What's new

India a Country of Hindus and of Their Descendants - Dr. Swamy

I did use "most",did I not?Besides assam most of NE is not hindu and never has been in a big way.Most hindus in NE are migrants from rest of India.So there goes another little addition in the list of delusions among Hindutavawadi fanatics.

Except for 3 states, the rest 4 are Hindu majority states even without migrants. From Nagaland to other states all came out in support of BJP, so there goes your delusions of separation from India. :D
 
.
Except for 3 states, the rest 4 are Hindu majority states even without migrants. From Nagaland to other states all came out in support of BJP, so there goes your delusions of separation from India. :D
SIgh.. so sensitive.and ill informed to boot.Most of NE is not hindu.BJP was supported just as congress was or any other party that may come.I wonder where you are getting your info from
 
.
SIgh.. so sensitive.and ill informed to boot.Most of NE is not hindu.BJP was supported just as congress was or any other party that may come.I wonder where you are getting your info from

Where do you get your info from? From what I know just 3 states are Christian majority states. If you are saying NE India is not in sync with the rest of India, then we will have to look into it won't we?

SIgh.. so sensitive.and ill informed to boot.Most of NE is not hindu.BJP was supported just as congress was or any other party that may come.I wonder where you are getting your info from

Also you can join any rebel group. See you then :D
 
.
No when the supreme court interpreted the "saar" of India to be Hindutva, it acknowledge that the culture of India is Hindu. I am saying culture is Hindu. Not religion. Also Hindu word is a substitute for Dharma. So all Dharmics are defined in the term Hindu. Now both Mr. Bhagwat and Mr. Swamy are saying since the spirit of India is Hindu, we all are Hindus. This again is a cultural application, not religious. So a Muslim praying in mosque is religiously a Muslim but culturally a Hindu. A Christian praying in his church is religiously a Christian but culturally a Hindu. The whole debate is about cultural identification, not religious.

See this is the real cause of confusion. In Islam things are compartmentalized and defined. There is Islamic influence and some guidelines about culture. But culture itself is considered neutral and different from religion. There is no such thing as an Islamic culture. A culture can be said to have an Islamic interpretation when Muslims practice it. But religion and culture are very distinct and separate. That is why Pakistanis do not like being called Arabs, etc... For a Muslim calling the religion and culture by the same label is confusing.

This right here is the basic premise for Two Nation Theory. Muslim majority areas would never have agreed to this undefined and fuzzy and amorphous concept of religion and culture having the same name. The implication, despite your clarification is this: Hindu culture and religion can not be said to be separate when the name for both is the same. I see no reason why a Muslim should submit to a Hindu identity even when it is said to be cultural.

I think that the root of this dichotomy lies in the clashing civilizational narratives. Even though by the tail end of Mughal empire most of South Asia had the basis of being a single country, the definition of the 'other' was still in terms of Dharmic and Islamic identities. I have not read through anything related to this issue, but just based on my thinking and analysis, I can imagine that the vast differences between Muslims and Hindus and their respective attitudes overcame many of the shared cultural practices to an extent that we felt like two different nations rather than one.

There is a field out there beyond civilizational narratives where we are a human family. Only few people actually give it priority. Once you feel it, differences drop aside automatically. They become unimportant. This is perhaps one of the first stages of the Sufi ideal.

But exigencies of reality does not allow one to dwell on this. Unfortunately we are chained to our parochial ideas of identity based on a mix of nationalist, cultural, ethnic, and linguistic components with varying emphasis.

I have realized something, which I might have known but had stayed unexpressed. Thank you @Indrani for providing the impetus for articulating this. Things seem clearer now.

You and me both know if debated widely this would turn into a religious fist fight
hence i say somethings are better kept under carpets

Nah... I think that Indrani's post is very valuable and this thread would be poorer without it.
 
.
Nah... I think that Indrani's post is very valuable and this thread would be poorer without it.

u got me wrong, the debate i was mentioning isnt pn PDF but amongst Indians in media
I don't think our nation has matured to an extent for such debates
 
.
See this is the real cause of confusion. In Islam things are compartmentalized and defined. There is Islamic influence and some guidelines about culture. But culture itself is considered neutral and different from religion. There is no such thing as an Islamic culture. A culture can be said to have an Islamic interpretation when Muslims practice it. But religion and culture are very distinct and separate. That is why Pakistanis do not like being called Arabs, etc... For a Muslim calling the religion and culture by the same label is confusing.

This right here is the basic premise for Two Nation Theory. Muslim majority areas would never have agreed to this undefined and fuzzy and amorphous concept of religion and culture having the same name. The implication, despite your clarification is this: Hindu culture and religion can not be said to be separate when the name for both is the same. I see no reason why a Muslim should submit to a Hindu identity even when it is said to be cultural.

