SWOT analysis of RSS — Conclusions
Conclusion is tough when it comes to a vast multi-dimensional organisation like RSS which thrives on contradictions… but it has to be made here.
When Dr. Hedgewar launched RSS in 1925, it was planned in some gymnasiums and the anthem was Marati. However, as the organisation grew it needed full-timers and the moorings grew on Sanskrit as it was the consensus language.
The fact that the RSS is growing despite hiccups stands testimony to its birth on Vijayadashami. No amount of bans and character assassination bids could stop the growth of RSS — although it did lead to delay. It was Dr. Hedgewar’s vision that the organisation would be a success and Hindu Rashtra would be a reality when 0.5 percent of Indian villages and 1 percent of Indian cities were active swayamsewaks. Despite growth, that target has not yet been reached. But the RSS ideology has no opposition despite virulent propaganda by the media.
When Nehru thundered that he would crush the RSS, Golwalkar (the then RSS chief) had retored that the crushing mentality would be crushed. The same is true even now. The RSS model based on the ideology of Advaita is an unqualified success. There may be hiccups here and there….. but that would be cleared at the appropriate time.
Hindu Rashtra is a fact.. It is an idea whose time has come. It must be said that Rashtra is not necessarily a nation. It could even be a world. The RSS — despite its shortcomings — has been able to communicate the message of Hindutva to a large extent.
FIND THE SWOT ANALYSIS BELOW:
INTRODUCTION: http://greathindu.com/2010/01/the-swot-analysis-of-rss-today-my-new-book/
STRENGTHS http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-strenghts/
WEAKNESS http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-weakness/
OPPORTUNITIES http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-opportunities/
THREATS http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-threats/
CONCLUSION http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-conclusions/
Leave a Reply
1461 views, 6 so far
today |
-----Email: greathindu@in.com
Fascist Trends in Indian Media
January 30th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
I agree with deepak to a large extent, but i still have a few complaints against sangh,
[am a a swayamsewak, from last 16 yers & has done 2nd YR OTC, had participated in an ITC camp as Shkikshak, was in Anucharan for Na. Krishnappaji & Sarakaryavahakji during the Pratinidhi sabha, mangalore)
1. Sangh is and has always been regid and hesitant to changes. one small example being its ganavesh. common swayamsewaks have been insisting sangh to change it, since most of the swayamsewaks agree that it is outdated. Sangh hasn't even reviewed the purpose and intention behind making 'Chaddi' as Ganavesh, moreover, even the current Ganavesh has a british origin, and in fact Hedgewar had introduced a ganavesh similar to military and then had to change it according to government directions. The wide width of the chaddi was intended to be comfortable during the shakha, as there were no track suits available during that time...sangh should understand this.
2. Sangh hardly respects democratic principles within.. it seems to believe only in imposing it's opinion on the swayamsewaks, than hearing from them. (Just like Left parties) when you want to disagree about something stated by one of the prominent speakers during some discusion or boudhik, they immediately stop you from continueing that. (Own experience)
3. Many times, Sangh itself did not show respect to the great indian culture.
After the Orissa as well as Gujrat riots, I went through the sangh's resolutions passed in the pratinidhi sabha. but there was not even a single regret against the violance happened over there.., let us assume for a moment that Sangh or parivar has nothing to do with these incidents at al, and were the spontaneous acts following some other incidents that took place.
Let's assume that the nun who had been Gang raped by the rioters was involved in religious conversion, that too forcible religious conversion, but tell me deepak, which part of Indian Culture, Sanatana Samskruti or whatever says that you can Gangraping a woman for even the severest offences that she committed ??
There was not even a single regret/shock expressed against this incident, in the Resolution of RSS ABKM, held on 17, 18 & 19 Oct 2008...,
Interestingly, Sangh has passed pages of resolutions about dignity of women and incresing cases of attack against women, eve teasing etc... in its ABPS, held in the same year, March... !!! when i questioned the same with one of the prominent pracharaks, he had no answer for this !!
Here is the link for these two resolution, and anyone can acess the same, online..
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AeKOr6xAw-2oZGdqem1oa2RfNDEzZmZrOTZ4YzI&hl=en
Tell me one thing, do you feel that only Hindu women have the so called dignity that sangh believes in ??
in my opinion, even if we consider that the nun who was raped by rioters was the greatest threat to the hinduism or India and it's national heritage, culture and everything, Gang raping her was an insult to the very Sanatana dharma, which we owed to protect...
What do you say ? [you can chose to delete this post, since you might be in trouble for allowing this in your blog, as you are an employee of Sangh]
January 30th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-weakness/
you have spoken about some of the weaknesses in this article, but, they are probably the reasons for the weaknesses that i mentioned here..!!
