[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: HINDU HOLOCAUST DAY - August 14
-
Subject: Re: HINDU HOLOCAUST DAY - August 14
-
From: trivedi@curie.uchicago.edu (Anil Trivedi)
-
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 1995 09:39:01 GMT
-
Apparently-To: alt-hindu@ncar.ucar.edu
-
From news@bluebird.uchicago.edu Sat Aug 19 05: 30:52 1995
-
Newsgroups: alt.hindu
-
Organization: University of Chicago
-
References: <410sju$rns@babbage.ece.uc.edu>
-
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Mani Varadarajan <mani@srirangam.esd.sgi.com> wrote:
> I very severely object to this extreme politicization
> of this newsgroup in the name of religion. Such comments
> can do nothing but provoke anger and hatred and in no
> way promote an understanding of Hinduism as a religion.
>
> Such lack of moderation is appalling. I hope soc.religion.hinduism,
> which purportedly is Hinduism's "face" on the net, does not
> fall to such lows due to improper moderation.
For the record I would like to register my appreciation to the
moderators for accepting both of the articles in this thread: by
Rajiv as well as by Mani. I hope there will be more. This is a forum
for reflection and discussion, not for silencing sincere voices.
I reread Rajiv's post. While it is flowing with obvious and sincere
emotion, I could not fault it on facts. Bin Qasim *did* invade Sindh.
>From then on, the "bloody" or "glorious" (depending on your side)
sword wielded in the name of Islam *did* kill many Hindus. Gandhar
*did* use to be a Hindu area. Hindu Kush literally *does* mean
"slaughter of the Hindus". The 1947 partition *did* constitute a
victory for the Pakistan movement. And so on.
So, I don't believe that historical facts are in dispute. (Or if
they are, please do explain your perspective.)
If the article had said something abhorable like "all Muslims should
be killed", I would not only understand but also share your anger.
However, as far as I could tell, the article recommends *no* action
*whatsoever*; it openly says that a way to deal with the historic
and continuing Islamic aggression remains to be devised. In even
simpler words, it says that we have a mess on our hands: who in his
right mind can disagree with that?
Asking for a moment of silence in the memory of those killed may seem
dramatic to you but it is hardly something sinister to be upset about.
The article refers to India as "our Matrubhoomi, our Pitrubhumi,
our Punyabhoomi" and asks to "resolve to work hard to wipe off the
tears of our Mother Bharat". Again, you may not share the exact
emotion but I hope you can see that it is not the most evil call one
can encounter.
When I was learning about Islam or Judaism, it was not just a few
abstract principles which came my way, but a complex history including
conflicts, wars, and millenia old tales of martyrdom. Similarly,
I have every confidence that those who are genuinely interested in
"an understanding of Hinduism", as you put it, will be able to deal
with the facts of our history, as it has come to be. We cannot,
and fortunately need not, live paralyzed in fear of the "anger"
or "hatred" of those who might have no use for the truth or for our
perspective.
Hinduism's face has a mature and complex beauty. The articles that
we---Rajiv or you I---write here capture no more than a tiny pixel
of a great and enormous panorama. It is not the face; it is a fly's
view of a few molecules on the face! All reasonable and mature
people will already know this; your self-consciousness about what
kind of "face" we present is misplaced.
If you have something of your own to say about the history or about
how to resolve the problems history has thrust upon us, please do so;
I would very much like to hear your perspective.
Regards,
Anil
