Jump to content
zen

Can India afford to be secular?

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, New guy said:

Dude you are the gullible guy who fell for personal drug use story when the country had a 100 major issues. So of course you will  believe whatever anyone feeds to you and parrot the hate

 

Populist leaders must thank God for gullible peope like you 

What wrong did I mention there? There is two types of problem a socitety faces. One is fundamental in nature and other is transient. Fundamental problems take long time to resolve and if u do not plan then you can not resolve.
 

For example, Indian leadership was concerned on issue u mentioned  Roti kapadaa aur Makaan while ignoring disparity between Indian and Chinese economies and militaries. Result, is all in fromt.

 

Si just because you have short term issues of women education or poverty eradication doesn’t mean you ignore addressing other issues.

 

So if you have anything to counter why it doesn’t need addressing you can put it as I and most people see it as long term fundamental issue in Indian Society or global society where one group is ready to do violence as soon as it thinks it can match in number game of rest of society. Its effin worse then racism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zen said:

 

Saw the below on one of the threads here:

 

 

This guy is a hate filled nut case. Just because he speaks English on youtube doesn't make him any less a nut case. Or any less a hate monger.

 

There are dozens of temples in Mumbai where trustees are Muslims. And where Muslims partake in the upkeep of the temples.

 

Zakir Naik is hardly a representation of what an average Muslim. Its a very poor form to try and answer hypothetical questions about what India would be like using Zakir Naik as a benchmark. Zakir Naik as a representative for Indian Muslims in general, is like saying all West Indians are like Gayle or all Americans spell like G W (Dubya) Bush. Oh well.

Edited by Mariyam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2021 at 8:05 PM, New guy said:

 

So let me get this straight

 

Hinduism survived after independence, in a poor country, divided in a million ways by the British and the partition, left desolate and in poverty with no resource and no support. Conversion was ripe

 

 

You couldn't be more wrong. Hinduism has already lost the war, now it is about survival.

 

It was spread from Afgan to Indonesia, yet now has shrink to modern India. It is just 20% left. It is extremely important to preserve this 20%, yet at the same time cannot forget or forgive the violence and genocides.

 

And ancient India as poor? India like China wants reclaim its glory. It is land of knowledge, skills and this belief still remains.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mariyam said:

This guy is a hate filled nut case. Just because he speaks English on youtube doesn't make him any less a nut case. Or any less a hate monger.

 

There are dozens of temples in Mumbai where trustees are Muslims. And where Muslims partake in the upkeep of the temples.

 

Zakir Naik is hardly a representation of what an average Muslim. Its a very poor form to try and answer hypothetical questions about what India would be like using Zakir Naik as a benchmark. Zakir Naik as a representative for Indian Muslims in general, is like saying all West Indians are like Gayle or all Americans spell like G W (Dubya) Bush. Oh well.

 

I do not see Zakir Naik as a representative of the Muslim community but he is a big influencer (look at the large crowds that gather at his events) with an international reach ... Forget India, he found something from the somewhere to suggest against supporting places of worship of other religions in Pak! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, someone said:

 

You couldn't be more wrong. Hinduism has already lost the war, now it is about survival.

 

It was spread from Afgan to Indonesia, yet now has shrink to modern India. It is just 20% left. It is extremely important to preserve this 20%, yet at the same time cannot forget or forgive the violence and genocides.

 

And ancient India as poor? India like China wants reclaim its glory. It is land of knowledge, skills and this belief still remains.

 

 

Democratic leaders of all democracies can’t see beyond their next election hence they are nowhere close to discussing this issue. 
 

As soon as France tried to do something about it, suddenly pain of Muslims living posh lifestyle in West is felt by people who cant afford food in Yemen and Afghanistan. Pakistan has to close French embassy. In times like this, you feel, Can democracy really solve this menace or you keep the menace of Chinese Communism alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In France, Zemmour is rising candidate from the right, who is bringing to the front and centre the priciple of secularism and immigration.

 

See if you find resemblance with our discussion on secularism. He is considered an extreme candidate because he has abandoned all political correctness.

 

 

Edited by ravishingravi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is true that India lacks a common unifying factor. Right after Independence would have been great if India had been divided into smaller countries like Europe, based on Language. 
 

But after 60 years, it is too late to make this a Hindu country like Israel or to divide it into smaller groups based on language. So secularism and unity in diversity, however flawed it is, is the only way to keep India as a single country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lannister said:

Secularism is an idea born out of Atheism and there are many non-religious people in India.

 

Majority wanted India to become secular, and move away from religious nonsense. That is the reason we are not in a Hindu rashtra. 

 

So, can you tell us list of countries which are secular and therefore by implication atheist. Countries like US and UK don't qualify. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ash said:

It is true that India lacks a common unifying factor. Right after Independence would have been great if India had been divided into smaller countries like Europe, based on Language. 
 

But after 60 years, it is too late to make this a Hindu country like Israel or to divide it into smaller groups based on language. So secularism and unity in diversity, however flawed it is, is the only way to keep India as a single country.

 

But Hindus / Other communities are not homogenized anyway. A hindu is Punjab / Manipur has little or nothing in common with Hindu in TN / Kerala. Its diversity period. A hindu nation will by implication be diversified.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sat Nov 27 2021 at 8:34 PM, zen said:

A long long long time ago per this map:

 

oece97wz7qu41.jpg

Afghans in early medieval & later Ancient times was mostly Buddhists..  Thanks to various central Asian invaders & Indo-Greek kings adopting Buddishm. Even Md Ghori's grandpa was a freakin Buddhist.  Buddhism actually was most prominent religion of the time surpassing Hinduism by quite a distance in South Asia.  If not for Gupta Empire it probably would have vanished in India itself. 

Ashoka & later Mauryan rulers did a great job in spreading Buddhism in nearby countries.  Their anti Hindu acts later on led to the mutiny in army & finally the end of their official Patronage to state sponsored Buddhism. 

Buddhism was easy to spread as compared to complex Hinduism ( it wasn't as simple as it is today thanks to various reforms)  but had much stronger roots to survive Islamic invasions.  

Buddhism & Taoism even though got a major boost under Early Mongols & Khanate rule 

Edited by Lone Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

India has to maintain status quo for quite a while as we are not in a position to make radical changes.  Surrounded by enemies & with a significant population living in poverty..  Uplifting Indian middle class are major challenges. 

Maybe somewhere down in future we can do something about it.  Let's follow the China Xinjiang template even though not as extreme or simply better it.  But as of now we don't have any other choice 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ash said:

It is true that India lacks a common unifying factor. Right after Independence would have been great if India had been divided into smaller countries like Europe, based on Language. 
 

But after 60 years, it is too late to make this a Hindu country like Israel or to divide it into smaller groups based on language. So secularism and unity in diversity, however flawed it is, is the only way to keep India as a single country.

Matlab kuch bhi...  That's like saying Kaash 1857 mai feudal lords may have won & divided India among themselves.  North to Mughals..  Deccan to Marathas & South to god knows who. 

The only thing British did right was brought whole of the nation under one flag & what unification really sounds like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
But Hindus / Other communities are not homogenized anyway. A hindu is Punjab / Manipur has little or nothing in common with Hindu in TN / Kerala. Its diversity period. A hindu nation will by implication be diversified.  
Ramayana in Bali is way different than that in India because it has a cultural context unlike abrahamic religions which follow dogmas.Hinduism needs to be seen from a cultural context.

Par in gadhon ko kaun samjhaaye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lone Wolf said:

Matlab kuch bhi...  That's like saying Kaash 1857 mai feudal lords may have won & divided India among themselves.  North to Mughals..  Deccan to Marathas & South to god knows who. 

The only thing British did right was brought whole of the nation under one flag & what unification really sounds like. 

Matlab kuch bhi. Britishers did nothing of that sort. Although, there were multiple kingdoms, common people had free access to sacred places for pilgrimage etc, there was cultural oneness where stories of Ramayana and Mahabharata provided a sense of the underlying rashtra for culture, people identified with the chars and many names were given to their progeny to propagate the cultural identity. When kings acquired new lands, they didn’t force their language and religious ideology on to common people, that was the Dharma of those times. You have been fed with comme Marxist history of the white saviors. They siphoned off 35 trillion stifling pounds from India and left the country under poverty 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...