January 30th, 2010 at 11:32 pm
Hello Blogger Friend,
Your excellent post has been back-linked in
hinduonline.blogspot.com/
- a blog for Daily Posts, News, Views Compilation by a Common Hindu
- Hindu Online.
January 31st, 2010 at 8:32 am
@ Pradeep Shenoy,
I am not an employee of the Sangh because legally the Sangh does not own anything.
Besides, I am a professional journalist. Nobody can silence me.
As regards the weakness that you mentioned, I don’t agree wtih you.
Rape rubs both ways. If Jehadis can rape our women, we can return the compliment.
I think u r highly influenced by the Gandhian bug.
January 31st, 2010 at 10:27 am
[...] CONCLUSION http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-conclusions/ Leave a Reply 136 views, 136 so far today | No Related Post [...]
January 31st, 2010 at 11:02 am
@ Pradeep Shenoy,
January 31st, 2010 at 11:05 am
@ Pradeep Shenoy,
January 31st, 2010 at 11:14 am
[...] CONCLUSION http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-conclusions/ Leave a Reply 176 views, 32 so far today | No Related Post [...]
January 31st, 2010 at 11:14 am
[...] CONCLUSION http://greathindu.com/2010/01/swot-analysis-of-rss-conclusions/ Leave a Reply 110 views, 34 so far today | No Related Post [...]
January 31st, 2010 at 8:58 pm
My friend Deepak Kamat , I fully agree with you, We need to retaliate , instead of laying down and accepting the rape.
January 31st, 2010 at 10:52 pm
Hi Deepak,
sorry, I am not aware whether you are an employee of sangh or not, but don’t tell me that sangh doesn’t own anything, if that is the case u r talking the Gandhian way…!!
Because i have been a part of Sangh for quite a long period, and still i am, and am proud to be so. but don’t even think that i believe in Gandhian way, but neither i believe in Jihadi way..I still trust and follow the DOCTORJI way…
If Jihadis do something and we retaliate by copying the same, why did we need an organisation like sangh ? we would have directly started a Hindu Jihadi Organisation..
Sangh d been banned so many times, but none of them could prevail, because Sangh believes in the law of this land, (though it hardly follows the democracy within)
Even after Nanavati comission held sangh guilty in Babri case, no government could dare to impose ban on sangh..because they know, that it would prove expensive…
Deepak, u seem to be more interested in branding people (As Gandhians or Traditionals, Secularists etc) than discussing the issues.
Sangh did fight for the survival of Hindutva, Hindu Culture etc etc.. but as you said, if we start retaliating like Jihadi’s we need to amend the very meaning & definition of Hindutva itself..!! given by Doctorji or Guruji…
it also seems that u haven’t even gone through the resolutions that i referred in my comment.
Many of our Sangh leaders give hours of boudhik about indian culture, dignity of women and so on, but…..
(I believe in sensorship to a reasonable extent, and you must be knowing about whom am i talking here, if not, ask anyone in mangalore, they will tell you…)
As i said, if we justify the gang raping of the nun, how could we oppose the Love Jihad ? where Hindu girls themselves have gone crazy about the muslim guys..
Throw the gandhism to arabian sea, but, why should we claim that we are the custodians of Hindu culture ? let’s openly say that we just want to kill the people belonging to other faiths, not to prevent hinduism, but just for destroying their culture…
February 1st, 2010 at 10:44 am
pradeep is another Taqqiya master.
February 1st, 2010 at 1:11 pm
The PRadeep Shenoy dogma
Dogma: Hi Deepak, sorry, I am not aware whether you are an employee of sangh or not, but don’t tell me that sangh doesn’t own anything, if that is the case u r talking the Gandhian way…!!
Reality: Then give me the balance sheet of RSS.
Dogma: Because i have been a part of Sangh for quite a long period, and still i am, and am proud to be so. but don’t even think that i believe in Gandhian way, but neither i believe in Jihadi way..I still trust and follow the DOCTORJI way…
Reality: Pray tell me what is Doctorji Way. Do you want to make RSS another cult like Prabhupad of Iskcon?
Dogma: If Jihadis do something and we retaliate by copying the same, why did we need an organisation like sangh ? we would have directly started a Hindu Jihadi Organisation..
Reality: If you had done it that way, there would have been no need for RSS birth in the first place. But you pray inside the room when the rape take place, that was the reason why Doctorji thought of organising Hindu society.
Dogma: Sangh d been banned so many times, but none of them could prevail, because Sangh believes in the law of this land, (though it hardly follows the democracy within)
Reality: You should have fought for it. Don’t you remember the Sangh line — Swayamewamrigandrita. You seem to fall short of the RSS line. The Sangh does not believe in democracy. it is very mufch in tune with Eka Chalaka Anuvrata philosophy.
