Kashi-Vishwanath TempleI was reading this article by Mr. M V Kamath. It left me really angry. Angry at Muslims for inflicting and Hindus for putting up with inhuman behavior. The question in my mind was: Is Mr. Kamath hate-mongering? Upon thinking more about it, I came to the conclusion that telling the truth is not hate-mongering. As it says in the Bible (John 8:32) “And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." Telling the truth is cathartic. It may open some old wounds but when it heals it will be forever. Truth forces people to accept responsibility, which then leads to self-evaluation and behavior modification. Truth is the ultimate weapon we have for all of our long-standing problems.
Typical approach of our pseudo-secular historians and educators (aided and abetted by Congress politicians) has long sought to brush every wrongdoing against the Hindus under the carpet. Has that solved any problems? Other than keeping the future generations ignorant it has achieved nothing. It has yet to bring Hindus and Muslims any closer. It has denied Hindus some of their basic rights and the pride we should feel in being a Hindu. It has made the Muslims feel that they are victims rather than perpetrators. I am not suggesting that Muhammad Muslim on the street is responsible for his forefather’s barbarity. But if Muhammad Muslim knows about his forefather’s culpability in historical wrongdoings, then chances are that he will try to settle festering issues a lot more amicably (a tall expectation but we can always hope). If Muslims are told in no uncertain terms by their leadership (again a tall expectation) that a number of Masjids are built on Mandirs then problems like the one in Ayodhya can be resolved. It is very sad to go to Vishwanath temple and see that the real temple is a masjid, which is two doors down from the current mandir. Vishwanath Temple is a heavily crowded place. No Muslim would come there to offer prayers. No one does except for the mullah who keeps the place operational to keep the claim going. If the Muslims were to surrender that part of the building, which is meaningless to them, then that gesture will go a very long way towards assuaging Hindu feelings.
Truth will force Hindus to re-evaluate this fancy notion that the spirit of India is secular. It is not. It is Hindu (that is why we are still secular but that is another article). Every time we bowed down to Muslim or British invaders, we lost something. We should realize that by bowing down to the pseudo-secularists and liberals, we might be losing the most precious thing of all – our spirit.
An aspect of singular disdain for Hindu feelings
By MV Kamath
Ayodhya has been one of the holy cities divested of virtually all its prominent shrines and sanctuaries between the 13th and mid-18th centuries. One gets an idea of the list of Hindu shrines that were destroyed from a book authored by Meenakshi Jain entitled Parallel Pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim Relations (1707-1857). Insult after insult was heaped by Muslim rulers on Hindus. Aurangzeb even had made an endeavour to rename Mathura as Islampur and Brindaban as Muminabad. Such was his contempt for Hinduism. Will our pseudo-secularists kindly name such instances of Hindu rulers treating Muslim subjects so shabbily? So cruel was Muslim rule that Jain reports that "Hindus in Rohilkhand had to accept a considerable degree of inferiority in matters of religious display. All their wedding and festival processions had to give precedence to Moharram parades and it was expected that during this period they would not exhibit any signs of merriment".
The article can be read at: http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=369&page=4Typical approach of our pseudo-secular historians and educators (aided and abetted by Congress politicians) has long sought to brush every wrongdoing against the Hindus under the carpet. Has that solved any problems? Other than keeping the future generations ignorant it has achieved nothing. It has yet to bring Hindus and Muslims any closer. It has denied Hindus some of their basic rights and the pride we should feel in being a Hindu. It has made the Muslims feel that they are victims rather than perpetrators. I am not suggesting that Muhammad Muslim on the street is responsible for his forefather’s barbarity. But if Muhammad Muslim knows about his forefather’s culpability in historical wrongdoings, then chances are that he will try to settle festering issues a lot more amicably (a tall expectation but we can always hope). If Muslims are told in no uncertain terms by their leadership (again a tall expectation) that a number of Masjids are built on Mandirs then problems like the one in Ayodhya can be resolved. It is very sad to go to Vishwanath temple and see that the real temple is a masjid, which is two doors down from the current mandir. Vishwanath Temple is a heavily crowded place. No Muslim would come there to offer prayers. No one does except for the mullah who keeps the place operational to keep the claim going. If the Muslims were to surrender that part of the building, which is meaningless to them, then that gesture will go a very long way towards assuaging Hindu feelings.
Truth will force Hindus to re-evaluate this fancy notion that the spirit of India is secular. It is not. It is Hindu (that is why we are still secular but that is another article). Every time we bowed down to Muslim or British invaders, we lost something. We should realize that by bowing down to the pseudo-secularists and liberals, we might be losing the most precious thing of all – our spirit.
An aspect of singular disdain for Hindu feelings
By MV Kamath
Ayodhya has been one of the holy cities divested of virtually all its prominent shrines and sanctuaries between the 13th and mid-18th centuries. One gets an idea of the list of Hindu shrines that were destroyed from a book authored by Meenakshi Jain entitled Parallel Pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim Relations (1707-1857). Insult after insult was heaped by Muslim rulers on Hindus. Aurangzeb even had made an endeavour to rename Mathura as Islampur and Brindaban as Muminabad. Such was his contempt for Hinduism. Will our pseudo-secularists kindly name such instances of Hindu rulers treating Muslim subjects so shabbily? So cruel was Muslim rule that Jain reports that "Hindus in Rohilkhand had to accept a considerable degree of inferiority in matters of religious display. All their wedding and festival processions had to give precedence to Moharram parades and it was expected that during this period they would not exhibit any signs of merriment".
No comments:
Post a Comment