What's new

How Will India's Attempted Hinduization Impact Pakistan and the World?

RiazHaq

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
6,611
Reaction score
70
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Haq's Musings: Rise of Sangh Parivar: Modi Accelerating Total Hinduization of India?

There have been serious questions raised about India's secularism since its independence in 1947. Such questions have gained new urgency with the rapid rise of Hindu Nationalists and the election of BJP leader Narendra Modi in 2014.



Serious doubts about India's claim of secularism were articulated well by Indian journalist Kapil Komireddy in an Op Ed piece he wrote for the UK's Guardian newspaper a few years ago. Here's an excerpt of it:

"Indian Muslims in particular have rarely known a life uninterrupted by communal conflict or unimpaired by poverty and prejudice. Their grievances are legion, and the list of atrocities committed against them by the Indian state is long. In 2002 at least 1,000 Muslims were slaughtered by Hindu mobs in the western state of Gujarat in what was the second state-sponsored pogrom in India (Sikhs were the object of the first, in 1984). Gujarat's chief minister, Narendra Modi, explained away the riots by quoting Newton's third law. "Every action," he said on television, "has an equal opposite reaction." The "action" that invited the reaction of the mobs was the torching of a Gujarat-bound train in which 59 Hindus pilgrims, most of them saffron-clad bigots who were returning home from a trip to the site of the Babri Mosque that they had helped demolish a decade earlier, perished. The "equal and opposite reaction" was the slaughter of 1,000 innocent Muslims for the alleged crime of their coreligionists."

Komireddy goes on to describe how India's "liberal" elite rationalize sectarianism in "secular" India:

"The novelist Shashi Tharoor tried to burnish this certifiably sectarian phenomenon with a facile analogy: Indian Muslims, he wrote, accept Hindu rituals at state ceremonies in the same spirit as teetotallers accept champagne in western celebrations. This self-affirming explanation is characteristic of someone who belongs to the majority community. Muslims I interviewed took a different view, but understandably, they were unwilling to protest for the fear of being labelled as "angry Muslims" in a country famous for its tolerant Hindus."

The Sangh Parivar's project to Hinduize India has accelerated with the landslide victory of BJP leader Narendra Modi and his inauguration as Prime Minister of India in 2014. Some of the manifestations of this phenomenon as reported by the Washington Postare as as follows:

1.The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (or the World Hindu Council) launched a program called “Gharwapsi” (or Homecoming) to urge India’s Muslims and Christians to convert to Hinduism, which they said was the religion of their ancestors. It has resulted in many reported instances of forced mass conversions of Christians and Muslims to Hinduism.

2. Beef sales have been banned in several Indian states. The most egregious of such laws is the Maharashtra state law that criminalizes possession or consumption of beef.

3. Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj has said the Hindu scripture Bhagwad Gita must be declared a “national scripture.” Another BJP politician, Manohar Lal Khattar, the chief minister of the northern Haryana state has said Bhagwad Gita is considered more important than India’s secular Constitution.

4. Poor school children are being denied eggs, a cheap protein needed by growing youngsters, in their school lunches by India's vegetarian Hindu elite, according an NPR report.

The above changes are just the tip of a much larger iceberg of Hindu transformation of India with major appointments of Hindu ideologues by ruling party to key positions in education and media posts at the center and the provinces.

It's not just in India that the Hindu Nationalists are gaining strength. Their programs receive significant funding and support from non-resident Indians (NRIs). A report entitled "Hindu Nationalism in the United States: A Report on Non-Profit Groups" makes the following assertions regarding the strength and nature of the Hindu nationalist movement in the United States:

a. Over the last three decades, a movement toward Hinduizing India--advancing the status of Hindus toward political and social primacy in India-- has continued to gain ground in South Asia and diasporic communities. The Sangh Parivar (the Sangh "family"), the network of groups at the forefront of this Hindu nationalist movement, has an estimated membership numbering in the millions, making the Sangh one of the largest voluntary associations in India. The major organizations in the Sangh include the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Bajrang Dal, and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

b. Hindu nationalism has intensified and multiplied forms of discrimination, exclusion, and gendered and sexualized violence against Muslims, Christians, other minorities, and those who oppose Sangh violations, as documented by Indian citizens and international tribunals, fact-finding groups, international human rights organizations, and U.S. governmental bodies.

c. India-based Sangh affiliates receive social and financial support from its U.S.-based wings, the latter of which exist largely as tax-exempt non-profit organizations in the United States: Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA), Sewa International USA, Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation-USA. The Overseas Friends of the Bharatiya Janata Party - USA (OFBJP) is active as well, though it is not a tax-exempt group.

Acceleration of "secular" India's total Hindu-ization under Prime Minister Modi represents a sea change for South Asia region and the world. It could prove to be verydestabilizing for India, a much larger and far more diverse country than its neighboring Islamic Pakistan. Such instability could derail India's economic rise unless its forced Hindu-ization is checked by the country's leadership with external pressure from India's friends. And its effects will be strongly felt far outside the borders of India. It is already causing serious issues between India and Pakistan that could lead a devastating war in South Asia with severe consequences for the entire world.

