Which of these TWO different solutions will allow us to achieve hindu-muslim UNITY in the subcontinent?

[Manny_Pacquiao]

7 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

I disagree, just like checking Islamic identity politics which causes sedition, the class politics need to be checked too. Communism had failed world over.  It is a flawed ideology. In India, it is only leading to anarchy, naxalism and eventually terrorism (with the nexus from seditional forces like ISIS, PFI, SDPI etc).  Besides, the marxist movement is about bringing a revolution to affect change in the society, they think that the dharmic connection is the real enemy of India and they tend to break it in every opportunity.  

 

when it comes to addressing economic inequalities, what do we really have? reservations? thats it.

 

and no political party, including the BJP, can touch reservations. all you can do is just give everyone reservations so it becomes meaningless.

[Manny_Pacquiao]

18 minutes ago, someone said:

Congress is just a stop-gap measure. Wherever demographics are in their favor, Muslim leagues type parties are the winner and no Hindu will ever win such constituency. So fake is the secularism. 

 

18 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Political Islam is usually about Islamic supremacy or purity, because we are more, we want this region, 15% > 85% in strength, wagaira. In the face of strong opposition, it will turn into a victim and complain about pogroms. So, the two political movements are different to compare and give support to.

true.

 

so we could address this issue by banning proselytization? i think that would be fair. the only conversions that should be encouraged, are non-muslim to hindu conversions. the rest should be actively discouraged, and banned by law. how else do you keep the demographics in your favor?

 

i can't think of any other solution.

[coffee_rules]

5 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

when it comes to addressing economic inequalities, what do we really have? reservations? thats it.

 

and no political party, including the BJP, can touch reservations. all you can do is just give everyone reservations so it becomes meaningless.

Exactly, the class politics has turned into a identity politics, where they are targetting the poor classes and saying it is because of the lower castes. That kind of politics need to be shunned. India should eventually abolish caste system and it's politcs and have policies based on economic status of the people. After 100 years of such politics, we are pushing more and more people into the lower caste bucket. 

[someone]

6 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

 

true.

 

so we could address this issue by banning proselytization? i think that would be fair. the only conversions that should be encouraged, are non-muslim to hindu conversions. the rest should be actively discouraged, and banned by law. how else do you keep the demographics in your favor?

 

i can't think of any other solution.

What about acknowledging their ancestry? Humans by nature do not hate their own family. So bringing the connection with Indian roots?

 

As currently, they are overdoing in trying to be "pure" or "Saudi Muslim". Thus, the battle lies in the education, and overcoming certain taboos subjects, history of conversions. If they can accept the past and be confident about it, it would solve many things...

[Manny_Pacquiao]

13 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

Reform Islam?sounds exhausting.If you want a quick fix then let's find a common enemy,nothing unifies more than a common enemy.

 

this is the reason why i support religion-oriented politics. hindus with a common enemy are unified. without the common enemy, we go back to the days of bihar under laloo.

 

i dont like hindu-muslim politics, but its a preferable alternative to caste politics.

[someone]

20 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

when it comes to addressing economic inequalities, what do we really have? reservations? thats it.

 

and no political party, including the BJP, can touch reservations. all you can do is just give everyone reservations so it becomes meaningless.

Yes, that's the solution by making it redundant.

 

Reservations itself is interesting, whereas Hindus are today are made guilty of crimes of the past. Whereas, there were more evil things like genocides done by other communities in the past. Yet, today such community members, do not have the burdens of the past, and instead, even talking about it is a taboo and a communal matter...

[maniac]

2 hours ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

i think most of us will agree that we need a combination of both, but the debate is...the ratio.

 

20:80 in favor of solution 2, or 50:50 solution 1? something like that...

 

important thing to remember is that the common muslim in india doesn't really know anything about islam. its more a social status than an identity. so solution 2 could work nicely.

 

very different from hindus, who actually worship (by ritual) a certain form of divinity.

Hindu Muslim unity has only one solution, if the Muslims of the subcontinent treat their version of Islam as a different version from anything else  that originated in a foreign country.

 

You don’t see every ordinary Christian convert making a mandatory pilgrimage to Vatican or Jerusalem or wherever they are supposed to go to. 
 

They have some churches in india  that is their version of mecca. Most of them at least the recent converts  still retain Hindu names and have no problem with it. The Bible is translated to the local language for them.

 

Not saying they are a beacon of virtue through they have started creating nuisance in Kerala,Andhra etc too but I don’t think they will ever become a national security threat regardless of how brainwashed they get. Max they will hate Hindus but not India again for the most part.
 

Anyways for what it’s worth the bigger picture is they don’t see themselves as foreigners.

 

However most if not all Muslims see themselves as foreigners. That’s the problem. They still read a book written in a language that has nothing to do with the Indian subcontinent, they have to visit a foreign country for salvation, they have to keep foreign sounding names.

 

Thats the problem, so it is neither the religion itself nor the Muslim but the mindset has to change.

