== COMMUNAL THING IN NAME OF PROUT ==
Namaskar,
This is in follow-up to an earlier letter, 'Like Blind Man & Elephant
Story', which discusses the Gujurat Riots of 2002. Unfortunately, still
one controversial article is listed on the Proutworld website that
misrepresents Prout's view on this subject.
To read the initial letter on this issue, please visit:
http://am-global-01.blogspot.com/2008/09/like-blind-man-elephant-story.html
PROUT'S STANCE:
AN IMPARTIAL VIEW OF HUMANITY
Everyone knows that Prout and communalism are worlds apart. Our Prout
philosophy never favours one group over another; neither in the cultural
sphere, nor in the linguistic, religious, or racial spheres. Prout takes
an impartial view towards the whole of human history.
Thus recently, when one sincere margii writer makes Prout's perspective
synonymous with the Muslim condition in India, then there is cause for
concern. Especially when that article is posted on a Prout website for
the entire world to read and review. People new to Prout will think that
Prout is pro-Muslim by reading that article.
When in fact, Prout is neither pro-Muslim nor pro-Hindu. We favour
neither communal group, but instead aim for social justice and a fair
portrayal of the Muslim-Hindu experience in India.
IN THE NAME OF PROUT, CANNOT SUPPORT MUSLIMS
To outrightly claim that the Hindus were the culprits and sole
perpetrators in the 2002 Gujurat riots, without referencing the
historical context, is to take a one-sided view of an issue. There are
decades and centuries of instances of mutual fighting between Muslims
and Hindus. Furthermore, from an objective, historical perspective, it
is not unfair to say that the Muslims are the clear-cut aggressors in
most instances. That is Baba's view.
Baba says, "It is no use denying the fact that the victorious Muslim
nation played the role of oppressor and did much injustice to the
inhabitants of India." (TTP)
Thus there is a definite trail of deliberate and overt Muslim aggression
in India.
And indeed still today, Muslims are lashing out and violently attacking
Hindus. Just days ago a series of 5 bombs exploded in New Delhi killing
and injuring hundreds; a Muslim group, the Mujahideen, is taking credit
for the bombings.
So when one margii writer does extensive research and posts an
intellectual work on how Muslims have been wronged in the 2002 Gujurat
riots, without examining past or present events, then that is clearly a
case of academic negligence, whether done consciously or not. The affair
is a most serious issue for us when the article claims to be
representing Prout. Then it is no longer a personal affair, but a case
of publicly misrepresenting our social philosophy.
STEPS MUST BE TAKEN
Swift steps should be taken to have such an article, 'Facing
Fundamentalism in the Wake of the Gujurat Genocide', removed from the
ProutWorld website. That is what we request: It is unjust to include an
article, which subscribes to communalism, on the Prout website.
Actually, one of the main contributors and top-post holders in Prout has
clearly neatly described the Muslim condition:
"The narrow, dogmatic character of Islamic religion is a stumbling block
to social synthesis. Whether on the Indian subcontinent, in the Middle
East, the Philippines or the Balkan states, the Islamic community is at
daggers drawn with the other religious communities." ('The Historical
Need for Prout')
Thus it is surprising that he and his colleagues who administer the
ProutWorld website would have accepted an article like, 'Facing
Fundamentalism in the Wake of the Gujurat Genocide', which clearly is
partial to the Muslim cause.
As we all wish to see Prout represented in a just and proper manner,
best will be to have the aforesaid article removed from the Prout
website. The author need not be blamed or reprimanded in any way as
their intentions were sincere. But when the article makes the case of
communalism, then there is no scope for it to be published in the name
of Prout.
BABA'S BLESSING
Baba says, "PROUT...work(s) to enhance the all-round welfare of the
people in their respective areas and unite humanity on a common
ideological base. The interests of all local people will be guaranteed
and gain proper recognition." ((PNS-13)
Namaskar,
Purusottama
MORE ON THE HISTORY OF MUSLIMS IN INDIA
Here are Baba's teachings which clearly show the aggressive role Muslims
have taken in India. And this entire history must be considered when
evaluating the Muslim-Hindu relationship. It is unjust to look at an
afternoon's events or even that of a month, and then claim that to be an
accurate picture.
The following is from the initial posting on this topic by the margii
who wrote on 7 September.
SOME OF THE HISTORY INVOLVED
Here is a rough outline of the historical trends of Hindu-Muslim
relations, because there is indeed an involved history and no single
incident can stand alone in a vacuum.
First, India is the homeland of Hindus, as the Muslim invaders came from
outside territories. Perhaps the first Muslim brigade to enter India was
that of Genghis Khan, in the 12th century. It was well-known that the
ruthless Genghis Khan pillaged, stole, raped, and murdered his way
across the Asian continent, including India-- only to leave the area and
then return and do it all over again.
Baba says, "History does provide some examples of benign, enlightened
kings such as Ashok the Great and Alfred the Great who did some good for
society, but they are few in number. Most were warmongers, such as
Genghis Khan. They were so cruel that they stained the green earth under
their feet with blood, and caused the sky to resound with the wails and
tears of their innocent victims." (APH-4)
Tragically, the Moghul King Genghis Khan set an abominable and gory tone
for Hindu-Muslim relations. During his time, and in his wake, so many
gruesome events occurred.
In addition, in that Hindu homeland of India, the Muslims went about
capturing so many Hindu temples that were full of gold and jewels and
converted them into Islamic mosques. Included in these episodes is the
ruination of the Lord Krsna Somnath temple. This is all part of the
well-known history, one which Hindus cannot forget.
SOME OF THE HISTORY INVOLVED (PART 2)
This is not to say the no Hindu ever killed a Muslim during the Genghis
Khan era, or during the subsequent Moghul rule. But neither can we rule
out the fact that the Muslims were the invaders and the aggressors.
Baba says, "It is no use denying the fact that the victorious Muslim
nation played the role of oppressor and did much injustice to the
inhabitants of India...The oppression and injustice done by the Muslims
made the non-Muslims unite anew an anti-Muslim sentiment grew among
them." (TTP)
Baba says, "the victorious Muslims with the vanquished Hindus." (TTP)
So the very mode of the aggressive Muslim presence in India created a
backlash amongst non-Muslims. The reaction against Muslims by the native
Hindus did not start unprovoked, rather it was done in self-defence lest
they be wiped out entirely. That is also Baba's teaching.
Thus from one Muslim King to another, there were varying fluctuations of
intense fighting and bloodshed. This cannot be denied. Plus, it was the
Muslims who came from outlying areas to occupy the Hindu homeland.
These are the facts of history.
All of this must be taken into account when making an informed judgment
about the 2002 riots in Gujurat. Because every incident is part of a
greater cultural and historical context.
SOME OF THE HISTORY INVOLVED (PART 3)
As we move closer to the present day, one obvious event that cannot be
overlooked is the division of India. No doubt the division, or
trifurcation of India, was incited by the British, but at the same time
both Muslim and Hindu leaders wanted to come into power. And it was also
for this reason that India got divided.
In this 1947 debacle, there occurred the massive spilling of blood and
arguably the largest human migration in the history of the world.
Muslims and Hindus were killing each other in the streets.
But it cannot be overlooked that it was the Muslims who were eager to
divide India.
Baba says, "They [the Britishers] infused in the Muslims the idea that
the Hindus formed the majority, and that therefore if the British quit
India the government would naturally go into the hands of the Hindus,
and the Muslims of the whole of India would remain as their subjects.
This shrewd policy yielded good results. A Hindu phobia grew among the
Muslims. The Muslim leaders began to propagate this Hindu phobia at the
top of their voices, and as a result of this anti-Hindu sentiment
created out of Hindu phobia, a Muslim nation was again born in India in
this twentieth century. Directed by this Hindu phobia, they demanded a
separate homeland for the Muslim nation." (TTP)
In the aftermath of division, Pakistan became a Muslim state where
Hindus were not welcomed, but rather persecuted. Indeed, Hindus have
been ruthlessly tortured in Pakistan. That is why, today, only 1% of the
entire country of Pakistan is Hindu.
Yet to appease the Muslim community, one so-called leader of the day
convinced the newly formed Indian government to make a deal.
Baba says, "Mahatma Gandhi should not have pressed one government
[India] to pay fifty crores of rupees [entire government revenue] to
another government [Pakistan] against the interests and sentiments of
the people of that country [India]." (PNS-4)
Here again, Baba's ideal is that both communities suffered greatly in
the ordeal of the break-up of India, then why should it have fallen upon
Hindus to make such an offer to Muslims, when it was the Muslims who
wanted division.
MUSLIM LIFE IN INDIA AND THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION
In contrast to the poor treatment of Hindus in Pakistan, Muslims are a
thriving population in India such that India is the third-largest Muslim
country in the world. Furthermore, India became a secular state, not a
Hindu one, and Gandhiji made another grave error in granting special
rights to Muslims in the Indian constitution, in his foolish attempt to
appease them.
Ever since, so many Indian politicians have continued to grant special
rights to Muslims in order to garner the Muslim vote. Hence it has
become a political ploy that invariably angers many Hindus.
Thus, Muslims live by a different set of laws in India than Hindus do.
That is another source of angst for Hindus.
For example, only Muslims are allowed multiple wives, only Muslims may
divorce at will, and only Muslims have special privileges in Kashmir
even though this was traditionally a Hindu region.
Baba says, "There was hardly any communalism in Kashmir where Muslims
lived under the Hindu Raj." (PNS-18)
All of this despite the fact that the Muslim way of living goes against
cardinal human values, such as their treatment of women. Indeed, Baba
says that we must never accept those religious doctrines, such as the
Islamic code, which overstep cardinal human principles.
MORE ABOUT THE MUSLIM POPULATION IN INDIA
Because of their having multiple wives, the Muslim population in India
is growing more and more, literally scaring Hindus into thinking that
one day they will be swallowed up in their own homeland. That is why
Baba says that the constitution of any nation must grant equal rights to
all-- not special rights to any group. If special rights are granted, as
has been wrongly done in India, then peace can never prevail. Rather
there will be resentment and fury.
The above then needs to be considered when making judgments regarding
Hindu-Muslim relations.
Here the point is not that Hindus have never done any wrong-- they have;
rather the larger issue is that there are many layers to this problem.
That is what we must always remember. And these need to be kept in view
if we are going to come up with a just, Proutistic analysis.
****************************************
Dangerous Yoga
Baba says, "Suppose, one is a great Yogii but if there is no love for
his goal, then those suspended propensities will finally be converted
into crude matter. That is, the subtle human existence becomes like
iron; it becomes like wood; it becomes like sand. What a deterioration!
What a downfall! This particular type of yoga where a yogii does not
bear love for the Supreme Entity is called 'Hatha Yoga' in Samskrta. It
is dangerous for human elevation." (AV-2, p.18)
Note: Nowadays, especially in European countries, in the name of
teaching yoga certain pseudo-yoga-businessmen are busy selling their
useless and dirty things to the common public by opening various yoga
and meditation centres. But in those places citing the God's name is
untouchable. And not only that but they teach all kinds of fake lessons
such as misguided pranayama and self-invented asanas etc. But when the
Goal is not Parama Purusa then that ultimately brings terrible
degeneration. Neither is the unassuming public aware nor are these
culprits aware what hell they are bringing upon innocent people. It is
our duty as far as possible to warn everyone for their welfare.
******************************************
