV. Indians are painted black and made to look like Negros (by wearing curly hair wigs) and made to behave as apes. The aim is to make us look like a missing link between a man and a beast.
: I am told this TV station is controlled by foreigners and their aim is to degrade us and also to make the Indians look like followers of the West. You are the land of the great Mahatma Gandhi, so please terminate this station.


By chirag patel (203.163.163.233) on Wednesday, December 10, 2003 - 01:26 am:

I from Gujarat India Iam hindu I need a job i want to work in usa due to because here I am having financial problem & not getting job related to me,so how can i fulfill my parents requirements now iam going to sell my home & so please if their is any kind of job is their iam ready to work their as a be part of india & indian culture.

thanking you,
jay bharat,

chirag patel


By Anonymous (208.18.154.139) on Sunday, July 27, 2003 - 11:55 am:

No one can change the history of Aryavarta read this: "India was the mother of our race and Sanskrit the mother of Europe's languages. She was the mother of our philosophy, mother through the Arabs, of much of our mathematics, mother through Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity, mother through village communities of self-government and democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all."

- Will Durant


By ak on Thursday, November 11, 1999 - 12:09 pm:

A swami's open letter to Pope
The Times of India News Service

NEW DELHI: In an open letter to Pope John Paul II, Swami Dayananda Saraswati has requested him, on behalf of the ``non-aggressive religions'', to put a freeze on conversions and create conditions in which all religious cultures can live and let live.

Welcoming the Pope to India, a country with a unique religious culture which accommodates many religious traditions, the noted scholar of Hindu theology says the Pope can play a significant role in defusing religious conflicts and preserving the world's rich cultures.

The letter says, ``I am appealing to you here to accept that every person has the freedom to pursue his or her own religion.'' On the basis of reason, says the letter, no non-verifiable belief is going to fare better than any other non-verifiable belief. According to reason then, there is no basis for conversion in matters of faith.

A second important issue: some religions convert, some do not. Among the latter, non-aggressive, ones are Hinduism, Judaism and Zoroastrianism. Religions committed by their theologies to convert are necessarily aggressive, since conversion implies a conscious intrusion into the religious person.

``Religious conversion destroys centuries old communities and incites communal violence.'' In many, religion is woven into the fabric of culture so destruction of a religion amounts to the destruction of a religious culture. ``The Mayan, Roman and many other rich cultures are all lost forever and humanity is impoverished for it.''

In any tradition, it is wrong to strike someone unarmed. Since certain religions and cultures do not convert, attempts to convert them are one-sided aggression. ``We don't believe in conversion, even though certain Hindu organisations have taken back some converted people. Thus conversion is not merely violence against people, it is violence against people who are committed to non-violence. In converting, you are also converting the non-violent to violence.''

Protest against religious conversion is branded persecution because the argument is that religious freedom is curbed. But the other person also has the freedom to practise his or her religion without interference. ``Religious freedom does not extend to having a planned programme of conversion.''


By Editor on Thursday, November 11, 1999 - 12:07 pm:

Hindu militancy is a 'creative force'. "Dangerous or not, it's a necessary corrective to history and it will continue"

VS Naipaul in an interview to Outlook magazine


By BHARAT GUPT on Saturday, July 10, 1999 - 02:33 pm:

A Razor in Monkey-Hands
The Pluralism of dilettantes


by Bharat Gupt
Prof. at University of Delhi

"Pluralism" is a word that these days abounds alike in the glib of
talk of undergraduates, outpourings of oppressed film-makers, papers
read by academics in international seminars and the maiden speeches
of newly elected MPs.

But how much have we paused to think :

1. What exactly can one mean by the word ?
2. What obligations in actual social
conduct does a life of pluralism demand from its professed adherents ?
3. Is it that pluralism is only a contemporary concept and older cultures
have had no brush with it ?
4. Or is it that the present day world and
Indian society in particular has lost the perspective to manage variety and differences with a clear faith in the deeper unity of cosmic existence with only one slot for humankind.


It is a pity that in our land where for thousands of years the question of plurality has been debated in metaphysical and ethical
terms, the word has been debased to mean mere tolerance of divergent
religious faiths and cultural habits. Discussions on plurality in the
context of the ultimate nature of the seen and unseen universe are no
longer the order of the day. Can the diversity of dress codes, sexuality,
religious convictions and morals be practised if the finer questions of
pholosophical plurality are shoved under the carpet ? Reducing the
larger expanse of plurality to "ethnic tolerance" or "communal harmony"
is putting the cart before the horse.


If the deeper springs of religious
and societal beliefs are not studied, debated and analysed, measures to
keep the adherents of these faiths and communities in harmony are
not going to succeed.

