Hindus and Muslims same?

[Guest guest]

First about what Prabhupada said,In India,The Sufi type of Islam was and is predominant there.They differ from other Islamic sects, in that they do have human representation's.

 

About the Quran,all translations of Arabic into other languages can be interpreted in different ways,just like sanskrit,there is no definitive translation.

Also translators most often are motivated,and prejudiced to give the acceptable translation.

The Quran is no different then other scriptures,in the Torah,even the Vedic scriptures we can find places, where seemingly unjust punishments, are recommended.

This is due to time,place and circumstance,scriptures are meant as guides to spiritual realization,the material laws and rules for society are fluid,and subject to change.

For instance in the Arabian desert,if your family's life depended on your camel,and it was stolen,it could mean death for your family.At the time Arabia was lawless and violent,rape was common,therefore a strong admonition against certain types of behavior was necessary.

This is no longer true today,the Sharia is used as an implement of coercion,and fear based capitulation.

In fact many Muslims expect the arrival of a savior,"the Madhi",he is prophicized to end the rule of sharia,and Islamic strictness in general,and bring about a new, freer, heavenly society.

 

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

Originally posted by shiva:

A.C. Bhaktivedanta stated that all the major religions are bonafide.

The problem with the Islamic world,is not Islam,or the Quran,it is the Sharia,Islamic law.

Sharia,is the dominant force in the Islamic world,It is created, and enforced, by poltically and economically motivated persons.

The Quran was related by Muhammed,after his death,Immediatly there was a power struggle,and Islam splintered into various factions,the motivation was power and wealth.

This has continued till the present.Islamic law forces the masses to conform to the desires of the power elite,be they oil tycoons,or Mullahs,or Sheiks.

These power elites, abuse the masses,indoctrinating them, for the power base they give.

This rule of terror,like the cutting off of the hand of a thief,or the stoning to death of an adulterer,even in thought,is not Islamic.

Islam is based on the old testament,like the new testament of the Christians,it preaches an eye for an eye,not that you kill an adulterer,or maim a thief.

This is the real problem,the twisting of Islam,in the service of the power elite's,it has been going on since the Death of Muhammed.

The solution is to expose Sharia,as un-islamic,to expose the exploitation of the masses for profit and power.

The Quran is about the brotherhood of man,it has been twisted into the exact opposite,now because of the dominance of Sharia,and the ability of it to be changed,Islam is now about the imprisonment of common sense,and mercy.

Nice points!

 

YS,

 

 

[karthik_v]

Hare Krishna Shiva Prabhuji,

AGTSP! PAMHO!

 

First about what Prabhupada said,In India,The Sufi type of Islam was and is predominant there.They differ from other Islamic sects, in that they do have human representation's.

 

True, but Sufis are not the mainstream. They are a minority. Anyway, they don't have mosques - only dargas. So, mosques and images never go hand in hand.

 

About the Quran,all translations of Arabic into other languages can be interpreted in different ways,just like sanskrit,there is no definitive translation.

 

Possible, but has any Muslim theologian ever claimed so? Does Quran itself allow for any interpretation? Is it written in a metaphorical language, like the vedas? I quoted from the Rk veda to show that they explicitly state that the truth of the vedas is not the words convey. Is there anything like that in Quran? Aren't we assuming things that Muslims themselves don't? As for as Hindus are concerned, we have always opposed tooth and nail all the western interpretations. Here, I wasn't quoting from any western translation of Quran. I was quoting from the translations of Muslim theologians.

 

the material laws and rules for society are fluid,and subject to change.

 

True. That is why practices like sati were banned and rightly so. But, Quran doesn't allow for changes. That makes it dogmatic and dangerous.

 

At the time Arabia was lawless and violent,rape was common,therefore a strong admonition against certain types of behavior was necessary.

 

I am not sure that pre-Mohammad Arabia was lawless. My limited reading of their history doesn't say so, but I would be obliged to anyone who can correct me. If any, as per my understanding, lawlessness started with Mohammad. In any case, you had stated that cutting off the hands and stoning weren't Islamic and hence I quoted those references.

 

In fact many Muslims expect the arrival of a savior,"the Madhi",he is prophicized to end the rule of sharia,and Islamic strictness in general,and bring about a new, freer, heavenly society.

 

I would like to hear more about this. Can you please write more? I thought that Quran and Hadith consider Mohammad as the final prophet.

