Page views

Ananda Marga Forum

All the letters on this blog are directly related with the teachings of Shrii Shrii Anandamurti ji Baba.To communicate with the editors of this forum or receive postings of this blog, email us at:



Just a reminder to be sure to subscribe to our two new blogsites:

For latest news click here Ananda Marga Universal

For latest news click here Ananda Marga News Bulletin

Or email us at:

And we will be sure to add you to the list.

In Him,


Communal Thing in Name of Prout

To: AM-GLOBAL From: Foster Davis Subject: Communal Thing in Name of Prout Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 22:42:36 -0400 Baba "Ga'n sedhe ja'i toma'r tare, shun'abe tumi e a'sha'te..." (PS 4799) Purport: Baba, You are ever resplendent. On this moonlit night by Your grace I have lit the lamp of devotion and am sitting here surrounded by the vast darkness of my reactive momenta (samskaras). Baba, in this situation I am practicing Prabhat Samgiita, again and again-- to please You. Baba, I sing on and on with this hope: That You will grace me by listening. Baba, theoretically I know that You are with me always and that You are my my eternal Sakha'*, but still I wonder what type of relation is this of ours. Baba, You never spend time with me, & You never speak with me. Just You keep me all alone. And in that desperate state I become totally dry inside and I think that without You my entire life is like the burning desert, with no relief in sight. Baba, without You by my side, in Your absence, I am totally miserable. Baba, please grace me by coming. O' my dearest One, please give me a sign that You are listening to the calling of my heart. Baba, please come and tell me whether You are listening or not. After that, You are free to go wherever You like. O' my dearmost Baba, please be gracious and shower Your sweet smile directly in my mind so that it makes a permanently blissful impression-- imprinted forever in my memory-- like wonderful colours and decoration of alpana'. Baba, please be ever-gracious and reside always in my mental abode-- up till eternity... * Sakha'= Baba says, "'Samapra'n'a'h sakha' smrtah'. Where love and devotion are so overwhelming that it appears as if there is only one entity in two bodies, such a pair of persons is known as 'sakha''. The bhakta, the devotee, is the sakha of Parama Purus'a, because the bhakta can never think of himself as a separate entity from Him. Here he altogether forgets that he is separated from God. That is why Parama Purus'a is also a sakha' to His bhaktas and the bhakta is the sakha' of Parama Purus'a." (AV-6)
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:
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.
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.
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 says, " 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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.

Policy on Comments

Spam and unparliamentary language not to be used.

folders: Ananda Marga related articles on hundreds of niche issues


To receive postings of this blog, email us at:

Baba nam kevalam