Is being Anti-Islam the same as Pro-Indian?

[zaxcolix]

The question before the court is not the legality of the structure.

LOL ...when the High court has asked for the temple to be restored its status becomes legal by default. You cannot restore an 'Illegal structure'.

One of the other narratives is that it commemorates the eradication of malaria from the city. Sure there is a debate about the origin of the monument. But when there is no commonly agreed narrative why call it religious? Your version is just one of the theories.

"Relation d’un voyage fait au Levant" by Jean de Thévenot mentions this in his book. Now show me proof of the "Malaria Story"

It would be all the world better if the circle around Charminar is cleared up of the street vendors. Even better if people are not allowed to weaken the structure by climbing it.

Why not ask for that first ? ...after all its your muslim brothers who illegally put up shops and vendor goods around the charminar. .....at least that way you will have some credibility.

Not surprised. But the correct translation is:Even bigots can be right once in a while. And we should not mistake it to be wrong because a bigot said it.

You wouldn't be ...its you kind who indulge in petty name calling ....... So you are now saying asking for movement of Temple is not religious bigotry. You still have to answer why ... and you still have not answered a lot of my other questions.

[/QUOTE]

 

[rubyjackass]

Do you how many Buddhist Viharas still exist?

Do you how much of Buddhist/Jain Literature is still around?

If thats the case why do Jains all over India have no bad blood with the Hindus?

Why do you see no political problems between them and the hindus and they are amongst the richest communities in India?

Do you know what is theravada buddhism?

Did the Hindus vandalize the library in Nalanda,have they ransacked Bodh Gaya or dont they go there when they go to varnasi/haridwar,my own grandparents and parents consider it as holy as varnasi/haridwar/rishikesh.

why you spinning random stories and making a weak defense for yourself?

Since you are from Chennai,do you about the wars between Theravada Buddhism and Saiva Tamils in the 15th century and even that did not prevent a peace between Tamils and Sinhalese until recently in 1947.

Do you know how much of jain literature is there in Tamil Language,most of it is.

Dont the hindus revere it themselves?

Yes. Again sorry for including Jainism with Buddhism as religions that spread to other regions from India.

I am not creating any bad blood. But if the numbers are not there now, the reason is either buddhists got driven out or they converted back to Hinduism.

True. today Hindus rever Jain and Buddhist texts.
But it does not erase the fact that fanatic Hindu rulers had persecuted Jains and Buddhists. I am not interested in doing the research for you. Kindly read up.

 

[KRAIT]

You are talking for centuries old persecution of Buddhists. India has move on and Jainism has been flourishing for decades.

One can't latch on to that history but rather focus on current trend. Even Muslims (at least nearby my city or state) urged for not killing Goats when Bakra-Eid happened on same day on Mahavir Jayanti. As a goodwill gesture. Mind you Jain are less in % than Muslims.

So shouldn't we look forward learning from mistakes of our past ?

 

[zaxcolix]

But it does not erase the fact that fanatic Hindu rulers had persecuted Jains and Buddhists. I am not interested in doing the research for you. Kindly read up.

WRONG .... there is no proof of that.

If you cannot prove it you should take it back and apologize for the same. As it is, your credibility is an all time low

 

[rubyjackass]

LOL ...when the High court has asked for the temple to be restored its status becomes legal by default. You cannot restore an 'Illegal structure'.

That is not how law works. In any case, what is being asked is to just shift the temple a little distance away.

"Relation d’un voyage fait au Levant" by Jean de Thévenot mentions this in his book. Now show me proof of the "Malaria Story"

This is what I have read in my school text book and remembered it all along. Later I came across other theories - the one you mentioned and another calling it a mosque.

Why not ask for that first ? ...after all its your muslim brothers who illegally put up shops and vendor goods around the charminar. .....at least that way you will have some credibility.

Because the temple issue is only going to get worse as days pass. And it was not there by 1950. So which issue should draw more attention. pray tell?

You wouldn't be ...its you kind who indulge in petty name calling ....... So you are now saying asking for movement of Temple is not religious bigotry. You still have to answer why ... and you still have not answered a lot of my other questions.

Read the meaning of bigotry and then decide whether asking for the temple to be moved is bigotry or not. It may be blasphemy but not bigotry.