[leyh]

Hi Kathik_v:

 

I hope you are well!Srila Prabhupada did not not advocating pacifism in the face of aggression or chanting Hare Krsna while our loved ones are being harmed. In one of his purports to Bhagavad-gita, Srila Prabhupada has stated that killing for self defence is sanctioned by Vedic principles:

 

“According to Vedic injunctions there are six kinds of aggressors: 1) a poison giver, 2) one who sets fire to the house, 3) one who attacks with deadly weapons, 4) one who plunders riches, 5) one who occupies another's land, and 6) one who kidnaps a wife. Such aggressors are at once to be killed, and no sin is incurred by killing such aggressors.” (From purport to Bhagavad-gita 1.36)

 

But, none of us is pure. So, let us not pretend. Even Arjuna wasn't pure. That is why Krishna told him to fight the war - He didn't ask him to chant on the battlefield.

Whether we are pure or not, the fact remains that “Muslims” and “Hindus” are material designations and the sooner we recognize this, the better. Self defence is naturally justified when we face danger from offensive parties, but isn’t it possible to engage in self-defence and at the same time not be attached to material designations? One could defend his country or his family against aggression with such a mentality: “I am not a Hindu, a Moslem or an Indian. I am spirit soul and I belong to Krsna and I shall fight against aggression for Krsna.”

 

In the Bhagavad-gita, Krsna says:

 

sarva-karmany api sada

kurvano mad-vyapasrayah

mat-prasadad avapnoti

sasvatam padam avyayam

 

“Though engaged in all kinds of activities, My devotee, under My protection, reaches the eternal and imperishable abode by My grace.” (Bhagavad-gita 18.56)

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by leyh (edited 04-18-2002).]

[karthik_v]

Dear Leyh Prabhuji,

AGTSP! PAMHO!

 

Self defence is naturally justified when we face danger from offensive parties, but isn’t it possible to engage in self-defence and at the same time not be attached to material designations? One could defend his country or his family against aggression with such a mentality: “I am not a Hindu, a Moslem or an Indian. I am spirit soul and I belong to Krsna and I shall fight against aggression for Krsna.”

 

Very nice argument and I agree with that. We should look at self-defense as a duty and not be attached to it emotionally. Otherwise it will degenerate into violence. Thanks for pointing out.

 

[Guest guest]

Up until recently,with the surge in fundamentalism,India and Pakistan have been sufi strongholds.

 

The experts I have heard from,all emphatically state, that the true, pure message of the Quran,can only be understood in the original arabic,translations lose meanings,or add them.

 

The Quran was supposedely spoken to Muhammed by an Archangel,his purpose was to bring law to a lawless society.Everything i have read,states that pre-islamic Arabia,was barbaric,ruled by oligarchs,tyrants,and criminals.The purpose of Muhammed was to change that particular society,of Medina,and Mecca.The religion that coalesced after his death,became a tool of the elite,as it is today.Like all scriptures,it is the spirit of the message that is important,Brotherhood of man,non-agression,etc.Those who would exploit in the name of the scriptures,will always use the so-called letter of the law,as the basis for their exploitation.

The book "Dune" by Frank Herbert,is a fictionalized account of the belief of millions of muslims,about the coming of the savior.In it the galactic empire is running smoothly,only because it's addiction to the spice "melange"(oil) is satiated by the exploitation of the planet "Arakkis"(iraq),which is the sole source of the spice.Arakkis is a desert planet,the indigineous people(fremen),are forced to live life in hiding,as they battle the colonial exploiters.They have a religious belief in the coming of a savior,called "Maud'ib"(madhi),who will bring about the end of colonialism,and bring paradise to the desert planet.

This is the fictionalized story,based on the Islamic prophecy,not all muslims have this belief,though it is very popular.

[leyh]

Originally posted by karthik_v:

Dear Leyh Prabhuji,

AGTSP! PAMHO!

 

Self defence is naturally justified when we face danger from offensive parties, but isn’t it possible to engage in self-defence and at the same time not be attached to material designations? One could defend his country or his family against aggression with such a mentality: “I am not a Hindu, a Moslem or an Indian. I am spirit soul and I belong to Krsna and I shall fight against aggression for Krsna.”

 

Very nice argument and I agree with that. We should look at self-defense as a duty and not be attached to it emotionally. Otherwise it will degenerate into violence. Thanks for pointing out.