Religious and cultural denominations will always
be taken over by chest-beating demagogues who shall proclaim the
right to dictate in their whims on behalf of vast populations. Their
conflicting claims will continue to create recurring flare-ups in the
name of protection of identity and continue to detract from the deeper
sources of spiritual and intellectual probings. The real worth of pluralism
lies in making those choices with a difference that are profound
investigations and not matters of mere practical conveniences. The
teaching of Nanak Dev, for instance, provided a fresh method of
infusing japa and community service in the nirguna tradition of the
medieval bhakti movement. He chose to provide a fresh plurality and
thus a new identity for spiritual upliftment and social welfare. But the
controversy we witnessed a few months back on helmets for Sikh
women pillion riders, was a hardly an issue of religious diversity. And
the current imbroglio on the film Fire is another example where on one
hand violence was used by self annointed culture-kings to prevent the
screening while on the other, provocation was provided by the
upholders of Lesbianism under the guise of right to dissent or rejection
of patriarchic oppression.

If sexual aberration can be an article for
pluralism, without a definition of the prime objectives of sexuality, one
can predict the pluralist pandemoneum in store.


The obligations of societies professing pluralism go beyond
tolerance. Such societies are obliged to actively undertake a reasonable
acquaintance with the articles of divergent faiths and beliefs. But in the
Indian system of formal education religious and moral education has
been kept out of school and college education as a guiding principle of
the secular state. It is presumed that acquainting a Muslim child with
Hindu precepts will obstruct his allegiance to his family faith and vice-
versa. Hence the state shall not teach the precepts of different religions,
and specially of the majority religion, to children lest it shakes the faith
of a child in his parental religion. In other words, it is presumed that
knowing about the faith of others, of the majority in special, is
detrimental. As a concession to the minorities, on the other hand,
freedom to teach their faith in schools is given as a matter of
constitutional right and the children of other faiths are supposed to put
with it. This theory of education is based on phobia and exclusion and
instills a suspicion of the other faiths. Such a kinky pedagogy can only
breed the intolerant and ignorant society we have fosterd where people
can fall prey to any ideology from terrorism to homosexuality promoted
from within or abroad.

Older societies had chosen to demarcate social norms for
adherents of different faiths in stricter terms. But people were more
aware of the fundamentals of each others' religion or sect. A Jain child
may not have gone to the same ashram as a Vaishnava or never shared
his lunch with a Shaivite, but the pedagogy had a rigorous system of
teaching the precepts of other systems even though for the purpose of
refutation. But what is taught today is a namby-pamby nationalism
constantly reeliing under the weight or some western ideology be it
colonialism, socialism or globalism.

In the pre-technocratic cultures spaces of common activities were
fewer than now in the age of high mobility and intermixing. With great
uniformizing through mass production, religion, language, skin-color
bias, marital laws and food are perhaps the few focal points of
distinction that pluralise populations. The last two may perhaps take
another half a century to homogenize. Therefore, it has become all the
more relevant that basic understanding about the operation of the first
three is strongly cultivated by one and all. But the emphasis has now to
shift from harping upon the differences between peoples, races,
religions and culture to the deeper unity of humankind.

The task can begin only by locating a common ground between
various religious beliefs and cultural beliefs. It may be remembered that
commonality between beliefs and not their differences are the raison
d'etre of communication. If communication is to be something more
than exchange of goods or info-commodity, then we may benifit most
from turning to the core of vibrant similiarity between religions and
cultural identities that exists beneath all differences and which, instead
of being wiped out by the individual differences, sustains itself and the
differences as well. To provide a simile, it is like the consonance between
two musical notes, which are always independent but are always
capable of generating a mutual resonance by virtue of their common
grounding in a given scale. Within our pluralism we need to explore our
common scale.

In fact, all communication rests upon an unstated presumption
that differences of identities and expressions are born out of a common
ground, not by themselves. In other words, the One creates the many,
the Scale defines the notes. Definition of the underlying One may not
essentially be theistic but can be material too as was the case with many
ancient philosophies like Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Epicurianism and
Stoicism. Identities are meaningful only so long as they interact , as
do the musical notes in relation to one another. Cultures are vibrant only
when they reveal their consonances. Otherwise, they stagnate or
become violent, leading both ways to self-destruction. The
communicative task needs to the fresh outlook of creating consonances
and calls for harmony, as opposed to hegemony which has often been
a cultural agenda to create unnecessary strife.



Want to contribute to IndiaCulture? Your Voice is Important & will reach far.

Marriage, Relations & Related Talk @ IndiaFamily.Net

Your Sincere Opinion is invited : Rajniti | India States | Recycle your soul mysticalguide | Hindustan.org Forums
No Ads, Solicitations, Commercial or out of topic Comments!
Please NO abusive language, CAPITAL letters or UPPER CASE! Thanks!
Use one name or alias..instead of anonymous for more replies.
You remain Anonymous. Not required to add email.
Use ENTER key twice to make a new para in your message.
Do NOT Post the SAME message in more than one board.

IndiaTalking Blogs

Subscribe Postings by Mail
Please Create A New Page if the current page is too long.
Use Emoticons Happy :) Sad :( to show mood. They become graphic upon posting.

Your name or: Nick, Alias or pseudonym
E-mail:(optional)
Post as "Anonymous" (Name required but wont appear if anonym. option checked!)

All Copyrights Reserved © 1998-2006 Hindustan Network - Hindustan.org IndiaTalking.com - Indiaculture.net No reproduction permitted in any format.