Dogma: Even after Nanavati comission held sangh guilty in Babri case, no government could dare to impose ban on sangh..because they know, that it would prove expensive…
Reality: that’s my point.
Dogma: Deepak, u seem to be more interested in branding people (As Gandhians or Traditionals, Secularists etc) than discussing the issues.
Reality: I have deal with every issue in a proper manner. Tell me what I have avoided.
Dogma: Sangh did fight for the survival of Hindutva, Hindu Culture etc etc.. but as you said, if we start retaliating like Jihadi’s we need to amend the very meaning & definition of Hindutva itself..!! given by Doctorji or Guruji…
Reality: Hindutva is not a dogma. It is the freedom to practice your own faith or no faith. If somebody dares to attack us, we can pay back not just in one coin but in two coin. Two eye for an eye. A jaw for a tooth.
Dogma: it also seems that u haven’t even gone through the resolutions that i referred in my comment.
Reality: I am researching RSS. I had read the resolutions even before you gave it to me. Besides the rapes were not done by men in knicker. Rapes do take place everwhere. Keep your eyes wide open.. That is because sex is an existential attraction.
Dogma: Many of our Sangh leaders give hours of boudhik about indian culture, dignity of women and so on, but…..
Reality: Those baudhiks have no teeth… I have quoted it as RSS weakness. Read what I have written again.
Dogma; (I believe in sensorship to a reasonable extent, and you must be knowing about whom am i talking here, if not, ask anyone in mangalore, they will tell you…)
Reality: Why should I ask anyone. I have enough strength to stand by my own conviction. I don’t need others approval. Swayamewa Mrugendrata. FYI, I did not inform anyone while writing this book. I wrote this book because I felt writing it.
Dogma: As i said, if we justify the gang raping of the nun, how could we oppose the Love Jihad ? where Hindu girls themselves have gone crazy about the muslim guys..
Reality: Even I can get the Muslim or Christian girls crazy after me. For me, my manliness does not lie in the anklets of women and the foam of wine. if somebody dares to rape our women, I can return the favour too. What’s your problem.
Dogma: Throw the gandhism to arabian sea, but, why should we claim that we are the custodians of Hindu culture ?
Reality: Pray tell me what is Hindu culture. I have told you that we are peace-loving. That does not mean that we are wearing bangles.
Dogma: let’s openly say that we just want to kill the people belonging to other faiths, not to prevent hinduism, but just for destroying their culture…
Reality: Who is killing? It is the evangelists and jehadis who are doing so? You seem to be a sucker for pseudosecular media propaganda.
February 1st, 2010 at 2:54 pm
BE FOREWARNED!!
Deepak is going to be out of job.
ICJ says all porno sites should be banned, along with sites that contain offensive and hate speech. This post alone is enough to get it banned as it openly advocates raping women.
http://www.vamban.com/urgent-need-to-ban-porn-websites-chief-justice-of-india/
I have started to move the papers and if at least this article is not removed in two days times, things are going to change. Remember it is the pseudo-secs who hold the sway in this country and not the uncivilised, uncouthedm ugly thugs who openly instigage people to rape women!
So I ask you to remove this post if you want to save your as*
February 1st, 2010 at 3:03 pm
@ Najeeb,
First ban Sania Mirza for wearing mini-skirts. All your fatwas could not stop her from displaying her green underwears.
February 1st, 2010 at 4:38 pm
@ Pradeep Shenoy,
February 1st, 2010 at 6:49 pm
@Pradeep Shenoy – Perhaps you had better read some more history and the present of India before ranting here. A total of THREE countries have been carved out of India – Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh ; Hindus have been murdered and kicked out of the Kashmir valley ; the state of Nagaland is 95% Baptist christian and officially only 25,000 people have been killed in the Naga violence but nobody can give an accurate figure because nobody knows exactly how many small villages were in Nagaland to begin with ; the state of Mizoram is 87% christians, and recently these converted tribals displaced entire villages of Hindu Mizos for being Hindu. Read about the Mizo camps. Read about the forced conversions and killings going on in Tripura and Arunachal Pradesh. Read up about Aligarh, Muzaffarnagar, Muradabad, Hyderabad old city, Bhopal old city, and a thousand others to see how Hindus are living in their own homeland.
Come back and rant here then about a fictional rape. That one that you are talking about was actually committed by a brother of the church and the sister (nun) was offended because she was not raped by father (senior than brother in church hierarchy) and so went to the police.
Try and visit any missionary of charity orphanage and see the condition of the “rescued” children. They are slaves and do all the work and are also raped by the holy fathers. Google “Catholic priests rapes” and see what comes up. They rape everywhere – the last case was reported a few days ago in the U.S.
February 2nd, 2010 at 2:56 am
SECOND WARNING!
For the attention of everyone.