Karthik_v Prabhu:

 

Please accept my humble obeisances.All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

We are indeed bound by duty to defend ourselves,our loved ones and even our society when confronted with aggressors.In Singapore,we have a system of National Service whereby every able-bodied young man has to be enlisted into either the Army,the Air Force,the Navy,the Police or the civil defence to serve a period of two or two and a half years (depending on education level).I spent two years and four months in the army and one day (until my Reservist liability runs out)if Singapore has to defend herself from external aggressors,I will be called to contribute to this defence.Sometimes,I wonder whether how I would feel if there ever was a war and I had to take part in it...it would probably be very difficult for me to be unemotional.Hopefully such a situation will never materialize and even if it does,may I make the best of a bad bargain by remembering the cowherd boy of Vrindaban,do my duty and dedicating it to Him.

 

yat karosi yad asnasi

yaj juhosi dadasi yat

yat tapasyasi kaunteya

tat kurusva mad-arpanam

 

"O son of Kunti, all that you do, all that you eat, all that you offer and give away, as well as all austerities that you may perform, should be done as an offering unto Me." (Bhagavad-gita 9.27)

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by leyh (edited 04-19-2002).]

[Guest guest]

To dismiss Muhammed as evil,is contrary to the siddhanta of A.C. Bhaktivedanta,who stated that Islam was a bonafide religion.

The fact of the matter is that,as Krishna say's "everyone follows my path in all respects".

The various religious teachings of the world,are not happening in a vacuum,they are the result of the desire of God.

Different people,with various degree's of spiritual attainment,follow the path they are guided to,by God.

To call Muhammed "a crooked fellow",is negating the reality of Islam,it is ,and has been, a religion for billions of people, for centuries.

This is no mistake,it is the will of God.

The real message of Muhammed is a spiritual one,regardless of his activities or some degenerate so called adherents.

The will of God is always the controlling factor,in any activity,there is no purpose to Muhammed or his teachings,without the will of God being manifest.

[sushil_kanoria]

 

Originally posted by shiva:

.

The Quran was supposedely spoken to Muhammed by an Archangel,his purpose was to bring law to a lawless society.Everything i have read,states that pre-islamic Arabia,was barbaric,ruled by oligarchs,tyrants,and criminals.The purpose of Muhammed was to change that particular society,of Medina,and Mecca.

-----------------------

 

 

Excellent Shiva,

The whole Ramayana is finished & then you are asking, "Sita is whose father"

 

In the Bhavishya Puran it is clearly mentioned that mohammed is a crooked fellow, a demon, that's it, nothing more than that I don't know still why are you supporting him. The best thing is purchase a Quran & read it, so that you can read about him in detail.

 

Hari Bol,

Sushil.

[abhi_the_great]

"panditah sama darshinah"

 

==

 

"apanditah bedha darshinah"

[Guest guest]

 

Using your philosophy,because some of Srila Prabhupadas disciples commit crimes,therefore that is an indictment of Bhakti Yoga,or if the Hindu mobs rape,burn ,loot ,and kill,then that is an indictment against Vedanta,...etc.

What is the difference between what one does,and the spiritual path he believes in?

What Muhammed actually did or did not do,physically,is not something that can be confirmed.

Over time, the leaders of Islamic society,in order to justify their own reprehesible activities,would create history,mandating history to be written to show that Muhammed did as they do.

Just as the history of Christianity,was created by the powers of the Roman Empire,in order to mold the religion to their own activities.

The spiritual message of the Quran,is to take care of each other,have faith in God,and try to remember God as you live your life,and if you are good,then God will reward you,if you are evil,then God will punish you,this is Karmic teaching.

Anything else that goes against these simple teachings,can be ignored

[Jagat]

Every religion has both a social and an individual side. Since there is a social side to religion, we may definitely pass judgements on what a religious society does as a reflection on that society's doctrines.

 

Hinduism has erred on the side of "individualism," Islam on the side of "socialism." Hindutva as a social or nationalist doctrine is basically a reaction to British national consciousness and Islamic pan-religiosity. It is not really a natural outgrowth of Hindu social doctrine, which is fragmentary and individual karma oriented.

 

Of course Hinduism is "pre-individualistic," but Hindu social doctrine still places little importance on social cohesion in society as whole. Social cohesion is left to each individual jati to work out for itself. Hinduism is thus reduced to competing jatis jostling for position amongst themselves.