Related Links:
Haq's Musings
Over 100 US Academics Warn Silicon Valley Against Business With Modi
Modi's Pakistan Policy
Pro-Modi Indian-American Enters Silicon Valley Congressional Race
India is World's Biggest Oligarchy
Gujarat Riot Victims Hindu Nationalists Admire HitlerIndia Has World's Largest Population of Poor, Hungry and Illiterates
Pakistan Needs More Gujaratis?
India's Israel Envy




Haq's Musings: Rise of Sangh Parivar: Modi Accelerating Total Hinduization of India?
 
Last edited:
It could prove to be verydestabilizing for India, a much larger and far more diverse country than its neighboring Islamic Pakistan. Such instability could derail India's economic rise

last 6 years I have been reading your blogs dreaming of this in all possible postures and positions. Kind of hilarious really :)
 
Any religious scripture which teaches tolerance, unity, contains progressive ideas, wisdom and appeals well to todays world context and gives good message to people should be given importance.
Nothing wrong with that.

Most of the Hindu scriptures are universal and consider humanity as one. So the arguments against Gita are not valid.
 
Any religious scripture which teaches tolerance, unity, contains progressive ideas, wisdom and appeals well to todays world context and gives good message to people should be given importance.
Nothing wrong with that.

Most of the Hindu scriptures are universal and consider humanity as one. So the arguments against Gita are not valid.

Listen to Sujit Saraf of Silicon Valley's Naatak Theater Company talk about it on KQED Radio

Silicon Valley's Naatak Theater Company Celebrates 20 Years: Forum | KQED Public Media for Northern CA
 
The article is really amusing and one does not need to labor much to know why. If I go by the Guardians report, the first slaughter of minorities by the majority Hindus happened almost 40 years after Hindus officially became majority in an independent nation, the next one happened after another long 16 years. Acknowledging the fact that both of these incidents are the darkest phase of Indian secular and democratic history, isn't it a miracle that the people by and large have so far been able to leave in considerable peace and harmony for seventy odd years?

What Western political elites and the media often deliberately or non-deliberately tend to ignore is the national psyche of India when it got its independence. Partition was preceded and followed by bloody riots, massacre and rape, Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus with some illuminating exceptions hated each other to the core; whereas Muslims who could not migrate to Pakistan were left with remarkable quagmire and confusion. An old Muslim in Assam went back to his impoverished house when he heard that he could not cast his vote because he was a muslim when the entire nation was celebrating their first election in 1950. Reservation for Muslims were vehemently castigated and denied as a necessary reprisal of Two nation theory. A thin demarcation line became prominent that was already existed during Mughal period, perhaps turned uglier under the British.

Despite such differences, Muslims survived. I can not say the community thwarted towards progress like a majority of Hindus did after the 19th century social and religious reformations, but they were not thrown out of services, businesses neither the state could declare them as non-Indians, plight that the Jews had to face when National Socialists came to power in '34. Though the recent events have been disappointing and brings a lot of disgrace towards the secular image of India, the propagators of the idea that India is being Hinduized and Muslims are facing extinction needs to introspect and realize that there is a difference between impulsive madness ('84 and '01-'02) and systematic persecution (1934-44).
 
It will not impact Pakistan at all as it is an internal matter for india which has absolutely nothing to do with Pakistan whatsoever. India has it's own race, religion, culture and heritage and us Pakistanis have our own which are both completely different and separate. india has it's rules and our country has our rules. Nothing more to it.
 
The article is really amusing and one does not need to labor much to know why. If I go by the Guardians report, the first slaughter of minorities by the majority Hindus happened almost 40 years after Hindus officially became majority in an independent nation, the next one happened after another long 16 years. Acknowledging the fact that both of these incidents are the darkest phase of Indian secular and democratic history, isn't it a miracle that the people by and large have so far been able to leave in considerable peace and harmony for seventy odd years?

What Western political elites and the media often deliberately or non-deliberately tend to ignore is the national psyche of India when it got its independence. Partition was preceded and followed by bloody riots, massacre and rape, Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus with some illuminating exceptions hated each other to the core; whereas Muslims who could not migrate to Pakistan were left with remarkable quagmire and confusion. An old Muslim in Assam went back to his impoverished house when he heard that he could not cast his vote because he was a muslim when the entire nation was celebrating their first election in 1950. Reservation for Muslims were vehemently castigated and denied as a necessary reprisal of Two nation theory. A thin demarcation line became prominent that was already existed during Mughal period, perhaps turned uglier under the British.

Despite such differences, Muslims survived. I can not say the community thwarted towards progress like a majority of Hindus did after the 19th century social and religious reformations, but they were not thrown out of services, businesses neither the state could declare them as non-Indians, plight that the Jews had to face when National Socialists came to power in '34. Though the recent events have been disappointing and brings a lot of disgrace towards the secular image of India, the propagators of the idea that India is being Hinduized and Muslims are facing extinction needs to introspect and realize that there is a difference between impulsive madness ('84 and '01-'02) and systematic persecution (1934-44).