The cyber crime cell in Kerala, a bastion of leftists has started to trace IPs of all people, especially people like S and other bajrangdal monkeys who participate in this site.
There will be one more warning and by then the call to rape should be removed, ie should be removed.
February 2nd, 2010 at 6:02 am
“Perhaps you had better read some more history and the present of India before ranting here. A total of THREE countries have been carved out of India – Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh ;”
Who needs a lesson in history? Let us see.
There never existed a country called India with the said borders. Ironically the largest ever existed in known history is when Auragazeb ruled, throrugh numerous wars, of course.
At the time of Independence, there more than 400 over so called princely states. Each one in fact, had its own ruler, its own currency, its own military, and as usual waged numerous wars between them at every opportunity!
What happened was not a partition but a failure in unification of the different countries to form a single entity. The ideology – of calling fellow citizens to be raped, and with the benefit of hindsight we can say that, with such calls repeated many a times nowadays and incidents were these calls were implemented provides sufficient reason to conclude that the fears of the minority at that time that they will be victimised and brutalised if Hindutva forces snatch power were realistic- that drives numerous sites including this was partly responsible for that failure.
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:06 am
@ Najeeb,
It is Koran that needs to be banned.
It is Koran that exhorts its followers to convert, kill, rape / trouble to the maximum.
Anyway, here is the Kolkatta Koran petition. Koran is not meant for the modern age.
http://www.bharatvani.org/books/tcqp/
P.S: take your warning and shove it right up your ass from where it came. Threats from worms are dime a dozen.
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:07 am
As I said before Muzzis, Marxists and Missionaries are mental patients who need to be treated in mental asylums.
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:14 am
http://greathindu.com/2009/09/no-need-to-hate-muslims-christians-and-commies-they-are-mental-patients/?cp=2#comment-28245
February 3rd, 2010 at 1:57 pm
THis is in response to Ananth’s assertion for RSS to involve in Social Issues. Infact they are very deep into it. Who is running Ekal Vidyalays? Who is running Bharatiya Vidya Bhavans. Well we may not agree with political stand( Not totally) but you can not discount them as ragtag. They are one of the superior,disciplined social service organization. WE wish RSS can change thier political stand and we all can attend RSS Shakas and get some lessons on Discipline and Social work. IF my information is right, they run more than 30,000 schools across India much more than even Chirstain Missionaries( Who are also doing great work, but also blamed for conversion too like RSS’s communalism). Get little more information Mr. Ananth. Ofcourse RSS’s political stand is baggage of Partition and counter wieght to Muslim League and Jamath E Islam. Well, may be after 30-50 years, we can se RSS taking the place of Congress as Nationlist organization same manner as what was during partition. Congress may relegated to the third spot.”
GLY Mendon,Baltimore, USA.
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:22 pm
@najeeb.. There never existed a country called India with the said borders. Ironically the largest ever existed in known history is when Auragazeb ruled, throrugh numerous wars, of course.
What about Maurya and Gupta period, dear? Just google ‘the empire of Ashoka” and see the map during Ashok regime. It’s larger than current India.
It seems for Muslims, the history of India starts only with their barbaric Islamic ancestors, who killed and converted wherever they went and The world history starts with the arab terrosrist muhammad.
Come out of ur cult pre conditions and think for a while.
I am surprised seeing Muslims still today calling themselves Muslims and advance the cause of Islam. Truth is out my dear Muslim friends. Truth cannot be kept in dark for so long and you don’t have any other way to decieve us, now.
Faith freedom international and other ex muslims has shown to the world clealy through Islamic sources who is Muhammad and what is that sick ideology called Islam.
So, come out of Islam and embrace Humanity.
February 4th, 2010 at 8:42 am
Vijay,
I stand corrected. What I meant is recent history. Not ‘known histroy’
Emperor Ashoka’s empire was much bigger. But remember that “early part of Ashoka’s reign was apparently quite bloodthirsty” and thus he conquered the vast lands. Here is an excerpt from wiki on Kalinga war:
“The general and his forces were, however, completely routed through the skilled tact of Kalinga’s commander-in-chief. Ashoka, baffled at this defeat, attacked with the greatest invasion ever recorded in Indian history until then. Kalinga put up a stiff resistance, but they were no match for Ashoka’s brutal strength. The whole of Kalinga was plundered and destroyed. Ashoka’s later edicts state that about 100,000 people were killed on the Kalinga side and 10,000 from Ashoka’s army. Thousands of men and women were deported”
So it is not just the “barbaric Islamic ancestors, who killed”!!