I think that the root of this dichotomy lies in the clashing civilizational narratives. Even though by the tail end of Mughal empire most of South Asia had the basis of being a single country, the definition of the 'other' was still in terms of Dharmic and Islamic identities. I have not read through anything related to this issue, but just based on my thinking and analysis, I can imagine that the vast differences between Muslims and Hindus and their respective attitudes overcame many of the shared cultural practices to an extent that we felt like two different nations rather than one.

There is a field out there beyond civilizational narratives where we are a human family. Only few people actually give it priority. Once you feel it, differences drop aside automatically. They become unimportant. This is perhaps one of the first stages of the Sufi ideal.

But exigencies of reality does not allow one to dwell on this. Unfortunately we are chained to our parochial ideas of identity based on a mix of nationalist, cultural, ethnic, and linguistic components with varying emphasis.

I have realized something, which I might have known but had stayed unexpressed. Thank you @Indrani for providing the impetus for articulating this. Things seem clearer now.



Nah... I think that Indrani's post is very valuable and this thread would be poorer without it.

@Chak Bamu I could explain and explain and explain and yet you would not get it. For that you need to understand Hinduism.

If you can access youtube somehow, listen to this video. That is the only way you will ever understand a Hindu.

 
.
This attitude was the reason India got divided in the first place and it will happen again.The Muslims wont come to Pakistan but they will tear apart "Mother India" again
 
.
Where do you get your info from? From what I know just 3 states are Christian majority states. If you are saying NE India is not in sync with the rest of India, then we will have to look into it won't we?



Also you can join any rebel group. See you then :D
Again.."not hindu" doesn't mean "christian".Who is looking to associate with those organised crime syndicates?Most probably "jawans" in their payroll.
NE isn't mainland India like it or not.
 
.
Again.."not hindu" doesn't mean "christian".Who is looking to associate with those organised crime syndicates?Most probably "jawans" in their payroll.
NE isn't mainland India like it or not.
Forgive me if I am wrong but Assam and Tripura are overwhelmingly Hindu according to census data and many animist tribes consider themselves Hindu such as the Bodos but it's your choice what you consider yourselves.
 
.
Again.."not hindu" doesn't mean "christian".Who is looking to associate with those organised crime syndicates?Most probably "jawans" in their payroll.
NE isn't mainland India like it or not.

What do you mean mainland India? Are you living on an island? If so, be informed that NE is also part of mainland India. Andaman and Nicobar and Lakshwadeep can claim to be cut off and isolated. It does not matter if you are Christian or not. Hinduism is basic animism + a lot of other philosophies. So if you are an animist, you still fall within the confines of Hinduism. We are nature worshipers too.
 
.
What do you mean mainland India? Are you living on an island? If so, be informed that NE is also part of mainland India. Andaman and Nicobar and Lakshwadeep can claim to be cut off and isolated. It does not matter if you are Christian or not. Hinduism is basic animism + a lot of other philosophies. So if you are an animist, you still fall within the confines of Hinduism. We are nature worshipers too.
It's up to them to decide what they consider themselves, we are in no place to say that they are this or that.
 
. .
What do you mean mainland India? Are you living on an island? If so, be informed that NE is also part of mainland India. Andaman and Nicobar and Lakshwadeep can claim to be cut off and isolated. It does not matter if you are Christian or not. Hinduism is basic animism + a lot of other philosophies. So if you are an animist, you still fall within the confines of Hinduism. We are nature worshipers too.
Doesn't cut it,your definition of hindusim.NE is not hindu,mostly.And definitely not mainland India as far as culture or people go.Don't insult us by sweeping us under the hinduism carpet.I wonder if you guys sweep sikhism,buddhism etc as "hindus" as well.We are different from you..for starters,we don't take religion as seriously as you guys.
As far as the geography was concerned,you know very well what I mean.A bit of personal chit chat with your jawans will fix that.
 
.
What do you mean mainland India? Are you living on an island? If so, be informed that NE is also part of mainland India. Andaman and Nicobar and Lakshwadeep can claim to be cut off and isolated. It does not matter if you are Christian or not. Hinduism is basic animism + a lot of other philosophies. So if you are an animist, you still fall within the confines of Hinduism. We are nature worshipers too.
NE has been cutoff from development for decades, part of stupid indian planning
don't blame them to be all warry, it has been jungle raj out there for so long
 
.
Doesn't cut it,your definition of hindusim.NE is not hindu,mostly.And definitely not mainland India as far as culture or people go.Don't insult us by sweeping us under the hinduism carpet.I wonder if you guys sweep sikhism,buddhism etc as "hindus" as well.We are different from you..for starters,we don't take religion as seriously as you guys.
As far as the geography was concerned,you know very well what I mean.A bit of personal chit chat with your jawans will fix that.

Yes we do. All Dharmic religions are defined under the term Hindu, also used interchangebly. If you feel insulted being considered part of the majority, then there is something seriously wrong in your thinking. May be you have been pandered to too much more than necessary. May be you need to be neglected and ill treated to feel like a minority again.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom