> Yes,
>
> I really dont want confrontation. I want only peace and
> communal harmonry
> where i live. I dont want to fight over religious issues.
> Simultaneously, I
> also don't want any organisation that spreads hatred
> between communities be
> it RSS or Al Qaeda. I dont want both of them because they
> are identical
> and fanatical elements provoking their respective religious
> sentiments creating a wall between the two religious
> community.
>
> After all, what do you expect from a muslim community
> Deobandis, they are
> from muslim community and it was rarest of the moment for
> them to denounce
> terrorism stronglly from Hyderabad. Can you take that
> step....
>
>
> chandan
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Aman Kumar Singh
> <
amanksr@rediffmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi Chandan,
> >
> > I think you are also the part of same group of people
> who says world should
> > have only one religion that is Islam, and RSS is one
> organization which is
> > opposing that and by removing RSS you can avoid
> confrontation with them and
> > there will be peace in this country. What a logic
> !!!!!!, I am sure you
> > are one of those people who says Karkare was killed by
> Hindu's and Mumbai
> > attack was done my RSS, Mosad and CIA.
> >
> >
> > I am pretty sure your mind has been poisoned beyond
> repair to understand
> > what is RSS. I can pray and pitty on you.
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Aman Singh
> >
> > On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 16:26:57 +0530
>
BIHARTODAY@googlegroups.com wrote
> > Trust me, peace will prevail and there would be no
> problem in the country
> > without RSS.
> >
> > Just try it once..
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Manoj Padhi wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mr. Mishra:
> >
> > Thanks for your response....
> >
> > Please read this review.. - It may change your mind...
> >
> > Other readers may comment.. as we are taking about
> History..
> >
> > BTW: I am not anti-Muslim but I don't like Muslim
> activists to cry wolf or
> > cry foul and invoke their special VVIP status by
> putting political pressure.
> > I admire true Secular Muslim leaders like Mr. Arif
> Mohammad Khan, who quit
> > Rajiv Gandhi's cabinet after he overturned a
> Supreme Court Judgment. I
> > believe that another gullible leader Mr.
> Antuley's job is in danger because
> > he believed inMr. Amresh Mishra's 4AM Mossad
> Theory .
> >
> >
> > But, when there is a desperate need to fight terror by
> a strong law, Muslim
> > organizations creating all kind of trouble.. [ UAPA
> May Be Misused Like
> > POTA: Jama'at-e-Islami Hind ] . This law is
> equally applicable across all
> > religions and if one religion outnumber other
> religions, why the law makers
> > need to be worried about this. i.e. if
> Jama'at-e-Islami Hind is so
> > concerned that Maximum terror attacks will be by
> Muslims, they should
> > modernize their Madarssa curriculum and exclude Jihad
> from it.
> >
> >
> > Here you go..
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > Manoj Padhi
> >
> >
> > TERRIFYING VISION: M.S. GOLWALKAR, THE RSS AND INDIA -
> A review by
> > Sudheendra Kulkarni
> >
> > Published in the monthly journal 'SEMINAR' ;
> May 2007
> > (
http://www.india-seminar.com)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 'HITLER OF THE HINDUTVA BRIGADE'
> > An Imagined and Demonised Portrait of 'Guruji'
> Golwalkar
> >
> >
> >
> > A Review Article by Sudheendra Kulkarni
> > Priya Bandhu,
> >
> > I am pleased to send you my lengthy review of the
> latest Penguin book on
> > 'Guruji' Golwalkar, the second and the
> longest-serving chief of the RSS.
> > Authored by Shri Jyotirmaya Sharma, it is titled
> TERRIFYING VISION: M.S.
> > GOLWALKAR, THE RSS AND INDIA. The review has been
> published in the latest
> > (May 2007) issue of SEMINAR journal.
> >
> >
> > You will see that my review is quite different from
> the predictably
> > positive appreciation of the book in most newspapers
> and magazines in India.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Sudheendra Kulkarni
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > TERRIFYING VISION: M.S. Golwalkar, The RSS and India.
> Author: Jyotirmaya
> > Sharma. Publisher: Penguin Viking (2007). Pages: 175.
> Price: Rs. 295
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > First, a relevant anecdote. Atal Bihari Vajpayee,
> India's former Prime
> > Minister, almost never used to sit on a chair when he
> was in the presence of
> > 'Guruji' Golwalkar in a room. He would make it
> a point to sit on the floor
> > as a mark of respect for someone he considered
> "saintly". In fact, in his
> > homage to the second and longest-serving
> Sarsanghchalak of the Rashtriya
> > Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), when the latter passed away
> in Nagpur on 6 June
> > 1973, Vajpayee wrote that he had an 'ichha
> mrityu' – that is, 'Guruji', who
> > was suffering from cancer, knew when he was going to
> die and had prepared
> > himself to welcome death. It is a rare ability
> acquired only by those with
> > lifelong ascetic practices.