And here is another here is another excerpt: “He embraced Buddhism from the prevalent Vedic tradition after witnessing the mass deaths of the war of Kalinga,”
And when we go further into history, we will see that there were other many expeditions too to unburden the mlechas from the face of bhumi devi. :
“Fourth century AD Sanskrit poet Kalidasa, credits Chandragupta Vikramaditya (aka Raghu) with having conquered about twenty one kingdoms, both in and outside India. After finishing his campaign in the East, South and West India, Raghu aka Vikramaditya (Chandragupta II) proceeded northwards, subjugated the Parasikas (Persians), then the Hunas and the Kambojas tribes located in the west and east Oxus valleys respectively. Thereafter, the glorious king proceeds across the Himalaya and reduced the Kinnaras, Kiratas etc and lands into India proper[4].
According to the Brihat-Katha-Manjari of the Kashmiri Pandit Kshmendra, king Vikramaditya (Chandragupta II) had “unburdened the sacred earth of the Barbarians like the Shakas, Mlecchas, Kambojas, Yavanas, Tusharas, Parasikas, Hunas, etc. by annihilating these sinful Mlecchas completely”[5][6][7]. “ (from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandragupta_II)
The Golden Age Emperors too engaged in mass killing of ‘mlechass’. They had been given no chance of conversion as they are mlechas and there is no way even thru conversion to make them to your same status of being a human, a bit different from those Islamic babarians!
It is worthwhile to quote from Ambedkar in this context”
“The Hindus criticise the Mohammedans for having spread their religion by the use of the sword. They also ridicule Christianity on the score of the inquisition. But really speaking who is better and more worthy of our respect—the Mohammedans and Christians who attempted to thrust down the throats of unwilling persons what they regarded as necessary for their salvation or the Hindu who would not spread the light, who would endeavour to keep others in darkness, who would not consent to share his intellectual and social inheritance with those who are ready and willing to make it a part of their own make-up ? I have no hesitation in saying that if the Mohammedan has been cruel the Hindu has been mean and meanness is worse than cruelty.
SECTION IX Annihilation of Caste. Vol-I, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writing and Speeches”
Unfortunately, it seems to me that this zeal to subhumanise others is still evident in many opinions and articles (including yours).
What I am saying is only this: Whether it is of vedantic, islamic or whatever, the histroy of mankind is rather disappointing.
February 4th, 2010 at 8:47 am
@ Najeeb,
The India that you are referring to is a political entity. India is a cultural entity. Cultural, India has been one. That’s what we call Hindu Rashtra.
February 4th, 2010 at 9:09 am
Just to add one more point:
it is not because of some special reasons or power that in the recent histroy, Aurangazeb became the ruler of vast land. It is just because he was zealous in conquering the lands.
Similarly, it is not because of some special ability that a muslim ruler had the biggest area under his reign in the recent history. It is just becaue muslims were the rulers in the recent past and they powerful.
February 4th, 2010 at 9:41 am
@ Najeeb,
Muslim rulers ruled not because of power but because they were merciless and did not folow any rules — thanks to Mohammed’s Taqia.
February 4th, 2010 at 9:43 am
“The India that you are referring to is a political entity. India is a cultural entity. Cultural, India has been one. That’s what we call Hindu Rashtra.”
I seriously doubt having a common culture will constitute a society! And of course the proposition of having the same culture can too be contested! Anyway, that is off the point of the current discussion.
The starting point of this thread was the arguement that three countries ie three different political entities were carved out of India. So where do u stand now? Since you are not talking about the political entity? Can I assume that you have no beef with the so called partition?
February 4th, 2010 at 9:47 am
The Najeeb dogma
Dogma: I seriously doubt having a common culture will constitute a society! And of course the proposition of having the same culture can too be contested
Realiyt: The common culture is Hindu — the search for truth and co-existence. That formed the bedrock of Hindu society.
Dogma: Anyway, that is off the point of the current discussion.
Reality: That is the only point of my discussion.
Dogma: The starting point of this thread was the arguement that three countries ie three different political entities were carved out of India.
Reality: Wrong again. Nation was divided because of Islamic fundamentalism.
Dogma: So where do u stand now? Since you are not talking about the political entity? Can I assume that you have no beef with the so called partition?
Reality: I believe in a Hindu world. You did not get the crux of the argument. Vasudaiva Kutumbakam — The world is one family. For that, intolerance of the Islamic and Abrahmic Christian variety should come to an end.
February 4th, 2010 at 10:14 am
“The common culture is Hindu — the search for truth and co-existence. That formed the bedrock of Hindu society”
Pls describe how an unequally graded ’society’ searched for truth and practised
co-existance. The society was stratifed in to water tight compartments and placed on above the other. There was not even healthy communication between different starta of the group of communities. (It cant be called a society)
“That is the only point of my discussion.”
If you look few posts behind, you will realise where I started.