Since you are lazy to search for the relevant thread on this very site. I am giving the link for the thread. You can read in detail about my argument with KS.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/central-south-asia/218553-religious-differences-break-out-again.html

You are talking for centuries old persecution of Buddhists. India has move on and Jainism has been flourishing for decades.

One can't latch on to that history but rather focus on current trend. Even Muslims (at least nearby my city or state) urged for not killing Goats when Bakra-Eid happened on same day on Mahavir Jayanti. As a goodwill gesture. Mind you Jain are less in % than Muslims.

So shouldn't we look forward learning from mistakes of our past ?

That is exactly my point. I was arguing with people who never heard of any Hindu rulers who persecuted other religions. I offered Gulab Singh as an example. He did not like it.

My point of the argument is exactly that. History is history. We should focus on the present instead of trying to removing historical facts like Babri. If we take this path of revenge, there is not stopping the floodgates.

 

[rubyjackass]

WRONG .... there is no proof of that.

If you cannot prove it you should take it back and apologize for the same. As it is, your credibility is an all time low

Ok. I admit I initially made the statement without proof. I guess I trusted too much in my history teacher. It is not hard to search for anecdotal evidence.

I did one search for you.

Ajaypala, who succeeded him was a fanatic follower of Saivism and Jainas were persecuted in his regime.

on [url]www.jainsamaj.org ( Jainism, Ahimsa News, Religion, Non-Violence, Culture, Vegetarianism, Meditation, India. )[/url]

 

[scrumpy]

In the sub continent it is. Forget anti Islam, even a tinge of secularism will get you branded a RAW agent straight away.

Interestingly even in India I've heard people calling others secular in a derogatory manner. Something on the lines of being secular means being anti-India. Idiots in India have been learning from the idiots in our neighbouring country.

Edit - On further reading, it looks like those idiots have infiltrated this thread too.

 

[zaxcolix]

That is not how law works. In any case, what is being asked is to just shift the temple a little distance away.

Unfortunately that is exactly how the law works .....

Your attempts to obfuscate the issue aside, the fact remains it is a structure with significant religious symbolism. That small temple is also an attempt to dilute that Islamic identity of that monument and make it more 'secular' so to speak.

That way it becomes a symbol of secular Hyderabad with universal acceptance, rather than a painful reminder of its Nizam and religious discrimination.

Because the temple issue is only going to get worse as days pass. And it was not there by 1950. So which issue should draw more attention. pray tell?

High court has said no to sifting the temple ....its a non issue. Its not going anywhere. Drawing attention to it is not going to change anything ......its only going to polarize all communities involved. Removing illegal structures around it will at least restore the beauty of the structure. You decide.

Read the meaning of bigotry and then decide whether asking for the temple to be moved is bigotry or not. It may be blasphemy but not bigotry.

Look at it impartially ....The real reason you are asking for the temple to be moved is because charminar is a symbol of muslim pride. A temple next to it hurts their pride ......now decide about the bigotry involved.

 

[rubyjackass]

Unfortunately that is exactly how the law works .....

Your attempts to obfuscate the issue aside, the fact remains it is a structure with significant religious symbolism. That small temple is also an attempt to dilute that Islamic identity of that monument and make it more 'secular' so to speak.

That way it becomes a symbol of secular Hyderabad with universal acceptance, rather than a painful reminder of its Nizam and religious discrimination.



High court has said no to sifting the temple ....its a non issue. Its not going anywhere. Drawing attention to it is not going to change anything ......its only going to polarize all communities involved. Removing illegal structures around it will at least restore the beauty of the structure. You decide.




Look at it impartially ....The real reason you are asking for the temple to be moved is because charminar is a symbol of muslim pride. A temple next to it hurts your pride ......now decide about the bigotry involved.

The high court got no petition to move the temple. For a hundredth time, read the thread I have linked. You will know why I suggest the temple be moved. Instead you keep ranting here. I will not reply next time.

And if you think a temple next to Charminar hurts my pride, I will quote Kumar Patel from 'Harold and Kumar go to Guantanamo bay' (refer to the scene in the plane):

'I am not even a Moslem, you moron!!'