 

Edited March 13, 2020 by maniac

[coffee_rules]

 

/All/ @Manny_Pacquiao

watch this video over the weekend, at least the first 35 mins, sums up the debate over the OP,

 

1. we have to move on, from this divide as we have look ahead for the future. There is no future as one nation, if we can’t live side by side. This is important for Indians esp living in India
2. There is a need for reconciliation for us to move on. we can’t have one set of people feeling proud of the barbarism that started since 8th century on this land and people, while the other is hating it.

3. Let the custodians apologize for caste atrocities, religious atrocities of ancestors, accept their roots and history and move on. Holding onto Arab or Persian identity is not going to help build the nation.

4. Brushing history under the carpet and calling those who bring it up again and again as bigots and Islamophobes is not the solution. India has to get beyond this political divide and form bridges within Indians to move on.

5. Pakistan is a historical mistake, we should ignore them and not create more Pakistans in India. We should divide that country and support independence movements of Baloch. PoK, Sindh, and Punjab

6. Kill all communists. Not important, but just saying it.

[randomGuy]

I think much of the difference between Muslims and Hindus is how the 2 butcher and what the 2 eat 

 

1. How: Muslims - halal , Hindus/sikhs - jhatka... Add to it the excessive butchering on Eid

 

2. What: more than half of Hindus are vegetarians, almost all muslims are  non vegetarians... Cows are not forbidden in Islam, eating pork isn't forbidden in Hinduism.

 

^^Much of the fighting between Hindus and Muslims comes out of these differences... So if and when we stop slaughtering animals for food and technology develops lab grown meat for Mass consumption(such as the research being done by Memphis meats), such that slaughtering animals for food becomes obsolete, peace between Hindus and Muslims will be achieved.

 

Rest we already know Islam is an intolerant religion, and without China or Russia type measures or BJP government, it won't be controlled.

 

Edited March 14, 2020 by randomGuy

[Mariyam]

@Manny_Pacquiao

 

Have to disagree here. Religion does not play a big role in India re: opportunities at education or upward social mobility. Infact that is a good reason we have *some* cohesiveness as a society today. Everybody knows that due hard work will be rewarded and everybody, irrespective of religious background believes that they have a fair chance of bettering their state of affairs.

 

The differential treatment is in terms of justice dispensation. Over here poor people and Muslims (especially the poor ones) have a much lower shot at justice than their Hindu compatriots. This is all the more evident when you look at the various riot cases since Independence.

Just to better explain my point, I saw a thread here that spoke about Sharad Pawar lying about an extra bomb blast in 93. This was a finding from the Shrikrishna Commission. That lie killed 0 people. The same commission also indicted many Shiv Sena politicians and policemen during the riots. That would never be discussed here. Because the mindset is that those people ( Muslims who suffer in the riots) deserve it and had it coming. 

Many of those police men were promoted. When the leader of the Shiv Sena passed away, he was draped in the tricolour and got a 21 gun salute! 

 

Dispensing justice equitably goes a long way to maintaining unity.

[Mariyam]

12 hours ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

when it comes to addressing economic inequalities, what do we really have? reservations? thats it.

 

and no political party, including the BJP, can touch reservations. all you can do is just give everyone reservations so it becomes meaningless.

In the history of independent India, is there a group which was granted reservations and then had them removed?

Its a political harakiri. Does not happen at all. 

[Mariyam]

@maniac Most Muslims see themselves as foreigners? Where from, do you come up with such stuff?

 

 

[Stradlater]

14 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

@maniac Most Muslims see themselves as foreigners? Where from, do you come up with such stuff?

 

 

Most Muslims I have interacted with in Rajasthan sort of claim some obscure foreign ancestry (Pashtun in a large number of cases) barring a few groups such a Kayamkhanis who are proud of their Rajput heritage even though the situation has changed drastically in their case too after wahabism started to spread it's wings in the region. 

[Mariyam]

1 minute ago, Stradlater said:

Most Muslims I have interacted with in Rajasthan sort of claim some obscure foreign ancestry (Pashtun in a large number of cases) barring a few groups such a Kayamkhanis who are proud of their Rajput heritage even though the situation has changed drastically in their case too after wahabism started to spread it's wings in the region. 

Fair enough. I wouldn't count Pashtun as foreign though. They were as much Indian as you and I, until recently. 

 

Most Muslims I have interacted with, and I believe that would be a larger and more diverse sample, do not make any such claims.

Salafist preaching from what little I have seen, does not result in the said people making claims about ancestry, it makes them denounce practices like visiting dargahs/mazhars and believing in a rather harsh variant of Islam. 

[Stradlater]

Just now, Mariyam said:

Fair enough. I wouldn't count Pashtun as foreign though. They were as much Indian as you and I, until recently. 

 

Most Muslims I have interacted with, and I believe that would be a larger and more diverse sample, do not make any such claims.

Salafist preaching from what little I have seen, does not result in the said people making claims about ancestry, it makes them denounce practices like visiting dargahs/mazhars and believing in a rather harsh variant of Islam. 

Kayamkhani people till 30-40 years ago followed in a large measure Hindu customs and cultural practices to the extent that in some cases it was almost impossible to tell them apart from their Hindu counterparts. 

Similarly they would respect their Kuldevi and many Kayamkhani forts had temples inside of them. Even their wedding rituals are mostly similar to ours. 

Pity the situation has changed to worse in the last few decades with mullahs from UP/Bengal coming in to destroy their centuries old cultural fabric. 

 

[Stradlater]

https://hindi.news18.com/news/rajasthan/jhunjhunu-kayamkhani-muslims-whose-customs-are-like-hindu-1628967.html

 

@Mariyam

[Mariyam]

19 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

https://hindi.news18.com/news/rajasthan/jhunjhunu-kayamkhani-muslims-whose-customs-are-like-hindu-1628967.html

 

@Mariyam

Thanks for sharing! Interesting stuff.

 

Don't Rajputs also claim/ have some foreign ancestry? I don't know where I read this. Probably on ICF itself.

[Stradlater]

7 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

Thanks for sharing! Interesting stuff.

 

Don't Rajputs also claim/ have some foreign ancestry? I don't know where I read this. Probably on ICF itself.

No we don't. This BS was propagated by the colonial era historians in order to justify the British imperialism in India whereby they labelled 'all' Rajput clans as having Scythian ancestry. 

 

But come to think of it, some of the clans might have had a foreign origin but that was long ago, around the time of Hepthalite invasions of North West if a few historians are to be believed. 

 

There's no one common origin that's for sure. 

Different warrior clans of North India with different backgrounds(some foreign and some indigenous) started inter marrying and thus emerged a distinct Rajput identity by the 6th century. 

 

The important thing to remember here is that we were even if some of us had foreign origins, thoroughly Indianized around 1200-1300 years ago. 

[maniac]

6 hours ago, Mariyam said:

@maniac Most Muslims see themselves as foreigners? Where from, do you come up with such stuff?

 

 

I meant that for the entire subcontinent.
 

As I said there will be some generalization involved when we are discussing a larger topic and we can’t avoid that right?

 

Forget Pakistanis who are a lost cause, even Bangladeshis when it comes down to the holy book or verses they memorize  it in the original Arabic  language? Are they allowed to translate and recite the verses in Bengali? 
 

Why does some guy in a remote village in Tamil Nadu have to call himself Sheikh Abdullah? How is he a sheikh? My understanding Is that is an Arabic name.
 

 The moment someone says Sheikh my first image is of a rich Arab guy with that thing wrapped around his head and sitting on a camel,  not some guy standing in the sun all day sweating and fighting the crowd to get tickets to a Rajnikant movie.

 

As I mentioned in my above post, Christians of subcontinent have no other foreign identity. May be some folk in Goa or the Anglo Indian types that’s about it. 
 

Parsees have no affiliation with Iran anymore. I mean yes you can make the same argument for Parsees that how come they have foreign sounding names but there is no hidden history here. They were refugees from a foreign country who got refuge in India and were allowed to retain their culture. Whatever they lost in Iran they rebuilt here so that memory has been wiped away and they have become an indic ethnicity now.

 

However on the other hand why does a Muslim from a remote part of Orissa have to go to a middle eastern country to attain salvation? 
 

If Salman Khan dances on Ganesh Utsav or Sharukh Khan plays Holi that shouldn’t be a photo op moment to rub their secularism in people’s faces, Why should that impress me? It’s an Indian festival and as Indians they are partaking in it. That’s what I am talking about when I say Muslims themselves or the portrayal of them shows they are their own unique entity. That makes them foreign to the rest of us.

[panther]

1 hour ago, maniac said:

I meant that for the entire subcontinent.
 

As I said there will be some generalization involved when we are discussing a larger topic and we can’t avoid that right?

 

Forget Pakistanis who are a lost cause, even Bangladeshis when it comes down to the holy book or verses they memorize  it in the original Arabic  language? Are they allowed to translate and recite the verses in Bengali? 
 

Why does some guy in a remote village in Tamil Nadu have to call himself Sheikh Abdullah? How is he a sheikh? My understanding Is that is an Arabic name.
 

 The moment someone says Sheikh my first image is of a rich Arab guy with that thing wrapped around his head and sitting on a camel,  not some guy standing in the sun all day sweating and fighting the crowd to get tickets to a Rajnikant movie.

 

As I mentioned in my above post, Christians of subcontinent have no other foreign identity. May be some folk in Goa or the Anglo Indian types that’s about it. 
 

Parsees have no affiliation with Iran anymore. I mean yes you can make the same argument for Parsees that how come they have foreign sounding names but there is no hidden history here. They were refugees from a foreign country who got refuge in India and were allowed to retain their culture. Whatever they lost in Iran they rebuilt here so that memory has been wiped away and they have become an indic ethnicity now.

 

However on the other hand why does a Muslim from a remote part of Orissa have to go to a middle eastern country to attain salvation? 
 

If Salman Khan dances on Ganesh Utsav or Sharukh Khan plays Holi that shouldn’t be a photo op moment to rub their secularism in people’s faces, Why should that impress me? It’s an Indian festival and as Indians they are partaking in it. That’s what I am talking about when I say Muslims themselves or the portrayal of them shows they are their own unique entity. That makes them foreign to the rest of us.

Embracing the true religion means you shun the Idolatary and filth of the polytheist, even if they dislike this.