 

Islam and then Christianity and European concepts of secular nationalism forced Hindus to develop a unitary concept of Hindu dharma, which is still in the process of evolving. However, the unsavory side of this development manifests in intolerance.

 

But intolerance arises out of reasons other than religious. There are economic reasons in a developing country like India with increasing numbers of upper caste young males in the ranks of the educated unemployed and underemployed to look for trouble and easy scapegoats like Muslims and Dalits.

 

The account of RSS militants causing trouble for Muslim vendors in the train station as being at the beginning of the whole trouble strikes me as likely to be the truth.

 

[theist]

Jagat said:

"The account of RSS militants causing trouble for Muslim vendors in the train station as being at the beginning of the whole trouble strikes me as likely to be the truth."

 

Not challenging the major ideas in your post but this last line needs rethinking in my opinion.

 

The Kar Sevaks were chanting Jaya Ram etc. at various stations and one can easly picture these "kirtans" being fanatical and challenging in spirit rather than coming from real bhakti.

 

But if I remember right a mod of 1000+ Muslims gathered at Godhra and burnt 58 people alive in the train car in response.That is the real madness here.

 

I mean, were the vendors stoned or lit on fire?

 

I may be reading more into your statement then is there, but it sounds to me like you may be blaming the victims.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood your intention.

[Jagat]

Well, I don't really know what happened. But I have seen what happens in India once mob consciousness takes over. It is not an infrequent occurrence, from mob killings of bus drivers who run someone over, to the crazy slaughter of Ananda Margi sannyasis in Calcutta for "child abduction." It can happen on either side of a divide.

 

But in India, the Muslims are in the minority and they know the kinds of things that can happen to them. I don't think they go looking for trouble unless they believe they have been treated unjustly. Just like Hindus living in Bangla Desh. They don't go making trouble because they know what will happen to them if they do.

 

Jagat

[theist]

From what I understand the Kar Sevaks,coming back from Ayodhya, had been very denomstrative at every station prior to Godhra.

 

It seems someone tipped off the Muslims at Godhra and they were waiting for the train.That accounts for the large number of Muslims in the area ready to attack.

 

After that we have all read about what happen in Gujarat with the Hindus burning and killing hundreds of innocent Muslims in their homes.

 

Its just madness.

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by theist:

Muslims gathered at Godhra and burnt 58 people alive in the train car in response.That is the real madness here.

 

I mean, were the vendors stoned or lit on fire?

 

 

When pure devotees during Caitanya's time did kirtan, muslims attacked and broke the mrdanga which is considered equivalent to Lord Balarama. On realizing that they were pure devotees, KAzi did allow them to do kirtans.

 

The problem today is those who are impure are trying to do kirtan and engage in temple construction. These rascal Hindus are trying to fight back and correct what great muslim rulers like Babar did - demolish hindu temples and build mosques. These foolish people are raising questions about slaughter of children, cows and rape of women. They dont understand that one should not see the lowly activities of spiritualists and only see that they are doing it in the name of God.

 

Islam teaches that kafirs can be killed. And what is wrong in what the muslims did ? As our political leaders have rightly done, we all, as transcedental personalities, should come together and criticize the killing of muslim devotees and condone the so called atrocities against the hindus. Hindus are mad and most of them are mayavadis. Even though they seem to worship Krishna, they are mere cheaters and they come no where near our muslim brothers in spiritual realization. Our muslim brothers, even though they initiate violence, it is in the name of the Lord.

 

[This message has been edited by ram (edited 04-27-2002).]

 

[This message has been edited by ram (edited 04-27-2002).]

[karthik_v]

Dear Jagat Prabhuji,

 

But intolerance arises out of reasons other than religious. There are economic reasons in a developing country like India with increasing numbers of upper caste young males in the ranks of the educated unemployed and underemployed to look for trouble and easy scapegoats like Muslims and Dalits.

 

You are partly right that economic reasons are what lead to manifestations of trouble. But please don't equate the Dalits with Muslims. One is the oppressed, the latter the oppressor. Seocnd crimes against the Dalits are not committed by urban upper caste youth, who are affected by unemployment, but by the rural upper caste who own land and who are least affected by unemployment.

 

The account of RSS militants causing trouble for Muslim vendors in the train station as being at the beginning of the whole trouble strikes me as likely to be the truth.