 

[bronxbull]

Kumar Patel also says that a coloured person racially abused him in the airport and the guy says,dude,am black.

are you making the same mistake?

 

[doppelganger]

We are all chapattis sekoed on God's tawa. Some of us he took his time on, some of us he just lost interest in quickly.

 

[zaxcolix]

The high court got no petition to move the temple. For a hundredth time, read the thread I have linked. You will know why I suggest the temple be moved. Instead you keep ranting here. I will not reply next time.

And if you think a temple next to Charminar hurts my pride, I will quote Kumar Patel from 'Harold and Kumar go to Guantanamo bay' (refer to the scene in the plane):

'I am not even a Moslem, you moron!!'

If there is no legal request for the temple being moved and if the court has sanctioned legality to the temple what is there is discuss?

......and quite frankly I dont care if the temple hurts your feeling or not ..only your apparent bigotry a.k.a 'secularism'. ...My point was there is no good reason why the temple should be moved.

In any case to assuage your need to declare yourself a non muslim ..I have edited my earlier post.

 

[bronxbull]

That is not how law works. In any case, what is being asked is to just shift the temple a little distance away.

This is what I have read in my school text book and remembered it all along. Later I came across other theories - the one you mentioned and another calling it a mosque.

Because the temple issue is only going to get worse as days pass. And it was not there by 1950. So which issue should draw more attention. pray tell?


Read the meaning of bigotry and then decide whether asking for the temple to be moved is bigotry or not. It may be blasphemy but not bigotry.

Since you are lazy to search for the relevant thread on this very site. I am giving the link for the thread. You can read in detail about my argument with KS.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/central-south-asia/218553-religious-differences-break-out-again.html


That is exactly my point. I was arguing with people who never heard of any Hindu rulers who persecuted other religions. I offered Gulab Singh as an example. He did not like it.

My point of the argument is exactly that. History is history. We should focus on the present instead of trying to removing historical facts like Babri. If we take this path of revenge, there is not stopping the floodgates.

Do you know that massacring enemies like afghan tribesmen is not religious persecution?

And Institutionally Hinduism says a strict no for anyone except Kshatriya to kill each other.

History ll always be history,Today ll be tomorrow's past but what has to be done,has to be done.

If the Jews didn't make Israel, they would still be languishing in different countries?

History ll always count as it caused the present and the present ll cause the future,It is continuous and forgetting the past is okay,forgetting and forgiving is okay but what happened once and the impact it makes causes a permanent change and it is irreversible.

So the reaction is natural and i can understand that you dont want to be a part of it as every man has his own views,fantastic or fatalistic,alarmist or pacifist but you have no right to insult anyone's right to remember and pay it back.

If there was no reaction,there would be no action as well.

Ok. I admit I initially made the statement without proof. I guess I trusted too much in my history teacher. It is not hard to search for anecdotal evidence.

I did one search for you.

on [url]www.jainsamaj.org ( Jainism, Ahimsa News, Religion, Non-Violence, Culture, Vegetarianism, Meditation, India. )[/url]

yeah all these things are political,most of the people you talk about are not the heroes,Chanakya & Adi Shankara did not slaughter anyone.

What typically happens is that religious or philosophical heads are centers of power and get caught in the power struggle between brothers,cousins and pay with their life for ending up on the losing side.

They died not for being jains but for indulging in politics.

 

[SQ8]

This is quite an interesting thread..
Brings out the questions whether Islam is only acceptable to the Indian Hindu Majority as long as it stays subservient and keeps providing bollywood actors. At best when Muslims do come into an intellectual or powerful role.. they must keep "apologizing" for Islam to remain popular with the "enlightened" intellectuals(and many posters here) from the Hindu majority.

In one fell swoop.. Islam has been thrown out as a religion of the invaders and massive efforts made to paint it as black.. from targeted "destruction" of existing sites to frame a barbaric Muslim history to an eyewash over any previous atrocities committed by other religions in India (such as the systematic elimination of Buddhism) in efforts to create a subservient minority that keeps its head down and eagerly plays holi for rising India.

 

[bronxbull]

I feel partition has made it simple enough for India.

The ones who stayed back,implicitly agreed to be under the larger majority.

So This land needs these rules to protect the security of the religion and the native culture of the place.

Invaders are not the reason,partition is.