The first recorded anti-Muslim riot in India occurred in 1854 in Godhra, Gujrat. It's been constant feature since independence. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim victims continue to languish in camps.

Catholic relief workers praised by Muslim refugees in Indian camps
 
The first recorded anti-Muslim riot in India occurred in 1854 in Godhra, Gujrat. It's been constant feature since independence. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim victims continue to languish in camps.

Catholic relief workers praised by Muslim refugees in Indian camps
Hindu-Muslim riots, for natural reasons had been a frequent phenomenon right from the time Muslims settled as residents in this sub-continent. It was a regular occurrence during Islamic age where Mughal rulers carefully guarding Hindu interests were not irregular affairs. The point is, blaming Independent India for Hinduizing and not protecting minorities from vengeance of the majority is merely hypocrisy. It is a perennial obstacle towards a perfect secular society in a Western sense which the state (that is consisted of a vast, diverse, traditionalist societies) despite with its all power and authority can not curb down completely.
 
The article is really amusing and one does not need to labor much to know why. If I go by the Guardians report, the first slaughter of minorities by the majority Hindus happened almost 40 years after Hindus officially became majority in an independent nation, the next one happened after another long 16 years. Acknowledging the fact that both of these incidents are the darkest phase of Indian secular and democratic history, isn't it a miracle that the people by and large have so far been able to leave in considerable peace and harmony for seventy odd years?

What Western political elites and the media often deliberately or non-deliberately tend to ignore is the national psyche of India when it got its independence. Partition was preceded and followed by bloody riots, massacre and rape, Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus with some illuminating exceptions hated each other to the core; whereas Muslims who could not migrate to Pakistan were left with remarkable quagmire and confusion. An old Muslim in Assam went back to his impoverished house when he heard that he could not cast his vote because he was a muslim when the entire nation was celebrating their first election in 1950. Reservation for Muslims were vehemently castigated and denied as a necessary reprisal of Two nation theory. A thin demarcation line became prominent that was already existed during Mughal period, perhaps turned uglier under the British.

Despite such differences, Muslims survived. I can not say the community thwarted towards progress like a majority of Hindus did after the 19th century social and religious reformations, but they were not thrown out of services, businesses neither the state could declare them as non-Indians, plight that the Jews had to face when National Socialists came to power in '34. Though the recent events have been disappointing and brings a lot of disgrace towards the secular image of India, the propagators of the idea that India is being Hinduized and Muslims are facing extinction needs to introspect and realize that there is a difference between impulsive madness ('84 and '01-'02) and systematic persecution (1934-44).
responding to a riaz haq thread? kono kaaj nai mone hoi ajke.....
 
The first recorded anti-Muslim riot in India occurred in 1854 in Godhra, Gujrat. It's been constant feature since independence. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim victims continue to languish in camps.

Catholic relief workers praised by Muslim refugees in Indian camps
Thanks for getting such enlightened post. Sir, can you tell me how many priest (I am not asking for civilian because i know their massacre can hide in the name of war) was killed by Muslim invader before 1854. You can start with Somanath Mandir or Pandharpur Temple or Temples at Multan ...... etc etc (list is too long, but I hope you as a person with a such high caliber can complete list very easily).
Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for getting such enlightened post. Sir, can you tell me how many priest (I am not asking for civilian because i know their massacre can hide in the name of war) was killed by Muslim invader before 1854. You can start with Somanath Mandir or Pandharpur Temple or Temples at Multan ...... etc etc (list is too long, but I hope you as a person with a such high caliber can complete list very easily).
Thanks in advance.

You are offering Sangh Parivar's fake history that has been debunked by many enlightened Indian Hindus themselves.

Supreme Court judge Markandey Katju on Sunday attributed simmering Hindu-Muslim tensions to a deliberate rewriting of history to project Muslim rulers as intolerant and bigoted, whereas ample evidence existed to show the reverse was true.

The judge also said that Indians were held together by a common Sanskrit-Urdu culture which guaranteed that India would always remain secular.

Justice Katju said the myth-making against Muslim rulers, which was a post-1857 British project, had been internalised in India over the years. Thus, Mahmud Ghazni's destruction of the Somnath temple was known but not the fact that Tipu Sultan gave an annual grant to 156 Hindu temples. The judge, who delivered the valedictory address at a conference held to mark the silver jubilee of the Institute of Objective Studies, buttressed his arguments with examples quoted from D.N. Pande's History in the Service of Imperialism.

Dr. Pande, who summarised his conclusions in a lecture to members of the Rajya Sabha in 1977, had said: “Thus under a definite policy the Indian history textbooks were so falsified and distorted as to give an impression that the medieval period of Indian history was full of atrocities committed by Muslim rulers on their Hindu subjects and the Hindus had to suffer terrible indignities under Islamic rule.”

Muslim rulers deliberately projected as intolerant: Katju - The Hindu
 

Back
Top Bottom