 

Too much CNN?!! Just to set the facts right, Godhra has a population of about 50,000 Muslims out of which 2500 gathered with gasoline in cans for the train to arrive. After the carnage, at the site alone, over 2000 gasoline cans were recovered. Each can will carry app. 5 gallons of gasoline. That means we are talking of over 10,000 gallons of gasoline alone. In India, getting gasoline in cans is illegal and to get such large quantities from a small town needs a very high level of planning and organization. So, let us not make simplistic statenents that add insult to the injury the kar sevaks suffered.

 

But in India, the Muslims are in the minority and they know the kinds of things that can happen to them. I don't think they go looking for trouble unless they believe they have been treated unjustly. Just like Hindus living in Bangla Desh. They don't go making trouble because they know what will happen to them if they do.

 

Again for facts, whereever Muslims live in Mohallas, they are the majority. Virtually every riot has been started by them for 2 reasons. One, they have the numbers where they live. Two, the leftist governments of India and the media invariably support the Muslims as the constitute a vote bank. Again a comparison with Bangladeshi Hindus is an insult to their plight. In case you thought that the Indian Muslims are sweet folks, please check out on Coimbatore and Mumbai blasts.

 

Dear Ram Prabhu,

 

Good one. Also, our Vaishnavas [of course, the ones unaffected by Islamic violence!!] often quote Lord Caitanya's example wherein he made the Kazi a little sober and advice everyone to emulate Him. What they don't remember is that no less a personality than Rupa and Sanatana Goswami had to convert to Islam and literally flee to Benaras to practice KC. Could the great Vaishnavas kindly educate me as to why those 2 great Goswamis couldn't emulate Lord Caitanya's example and make the Muslims a little sober? Or is it a case of exceptions not being the example?

 

How about the great saints who were murdered by the Muslims? Or is it that they were following the goddamn Advaita that they had to pay the due price? And the Vaishnava saints who were killed by the Musilms must have been enacting some lila.

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by karthik_v:

Godhra has a population of about 50,000 Muslims out of which 2500 gathered with gasoline in cans for the train to arrive. After the carnage, at the site alone, over 2000 gasoline cans were recovered. Each can will carry app. 5 gallons of gasoline. That means we are talking of over 10,000 gallons of gasoline alone. In India, getting gasoline in cans is illegal and to get such large quantities from a small town needs a very high level of planning and organization. So, let us not make simplistic statenents that add insult to the injury the kar sevaks suffered.

One, they have the numbers where they live. Two, the leftist governments of India and the media invariably support the Muslims as the constitute a vote bank. Again a comparison with Bangladeshi Hindus is an insult to their plight.

 

 

You are talking sense and logic. And if you overcome this problem of your mind you will see that Islam is a bonafide religion. In fact, that is the first step to becoming a muslim because you have to deal with the inconsistencies of our prophet who is a bonafide acharya. Our prophet will tell you that Allah has no form. When his numbers dwindle,he will claim that He saw Allah's form. Your brother muslims and ofcourse ignorant hindus, would claim that Islam is a tolerant path. And try not to ask why such severe punishment against non-muslims. Secondly, you should learn to tolerate the excesses of Mohammed. See the fact that Mohammed took away his own daughter-in-law or that he was a paedophile does not affect you personally today. He was deadly and dangerous but he is dead and gone. The positive side is that he is the outer limit of sinful activities and you can freak out and commit any sinful activity and quote the example of the aharya. Imagine having the freedom to commit all sins and and not habe the guilt. That I call liberation. And what is good is that some vaishnava may even recognize you as a great devotee - ]

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by karthik_v:

Also, our Vaishnavas [of course, the ones unaffected by Islamic violence!!] often quote Lord Caitanya's example wherein he made the Kazi a little sober and advice everyone to emulate Him. What they don't remember is that no less a personality than Rupa and Sanatana Goswami had to convert to Islam and literally flee to Benaras to practice KC. Could the great Vaishnavas kindly educate me as to why those 2 great Goswamis couldn't emulate Lord Caitanya's example and make the Muslims a little sober? Or is it a case of exceptions not being the example?

 

And the Vaishnava saints who were killed by the Musilms must have been enacting some lila.

This is like asking why didnt the lord stop the muslims from beating haridas, or why didnt nrsimha dev kill hiranyakasipu earlier before he tortured prahlad. Or why have a material world at all? The Lorde has his plans which we can never hope to understand fully. Everything is mercy of the lord.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by shiva:

To dismiss Muhammed as evil,is contrary to the siddhanta of A.C. Bhaktivedanta,who stated that Islam was a bonafide religion.

The fact of the matter is that,as Krishna say's "everyone follows my path in all respects"..

Have you read all the statements of Srila Prabhupada in connection with Islam before coming to this conclusion ? - In most cases SP tells the other people they are not even following their own religion. It is to tell them that they are insincere in their religious pursuit. It does not mean that he approved all other releigions except advaita - According to SB, a religion that does not give love of God is a cheating religion. A religion that does not define who is God has little chance to do that.

 

Originally posted by shiva:

The various religious teachings of the world,are not happening in a vacuum,they are the result of the desire of God..

Where do cheating religions come from ? If you have some good karma you can create your own religion and have followers. Even demons have gurus -

Originally posted by shiva:

Different people,with various degree's of spiritual attainment,follow the path they are guided to,by God.

And for those who do not want the guidance of God, there is always some bogus guru.

Originally posted by shiva:

To call Muhammed "a crooked fellow",is negating the reality of Islam,it is ,and has been, a religion for billions of people, for centuriesThis is no mistake,it is the will of God.The real message of Muhammed is a spiritual one,regardless of his activities or some degenerate so called adherents...

Come on. An acharya is known by his achara not unachara. If a 50 year old man took away your daughter by force, raped your womenfolk because you did not accept him as a guru and killed your pet cows, will you consider him a guru. Mohammed did all these. Calling him a crooked fellow does not bring out the reality of Islam. He is criminal and it is a criminal religion. If you threaten people by firce you can make billions of devotees as long as you give your followers freedom to commit sins in the name of God. Want to start a religion ?

Originally posted by shiva:

The will of God is always the controlling factor,in any activity,there is no purpose to Muhammed or his teachings,without the will of God being manifest.

There is dharma and adharma. Both happen ultimately with the sanction of the Lord. Even to commit a sin one needs some material qualification. So for having followers. But it does not mean that every thing in the world is on the path of dharma which is necessary for spiritual realization.

 

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by abhi_the_great:

"panditah sama darshinah"

 

==

 

"apanditah bedha darshinah"

intelligent discriminate between the path of dharma and adharma. Islam is the path of cheating religion

 

 

[Jagat]

[theist]

Funny and sad at the same time.

 

Last night on 60 minutes(a news show here in the US)4 young Muslim teenagers at a Islamic school in I believe New York, were asked if they thought the 18 year old suicidal murderess from Palestine reached Paradise after her blowing herself up in Israel.They all thought she had done the right thing and was in Paradise.

 

These people are on the far side of insanity.

[Guest guest]

Originally posted by theist:

Funny and sad at the same time.

 

Last night on 60 minutes(a news show here in the US)4 young Muslim teenagers at a Islamic school in I believe New York, were asked if they thought the 18 year old suicidal murderess from Palestine reached Paradise after her blowing herself up in Israel.They all thought she had done the right thing and was in Paradise.

 

These people are on the far side of insanity.

NY is special. Every one there is a muslim...er... insane

 

[abhi_the_great]

From another site.

 

By: Saradindu Mukherji

 

The acquittal of a 14-year old Christian boy and his uncle by the Lahore

high court in the so-called blasphemy case establishes not only that the

minorities in Pakistan are an endengered species but also that their safety

is dependent entirely on international pressure.

 

While it is understandable the the West should have taken so long to

realise the grim insecurity of the miniscule Christian minority in Pakistan,

there is little justification for the apathy of the political class in India,

which includes a very vibrant intelligentsia in this matter. The 1991 census

revealed that the minorities - Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis and Ahmadiyas-

who formed 23 % of the population of West Pakistan at the time of Partition

have been reduced to around 3%. If this is not ethnic cleansing, what it is?

 

While a sizable section of the minorties was wiped out in partition-

related mayhem, state-sponsored pogroms and forced conversions, the rest

had to abandon their ancestral homes and seek refuge in India. The Hindus

and Christians, numbering 1.2 million each, are mainly concentrated in

Sindh, where the bulk of the Hindus live, most of them work as bonded

labourers in lands owned by the Muslims; in Punjab, the Christians are

generally employed in low-paid jobs. This microscopic minority of kafirs

has suffered every conceivable form of intimidation, harassment, discrimi-

nation and persecution in the years since partition.