“Wrong again. Nation was divided because of Islamic fundamentalism”
I have shown that before British it is the muslim rulers who held the major part of the coutry together. During British rule, it was divided into 400 over princely states. And thus there was never a division, only a failure in unification. Anyway, since you said it was not about political entity, then what is the issue? The same so called common culture can be practiced across the borders. As when an Indian is in a far away land, he or she can still practise his own culture, if he wishes to.
“Vasudaiva Kutumbakam”
I have shown many a times before that your preaching of Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is hogwash. Your current arguement of ending other ideology (why did you leave communism?) to practice vasudaiva kudumbagam shows that once again. To say that other ideologies must end to practise vasudaiva kudumbagam is itself denying the ‘crux’ of the principle of vasudaiva kudumbagam!
February 4th, 2010 at 10:26 am
“For that, intolerance of the Islamic and Abrahmic Christian variety should come to an end.”
For the intolerance, re-read the quote from Ambedkar in post # 25
February 4th, 2010 at 10:37 am
@ Najeeb,
Ambedkar was paid for it by the British.
Read Arun Shourie’s: Worshipping False Gods.
February 4th, 2010 at 10:43 am
“Ambedkar was paid for it by the British”
Did you see the cheque?
And I suppose that you agree with my other points in that post!
February 4th, 2010 at 10:45 am
The Najeeb dogma
Dogma: Pls describe how an unequally graded ’society’ searched for truth and practised
co-existance. The society was stratifed in to water tight compartments and placed on above the other. There was not even healthy communication between different starta of the group of communities. (It cant be called a society)
Reality: Varna is by merit not by birth. Read the Shanti Parvah.
Dogma: “Anyway, since you said it was not about political entity, then what is the issue? The same so called common culture can be practiced across the borders. As when an Indian is in a far away land, he or she can still practise his own culture, if he wishes to.
Reaity: Therre is no equalty in Islam. It is either either/or intolerance. If you want to practice Taqia, it is upto you.
Dogma: I have shown many a times before that your preaching of Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is hogwash. Your current arguement of ending other ideology (why did you leave communism?) to practice vasudaiva kudumbagam shows that once again. To say that other ideologies must end to practise vasudaiva kudumbagam is itself denying the ‘crux’ of the principle of vasudaiva kudumbagam!
Reality: How can you tolerate people who are intolerant. How can we tolerate people who say that either you should ” kill or convert”. Either you have not read the Koran. Or you ar practising the Taqia. Hinduism is the freedom to follow
February 4th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Somehow I have been reminded of the last sloka of Gita:
“Yatra Yogeshawara Krishno Yatra ….
Where man is with God, there he reaches the self realisation. Think if this site is such a one.
February 4th, 2010 at 11:28 am
“Varna is by merit not by birth. Read the Shanti Parvah”
Go to society, instead of reading books and see how they lived and how they live. One example is that of ex-president KR Narayanan. He was denied the lecturer post because of his ‘low caste’, though he go a rank in his graduation. He then demanded an audience with the Maharaja of erstwhile Travancore. But Maharaja refused to see the man, who is to become the President of India later, because of his low caste origin.
This low caste man indeed became President. That shows Hindus are open to change and reforms.
Yes, things are different now and not as bad as it was, due to modern educated people like Ambedkar who you accuse of being paid by British and by Shourie as a false god. And it should not be forgotten that there are still many reports of caste discrimination such as denying water from the public well or entry to a temple in many parts of the country.
There are strict laws to ensure that it does not happen and most of the Hindus support it.
But we are talking about the a culture that is ’sanatana’ where everything purpotedly existed so nicely. I am merely showing it was not.
It is thanks largely to Muslim and British rule which emasculated and impoverished India.
“Therre is no equalty in Islam. It is either either/or intolerance. If you want to practice Taqia, it is upto you.”
Not in ancient India too. I wrote before about it, citing examples like Rama killing Shambuga, Shankaracharya asking the chandala to move away for him to walk, the treatment of Karana in Hastinapura etc.
All these are not supported and in fact condemned. Rama killed Brahmin Ravana too. Does that make him anti-Brahmin. Besides, he killed Shambuka not because he was low caste but because breached spiritual etiquettes. Anyway, Hindus are not enjoined to kill low caste people because Hinduism is freedom of faith and action.
“How can you tolerate people who are intolerant. How can we tolerate people who say that either you should ” kill or convert”. Either you have not read the Koran. Or you ar practising the Taqia. Hinduism is the freedom to follow”
That is why i have said that you have not understood the ‘crux’ of the principle. If you wait until everything is as you like to start to practice it, then what is the point of that principle itself? If only there is all kinds, all variations, then only seeing everyone as one holds any usefulness or validity. So either discard the concept of Vasudaiva…. or practise it.
It is upto you to discard Koran and practise Vasudaiva Kutumbakam.
Furthermore, there is one shloka, if i am not mistaken in Gita, that says everyone, tolerant, intolerant etc etc is from Him. Do you deny that too ?
As a Hindu I am free to reject/accept anything and everything. tHAT IS THE BEAUTY OF HINDUISM.
Again, how is ur attitude different from say that of Islamists or christian evangelists? They too, allegdly, want everyone to convert to their own ideology. You too want other to disappear (you have not spelt out how) to practise your idea of Vasudaiva kudumbagam.
Vasudaiva Kutumbukam is about tolerance and love unlike Islam which believes in extermination of all those who are against it.
There is one difference of course between your stand and theirs, though. They are doing that, supposedly for the salvation of whom they try to convert. But in your case you want it to be so just because then you can start to practice your own idea of Vasudaiva kudumbagam. This is not much different from Samudragupta’s expedition to unburden earth from mlechaas. And that is why the ‘British paid’ Ambedkar said that meannes is worse than cruelty.
Unlimited perversion from your side. I never said that.
The sad part is that in future, even after centuries, people most probably will still come to the conclusion that the history of mankind is disappointing.
Peace reigned in India until Islam came. That is a harsh fact approved even by Swami Vivekananda.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
I replied to Najeeb in his own post (previous). The Italicised part is mine.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:20 pm
You should not have edited my post to put your comments.
And as for your comments, it is nothing more than reactionary and jugglery.
Just one example:
in post#30: “Reality: I believe in a Hindu world. You did not get the crux of the argument. Vasudaiva Kutumbakam — The world is one family. For that, intolerance of the Islamic and Abrahmic Christian variety should come to an end.” (emphasise mine)
Me wrote: There is one difference of course between your stand and theirs, though. They are doing that, supposedly for the salvation of whom they try to convert. But in your case you want it to be so just because then you can start to practice your own idea of Vasudaiva kudumbagam. This is not much different from Samudragupta’s expedition to unburden earth from mlechaas. And that is why the ‘British paid’ Ambedkar said that meannes is worse than cruelty
He wrote in reaction to the above:
“Unlimited perversion from your side. I never said that.“
February 4th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
@ Najeeb,
It was an experiment that failed.
Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is not similar to Al-Islam.
Al-Islam is intolerant. Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is tolerant.
Still didn’t get my message.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Vasudaiva Kutumbukam belives in live and let-live unlike Al-Islam which believes in convert or kill.
So though there are similarities in the idea, it is as different as chalk and cheese.
February 4th, 2010 at 12:28 pm
“Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is not similar to Al-Islam.
Al-Islam is intolerant. Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is tolerant.
Still didn’t get my message.”
I wanted to stop with the above comment for the day. But just one more:
First try to understand and practice what you preach. Then take it in to your heart and yjrn every cell in your body should emit elements of the principle in which you belive, you believe. Then start to learn other idoelogies.
Bye!
February 4th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
@ Najeeb,
Vasudaiva Kutumbakam is not a belief… but a result of thehealthy mind.
February 5th, 2010 at 10:28 am
“Besides, he killed Shambuka not because he was low caste but because breached spiritual etiquettes. Anyway, Hindus are not enjoined to kill low caste people because Hinduism is freedom of faith and action.”
Hahaha.
Let us examine this and try to reach some conclusion.
Lord Rama killed Shambuga because he did not observe certain etiquettes, though he failed to mention the details that could cost one his life. It would have been better if he had spoken it out, so that people can be careful.
Anyway he was murdered for not following some aspects of something called spiritual etiquette by such a stalwart as Rama. Doesnt that make the claim of freedom of faith and action a bogus one?
Another possibility is that Rama, the student in Yoga Vasishta, was not aware of this beauty. Is that acceptable?
Third possibility is that Rama was not a Hindu but of intolerant Abrahmic tradition and that is why he killed Shambuga, is that acceptable?
February 5th, 2010 at 10:46 am
The Najeeb dogma
Dogma: Let us examine this and try to reach some conclusion.
Reality: Hinduism is not about conclusion. It is a way of life — ever evolving.
Dogma: Lord Rama killed Shambuga because he did not observe certain etiquettes, though he failed to mention the details that could cost one his life. It would have been better if he had spoken it out, so that people can be careful.
Reality: The joke is on you. You mentioned the killing without the cause. Selective quotations are dangerous indeed.
Dogma: Anyway he was murdered for not following some aspects of something called spiritual etiquette by such a stalwart as Rama. Doesnt that make the claim of freedom of faith and action a bogus one?
Reality: You don’t even know why he killed Shambuka. So you are speaking without any authenticity. Just because Ram jumped into the well does not mean that I too jump into the well. Ram is not the Mohammed of Hinduism.
Dogma: Another possibility is that Rama, the student in Yoga Vasishta, was not aware of this beauty. Is that acceptable?
Reality: It is not acceptable but debatable.
Dogma: Third possibility is that Rama was not a Hindu but of intolerant Abrahmic tradition and that is why he killed Shambuga, is that acceptable?
Reality: Not acceptable but debatable.
Advice to Najeeb: Read the entire Ramayana rather than do odd speculations in half-baked knowledge.
February 5th, 2010 at 11:26 am
“Reality: Hinduism is not about conclusion. It is a way of life — ever evolving.”
I am discussing ur point, ur ability to represent Hinduism. About Hinduism, I will discuss it with others, not with you. I am not insane to do that with you, dude!
“The joke is on you. You mentioned the killing without the cause. Selective quotations are dangerous indeed.”
deceitful. I did mention the cause, at least alluded to. You brought up another reason and contradicted it in the next sentence! Let others decide who is the joker.
“Reality: You don’t even know why he killed Shambuka. So you are speaking without any authenticity. Just because Ram jumped into the well does not mean that I too jump into the well. Ram is not the Mohammed of Hinduism.”
Refer the answer above. The reason I knew is from what i read and I mentioned it. But you had another reason, breaching some etiquetts. Check it out in post #37. Then you said the beauty of Hinduism is freedom of action and faith. Just opposite to what you wrote seconds earlier.
Thanks for the advice. I am not making any speculation on Ramayana. As I mentioned before, I will discuss about Ramayana with others. What I am saying is that you are only after cheap fame and some political mileage if you are in a political party. That is fine with me, but in the process you will play your part, however small it is, to destroy the country and subject people to untold suffering.
February 5th, 2010 at 11:34 am
The Najeeb dogma
Dogma: I am discussing ur point, ur ability to represent Hinduism. About Hinduism, I will discuss it with others, not with you. I am not insane to do that with you, dude!
Reality: I am not representing Hinduism. Hinduism needs no representation. However, your agenda is obvious — character assassination.
Dogma: deceitful. I did mention the cause, at least alluded to. You brought up another reason and contradicted it in the next sentence! Let others decide who is the joker.
Reality: You tried to allude that Hindus are jehadis just because Ram killed a low caste without mentioningn that Ram killed an high caste too. So it is you who leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
Dogma: “Refer the answer above. The reason I knew is from what i read and I mentioned it. But you had another reason, breaching some etiquetts. Check it out in post #37. Then you said the beauty of Hinduism is freedom of action and faith. Just opposite to what you wrote seconds earlier.
Reality: That means you speak without knowing the whole thing. Alexander Pope said, : Little learning is a dangerous thing. Very dangerous, Mr. Najeeb. Your little knowledge.
DogmaL Thanks for the advice. I am not making any speculation on Ramayana. As I mentioned before, I will discuss about Ramayana with others. What I am saying is that you are only after cheap fame and some political mileage if you are in a political party. That is fine with me, but in the process you will play your part, however small it is, to destroy the country and subject people to untold suffering.
Reality: Now you are assuming things. Act on my advise. Read the entire Ramayana and get back to me.
February 5th, 2010 at 11:34 am
I asked the question if Rama was not Hindu at the context of the writer’s remark. Not from any other conext.
One has to take a consistant stand, not move from one to another and say that consistancy is the hallmark of fundamentalism and cite Emrson, HG Wells and dont know who! This person doesnt seem to have grapsed the idea of Gyana Vairagya.
What is necessary is to go where the evidence leads you, as Socrates said, instead get stuck somwhere. But that does not mean you can swing like pendulam and react to each sentence. That is called reactionary.
Bye!
February 5th, 2010 at 11:38 am
Answer to Najeeb
Question: I asked the question if Rama was not Hindu at the context of the writer’s remark. Not from any other conext.
Reality: Yes, he was.
Question: One has to take a consistant stand, not move from one to another and say that consistancy is the hallmark of fundamentalism and cite Emrson, HG Wells and dont know who! This person doesnt seem to have grapsed the idea of Gyana Vairagya.
Reality: Life is oncistently inconsistent. It is not black and white. It is multicolour. Regarding the idea of Gyana viaragya. The otehr is equally true. That of Bhakti Rasa.
Dogma: What is necessary is to go where the evidence leads you, as Socrates said, instead get stuck somwhere. But that does not mean you can swing like pendulam and react to each sentence. That is called reactionary.
Reality: There is no evidence for everything. Life is not about evidence. Life is about just living. I did not react. I just replied to your questions.
February 5th, 2010 at 11:42 am
“You tried to allude that Hindus are jehadis just because Ram killed a low caste without mentioningn that Ram killed an high caste too. So it is you who leaves a bad taste in the mouth.”
Wrong again. What I said is that many Hindus did behave as what Ambedkar described, not sharing the light. And experienced by millions of others. That is it.