Everyone in India is a Hindu, says RSS chief

[SalmanNadeem]

Even Hindustan mean "Land of Hindus"

So when you call yourself a resident of "Hindustan", you are also implictly calling yourself a "Hindu".

Of course, in this case the word "Hindu" is a statement of identity, not religious belief.

And this, I believe, is exactly what the RSS chief is trying to say.

 

[Spring Onion]

Even Hindustan mean "Land of Hindus"

So when you call yourself a resident of "Hindustan", you are also implictly calling yourself a "Hindu".

Of course, in this case the word "Hindu" is a statement of identity, not religious belief.

And this, I believe, is exactly what the RSS chief is trying to say.

Lolzz the word Hindustan not at all mean anything which has anything to do with word Hindu.

Sorry the word Hindu is not at all representative of Identity of all the Indians.

Call them Bhartis/Bhartyas or Indians but "Hindu" ???? NO way man

 

[SalmanNadeem]

Lolzz the word Hindustan not at all mean anything which has anything to do with word Hindu.

Erm.... Hindu+Stan....means Land of Hindus. How difficult is that to understand.

Even the Mughal rulers called their empire Hindustan. And the residents of Hindustan included all the muslims also. So all muslims were "Hindus".

During colonial period, the British started to call all non-muslims in India as Hindus, so Hindu became a religious term.

RSS chief is trying to revert "Hindu" to its original, non-religious meaning. I think he should be praised and commended for it.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Mother Teresa was a Christian Fundamentalist. Don't even utter her name here. She believe that GOD would MAGICALLY HEAL her patients, and so she REFUSED to let them have any medical treatments. Is that someone you call a saint? I'd consider the thousands of NGOs who deliver medical treatments to poor people in India without their religious motivation to be far more deserving of "sainthood".

Anyways, mother teresa is not the topic of discussion.

OK. Although you response helps me to understand a little more about how you think. So in that context, I consider your response very relevant.

I am fully aware of the context. I am not stupid, you know. But unfortunately, you seem to be intent on twisting his words to suit your own prejudices.

Stupid is the last thing I'd associate with you, given your comments.

So if you understand the context, what's the problem? A man dedicated to a harder Hindu dominated world from an organization that is much the same - he says something glib and you expect us not to search for meaning? To accept a benevolent worldview from a man known for anything but?

Will any Pakistani say that all Pakistanis are muslims? They do all the time, except that in this case, they mean it literally - i.e. all Pakistanis should start praying 5 times a day and keeping fast on Ramadan. Oh, and idol worshipping is Shirk (Blasphemy).

Without even debating the comment (for example, I'd like to know where a Pakistani leader has said that Pakistani Sikhs are Muslims, and if he has, whether you think that's OK given you're defending what Bhagwat said), my Pakistan example was to get you to comment on the comparison.

It's like looking in the mirror isn't it? One hardline view to combat another. Well, I'm not having that. 'The enemy at the gates' is an old argument as well, too often used to justify a hardline course of action.

Did The RSS ask muslims to stop worshipping allah because it is shirk?

No, but let them come to the fore and they will say that one day.

 

[SalmanNadeem]

So if you understand the context, what's the problem? A man dedicated to a harder Hindu dominated world from an organization that is much the same - he says something glib and you expect us not to search for meaning? To accept a benevolent worldview from a man known for anything but?

I am well aware of RSS and its ambitions, and this I consider to be a great step forward.

What would you have preferred? If he had said that Hindu gods were the real gods and Muslim/Christian gods are blasphemous? Because that is what real fundamentalists say every day towards Hindus.

Without even debating the comment (for example, I'd like to know where a Pakistani leader has said that Pakistani Sikhs are Muslims, and if he has, whether you think that's OK given you're defending what Bhagwat said), my Pakistan example was to get you to comment on the comparison.

Firstly, no muslim would ever call a Hindu/Sikh a "muslim" because Islam's tenets are precise and defined. Any idol-worshpper cannot become a Muslim.

"Islam" and "Muslim" can have no other meaning other than the religious one, whereas "Hindu", for most of history, has been a demonym rather than a faith.

It's like looking in the mirror isn't it? One hardline view to combat another. Well, I'm not having that. 'The enemy at the gates' is an old argument as well, too often used to justify a hardline course of action.

I would call him 'Hardline' if he said that "Muslims cannot be Hindus" because they are different.

THAT, my friend, would be hardline.

No, but let them come to the fore and they will say that one day.

Haha. That is never going to happen.

What DOES happen every day, however, is that Muslims/Christians call people of other faiths as blasphemy and shirk.

Forget non-muslims, infact Shias and Sunnis are always telling each other that you are blasphemer and kaffir etc. Taliban is telling moderate muslims that they are kaffirs.

If Islam is always trying to carve out a exclusive niche for itself in every society, don't blame the society.

 

[Spring Onion]

Mother Teresa was a Christian Fundamentalist. Don't even utter her name here. She believe that GOD would MAGICALLY HEAL her patients, and so she REFUSED to let them have any medical treatments. Is that someone you call a saint? I'd consider the thousands of NGOs who deliver medical treatments to poor people in India without their religious motivation to be far more deserving of "sainthood".

Anyways, mother teresa is not the topic of discussion.

Mother Teresa and a fundamentalist ? Man something is indeed wrong with your definition of fundamentalist.

