69 million page views

Response to Iasius

Reader comment on item: Bush Declares War on Radical Islam
in response to reader comment: Mother Teresa, A Misused Icon To Furhter Aims Of Christian Conversions

Submitted by Don (India), Dec 3, 2005 at 06:56

Iasius writes,

"I might have thought a congregation of that magnitude, converging at the site of a relatively unimpressive and unimportant (from the Muslim angle) structure with an intention of demolishing it was clearly indicative of the will of the people. After all, isn't ‘will of the people' what democracy is all about? If sold-out political leadership is incompetent or unwilling to address and resolve an endlessly festering issue involving a proven historical usurpation, the masses are going to do something themselves."

Though Indian-Hindus have a right to their worship places, there are still many Hindu-Indians who say that destruction of the Barbri Masjid was done in a "bad taste" and was "un-Indian" in every way.

Isaius writes, "After all, isn't ‘will of the people' what democracy is all about?"

In that case Mahatma Gandhi was not following democracy! The will of the people was to remove the British at any cost and there were people who even advocated violence. But Mahatma Gandhi was against any form of violence. The Indians could have removed by force the British within no time. Why didn't then Gandhi call for national mob frenzied violent riots, if the will of the people any way "to remove the British"?

I will ask you one question Mr. Iasus: had Gandhi been alive what would have been his reaction to the destruction of Babri Masjid?

Mr.Iasus in his quest to thrash Christianity is advocating anything, even "evil" to score a point! What a sad soul you are!

There is no dispute about it and history is witness to the desecration of many a Hindu places of worship by Muslim zealots. Destruction of places of worship in medieval times was an integral part of political power. Such destruction was not confined only to Muslims alone. In the 11th century Harsh Deva of Kashmir defiled a lot of temples. In the 12th century Subhatha Varman, the Parmara ruler plundered Jain temples in Gujarat. Any number of such examples can be given. Note that the Jaganath temple at Puri is built on the ruins of a tribal shrine. At Bodh Gaya, the Buddhist Vihara was destroyed by Sasanka in the Sixth century and its place a Hindu temple was raised which still exists.

All this is a part of history through which India has passed. And the issue was settled through the years of freedom struggle. The Constitution of India which is the product of the freedom struggle had in unambiguous terms given to our people a democratic secular polity. A polity that was necessary for the preservation of the vast, multi-religious, multi-linguistic and multi-cultural character of our country. India's independence, an advance of human civilisation emphatically rejected the RSS concept of Hindu Rashtra. By raking up such issues of the past, the BJP today is once again placing the agenda of Hindu Rashtra before the country. As it was rejected earlier it has to be more emphatically rejected today.

The destruction of temples is to be condemned, so should the destruction of other places of worship. The destruction of mosques in Punjab following 1947 partition, the destruction of mosques in Bhagalpur in 1990 and the destruction of the Gurudwaras in 1984 were all according to the S.S. justifiable.Such double standards must be thoroughly exposed.
The diabolical nature of the S.S. can be understood by their complete lack of respect for the Hindu religion itself when along with the Babri Masjid it wantonly destroyed the Ayodhya temples of Ram Chabutra and Sita ki Rasoi on December 6. Does the S.S. condemn such destruction?

Finally, and importantly, by taking recourse to the destruction of temples as a justification for the destruction of the Babri Masjid, the S.S. is thoroughly exposing its character of operating outside the existing law and the Constitution. If temples are desecrated in Kashmir today they are being done by the anti-national secessionist forces who have rejected India's unity and Constitution. The Indian Government and the State deals with them accordingly as enemies of the country. The S.S., by equating itself with such anti-national secessionists only exposes itself as a political force whose character is no different. If this is their justification for destroying the Babri Masjid then they should also be dealt with like the anti-national secessionists are dealt with in Kashmir.
Further, the destruction of the Babri Masjid was not an isolated event confined to a communally sensitive locality. It was an event elevated to the national plane with kar sevaks mobilised from all over India. It symbolized the communalisation of Indian politics. Hence, the similar threats regarding Mathura and Varanasi, are part of anti-national activities not confined to any region or state but covering the country as a whole. (http://cpim.org/misc/1992_pseudo_hinduism_sry.htm)

Mr. Iasus: had Gandhi been alive, what would have been his reaction to the destruction of Babri Masjid? I am sure he would shun the "evil" justification you have given.

Iasus writes
"I wonder how seriously anything apparently reflective that film stars say is taken at face value!"

Indian actors are not "dumb-dolls" who were simply praising Mother Theresa. If it dose not take a "genius" to see if Mother Theresa was a "menace" don't you think they have the same intelligence like you to know who she is? What makes you think you are smarter than Indian film stars?

You see Iasus, when I first read your post you seemed to be a cognizant person who is doubting everything and in search of basic facts. But I was mistaken. All you want is how to bash and malign Christianity by what ever means you can. Whatever good Christians do is not good to you. It is not that difficult to play your dirty game you know. It is better if we respect each others opinion and try to have to have healthy arguments leaving aside old and cheap tricks, which you are using. It is possible to draw "fabricated" evil and conspiracy theories even out of great personalities like Gandhi, if one wants too, if one uses his mind cunningly. It is easy to draw evil out of "Mandela" if one knows how to use his mind shrewdly. It is that not difficult to play your game. As for showing how confused I'm (though you are the one who is very much confused and have judged me fast) I appreciate your correction, but it is not me, but you who is a confused soul. I will soon try to give you my responses for the other issues you have mentioned.

Don.
Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Response to Iasius by Don

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)