 

We should not forget that Pakistan emerged out of the rabid hatred

for the kafirs, which concretised with the street violence in Calcutta

on August, 1946, observed as "direct action day". As Sir Francis Wylie,

the governor of UP, wrote to the viceroy on August 29, 1946: "the most

ominous feature of the (Muslim League) demonstrations was the notable

tendency to give the whole movement a religious flavour. Many of the

meetings took place in and around mosques just after the usual Friday

prayers. I am told too that members of the Muslim League party are

making vigorous efforts to obtain support of Maulvis and Immams every-

where in the province. You might have noticed that The Dawn recently

started quoting extracts from the Quran every day on its leader page.

There has been some shouting of slogans about "Jehad" in various towns here."

 

Documents available with the Public Record Office (equivalent to our

National Archives) in London further substantiate the theory that

Pakistan was especially created for the Muslims. The British High

Commissioner to Pakistan, in his secret despatch to the Whitehall, dated

5th May 1948 wrote, "What Jinnah appears to be aiming at is a state

sufficiently Islamic on a high level to make it acceptable to the

brotherhood of Islamic states." To understand the plight of the Masihs

in Pakistan as well as the humiliation heaped on the Hindus and other

minorities there, it is crucial that we do not lose sight of the

lineage of the Pakistan state. But then India is full of lobbyists

for Pakistan and admirers of Jinnah who are also engaged in the lofty

mission of rehabilitating his "sacred" memory.

 

One of the most discriminatory and humiliating devices to reduce the

non-Muslims to a status lower than that of second-class citizens is the

separate electoral system, which bars minorities from active participation

in national politics. The minorities vote in separate lists and can only

be elected from special lists for the national and provincial Assemblies.

Unlike Muslim candidates, minority politicians cannot choose their

constituencies. The entire country is their constituency. Thus a Pakistani

Hindu cannot vote for a Muslim politician any more than a Muslim can

vote for a non-Muslim candidate. In the 237-member national assembly, the

kafirs have only ten representatives and they are barred from the Upper

House. This is religious apartheid at its crudest.

 

In a juridical dispute, the Muslim can accuse a non-Muslim of being

a 'kafir', in such a case the testimony of the latter would count for

half that of a Muslim's. In the event of homicide (voluntary or involunatry)

the kith and kin of a non-Muslim victim are entitled to only half the

compensation foreseen for a Muslim victim in a parallel case. There are

numerous other ways of persecuting the non-Muslims. Should a Muslim abduct

a non-Muslim woman (even a married woman) and declare that she has embraced

Islam, her family loses all legal power to claim her freedom. The quota

system and inherent religious prejudice have combined in such a way that

the non-Muslims are grossly discriminated in matters of education and

employment opportunities. No wonder most of them are engaged in low-level

sanitary work or in the nursing profession to which the "believers" are

not attracted. Moreover, Islamiyat is a compulsory subject for all students.

Theoretically, a non-Muslim can refuse to be examined on Islamiyat in the

absence of an alternative subject, the student stands to forfeit the marks

allotted to the subject.

 

In public schools there is no provision for teaching any religion other

than Islam. Non-Muslims also find it difficult to get admission to a

public hospital or to get a blood transfusion. This is not all though. In

1992, the Pakistani authorities made it mandatory for the people to declare

their religions in national identity cards. This is generally seen as another

tactic to isolate the non-Muslims and create a system of Islamic apartheid.

As if all this was not enough to reinforce the minority status of the

kafirs, other methods are also adopted to subjugate them - desecrating

their places of worship, forcibly converting and abducting them etc. No

wonder, there is a steady flow of Hindus from Sindh to India. Despite this

overwhelming evidence, the political class in India including some of the

refugee-victims of partition, habitually goes out of its way to defend

Pakistan. A whole range of diplomatic reports from Pakistan such as the

US state department Human Rights reports and the reports of some Pakistani

human rights activists stand as testimony to the victimisation of non-

Muslims. But we the people, and the government have refused to be moved

by these accounts.

 

We must see Pakistan as it is - a fundamentalist-terrorist state, no

matter whether it is ruled by a London-trained barrister, s Sandhurst

cadet, a feudal chieftain or an Oxford graduate. The ideological sustenance

flows from the same source.

 

If The Economist, The Times, Newsweek and the chain of the prestigious

media and other organisations in the West could highlight the plight of

the Masihs and provide the necessary moral pressure, why can't we follow

suit.