The RSS people and supporters are fundamentalists Not Mother Teresa.

Will any Pakistani say that all Pakistanis are muslims?

NO we will not say because not All Pakistanis are Muslims.

[QUOTE}They do all the time, except that in this case, they mean it literally - i.e. all Pakistanis should start praying 5 times a day and keeping fast on Ramadan. Oh, and idol worshipping is Shirk (Blasphemy).

Did The RSS ask muslims to stop worshipping allah because it is shirk?[/QUOTE]

Lolzzz no we dont say that all the time.

We and our religion and our Holy Book say "Muslims should pray 5 times a day and keep fast"

Our religion nor we say that All the Pakistanis should do so.


Lolz there is no concept of shirk in Hinduism so why would RSS say worshiping God, Allah, is shirk?

Do you even know the meaning of shirk in the first place?

I wonder why you are hiding behind a Muslim name

bad tendency.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

I am well aware of RSS and its ambitions, and this I consider to be a great step forward.

I couldn't disagree more about it being a great anything

What would you have preferred? If he had said that Hindu gods were the real gods and Muslim/Christian gods are blasphemous? Because that is what real fundamentalists say every day towards Hindus.

Firstly, no muslim would ever call a Hindu/Sikh a "muslim" because Islam's tenets are precise and defined. Any idol-worshpper cannot become a Muslim.

"Islam" and "Muslim" can have no other meaning other than the religious one, whereas "Hindu", for most of history, has been a demonym rather than a faith.

I would call him 'Hardline' if he said that "Muslims cannot be Hindus" because they are different.

THAT, my friend, would be hardline.



Haha. That is never going to happen.

What DOES happen every day, however, is that Muslims/Christians call people of other faiths as blasphemy and shirk.

Forget non-muslims, infact Shias and Sunnis are always telling each other that you are blasphemer and kaffir etc. Taliban is telling moderate muslims that they are kaffirs.

If Islam is always trying to carve out a exclusive niche for itself in every society, don't blame the society.

Every single thing you have said is a selective act of choosing the worse in 'the other' and justifying your actions based on the same. That's an old tactic as well.

The 'other' is bad, so we must be too. The 'other' defines itself in opposition, so must we. These are calls to action based on distrust and hate.

I will have no part of it. This not the India I want to be, nor will I accept its becoming.

 

[SalmanNadeem]

^Fine, if you think that I"m justifying the RSS statements by criticizing Islam and Christianity, then ignore those criticisms and respond to my other statements.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

^Fine, if you think that I"m justifying the RSS statements by criticizing Islam and Christianity, then ignore those criticisms and respond to my other statements.

Serious question: Which statements?

Also, I have to go out and won;t be back for some time. Will respond later.

 

[SalmanNadeem]

So I guess the Muslims and Christians are the Hindus that rejected Hinduism?

There is no religion called "Hinduism". It is a term coined by the British.

 

[SalmanNadeem]

Are they low cast hindus or high cast hindus ????/

None. Hindutva movement is an Atheist, Secular movement that does not believe in Caste System.

As per Hindutva, all Hindus are equal irrespective of their ethnic group or religious beliefs.

The only thing that matters in Hindutva is loyalty - are you loyal towards your motherland?

 

[sensenreason]

Erm.... Hindu+Stan....means Land of Hindus. How difficult is that to understand.

Even the Mughal rulers called their empire Hindustan. And the residents of Hindustan included all the muslims also. So all muslims were "Hindus".

During colonial period, the British started to call all non-muslims in India as Hindus, so Hindu became a religious term.

RSS chief is trying to revert "Hindu" to its original, non-religious meaning. I think he should be praised and commended for it.

hmm..I thought the word Hindu is derived from Sindhu and which is where India originates from...- Indus..more a reference to a geography and not religion or ethnicity...

 

[SalmanNadeem]

hmm..I thought the word Hindu is derived from Sindhu and which is where India originates from...- Indus..more a reference to a geography and not religion or ethnicity...

How can Hindu be a reference to Geography? Its a demonym - a name for a group of people, namely those people who reside in the lands located east of the Indus river.

 

[spsk]

RSS is stupid fellas in our society. We just regrest for having them in our country. They just see this country with religion eyes.
Shame on them

Have you gone mad? What do you mean by "feeling ashamed of RSS" ? Its realy strange to me that you want a religious organization to be secular . Its not RSS to be secular but its BJP. This is how our politicians turned our people blind by this word secular.

 

[Khajur]

I think this thread serves no purpose and needs to be closed because its only calling for useless flaimbait. The RSS Cheif said a stupid thing, doesn't mean we need to brainfcuk ourselves over it, even the Indians recognize the idiocy in his remarks.

Everyone is missing the point here expect one banned member named Salman and got RSS chief wrong.

I think what he said was that the "Hindu" should not just seen through the prisim of religion alone.As the "Hindu" word itself find no reference in the it original namesake Vedic Sanatana dharma .

The terms Hindu and Hindutva should accurately refer to the sons of the soil of this part of the world and their way of life irrespective of religions, like it used to be past, till British made us Indian.Even Moughal Emperor Akbar was the Shahenshah of Hindustan.

RSS chief wants sees the term "hindu" more as abbreviation of Hindustani aka Bharatiya aka indian, rather than represent Sanatana dharmis.And probably want to see term "hindu" to be used more as cohesive unit for all ppl otherwise known as indians in English.