> >
> >
> >
> > Jyotirmaya Sharma, who has written a highly, but
> unconvincingly, critical
> > ideological biography of the most important figure in
> the history of the RSS
> > (Terrifying Vision: M.S. Golwalkar, The RSS and
> India), does refer to
> > Golwalkar's spiritual orientation early in life.
> In 1936, he suddenly
> > abandoned his organizational responsibilities in
> Nagpur and went to his guru
> > Swami Akhandananda, who founded the Ramakrishna
> Mission Ashram in West
> > Bengal. "He went without telling anyone",
> not even Dr. Keshav B. Hedgewar,
> > founder of the RSS and one who, after four years,
> would anoint Golwalkar as
> > his successor at age 34. Had Swamiji not passed away
> within a month of
> > giving deeksha (spiritual initiation) to his disciple
> in early 1937,
> > Golwalkar would perhaps have chosen the life of a
> sanyasi.
> >
> >
> >
> > A "Fuhrer" who was not interested in
> politics or power
> >
> >
> > Because of his strong spiritual leanings, politics and
> political power did
> > not find a central place in Golwalkar's scheme of
> things for the RSS. Sharma
> > acknowledges this in his book. "In
> Golwalkar's mental universe," he writes,
> > "there are two permanent enemies, the Muslims and
> politics." I shall, later
> > in this article, show how the author grossly
> misrepresents Golwalkar's
> > thoughts about Islam and Muslims in his attempt to
> present the RSS leader's
> > vision as "terrifying". The belief that
> Golwalkar was uncompromisingly
> > anti-Muslim is so deep-rooted in a certain vocal
> section of India's
> > intellectual and political class that it is taken as
> an axiomatic truth
> > requiring no objective scrutiny. This belief is the
> basis for demonising him
> > as well as the RSS as "communal" and
> "fascist", terms that figure copiously
> > in Sharma's book and feed his central thesis
> captured in its title. However,
> > readers should ask themselves a basic question:
> "What kind of 'Fuhrer' was
> > Golwalkar if he had aversion for politics? Could
> Hitler have been Hitler if
> > he was similarly indifferent to acquiring political
> power?"
> >
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar wanted the Sangh and its swayamsevaks to be
> aloof from politics.
> > He was not initially in favour of establishing the
> Bharatiya Jana Sangh,
> > with the participation of select RSS pracharaks. In
> the 22 years that he
> > lived after its formation in 1951, there is little
> evidence to suggest that
> > he pushed the Jana Sangh to try to somehow capture
> governmental power so
> > that India could be declared a "Hindu
> Rashtra". Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya
> > (1916-1968), who became the Jana Sangh's foremost
> leader after the untimely
> > death of its founder Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee in
> 1953, was an intense
> > thinker in his own right. He formulated the
> party's ideological basis in the
> > form of a short treatise titled 'Integral
> Humanism'. It remains one of the
> > least discussed works of political philosophy produced
> in the
> > post-Independence era. Any unprejudiced student of
> politics who reads it is
> > sure to find it unthreatening, undogmatic and
> non-communal. BJP, the
> > post-1980 avatar of the Jana Sangh, has also enshrined
> 'Integral Humanism'
> > as its ideological guide in its party constitution.
> >
> >
> >
> > In the introduction to his book, Sharma describes the
> BJP as one of the
> > "Sangh-inspired organizations" which has
> "had a malefic influence on Indian
> > politics". He is entitled to his critical view of
> the BJP. But the least he
> > could have done as an author was to have examined
> Upadhyaya's thought
> > leadership and shown how he, or his two successors in
> the Jana Sangh and BJP
> > -- Vajpayee and L.K. Advani --, pursued
> Golwalkar's "menacing" vision in the
> > political field. He does nothing of the kind.
> >
> >
> >
> > Surprisingly, there is only one brief, and quite
> trivial, reference to
> > Upadhyaya in the entire book. Sharma does not even
> mention 'Integral
> > Humanism', or Upadhyaya's noteworthy
> presidential address at the Jana
> > Sangh's national council meeting at Calicut in
> 1967, in which he affirmed:
> > "We are pledged to the service not of any
> particular community or section
> > but of the entire nation. Every countryman is blood of
> our blood and flesh
> > of our flesh." By conveniently avoiding to train
> his analytical gaze over a
> > political leader with whom Golwalkar shared a strong
> bond of mutual respect,
> > Sharma has introduced a major lacuna in his book.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar on Nehru, Gandhiji and untouchability
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar never identified himself exclusively with
> the Jana Sangh. He
> > maintained close personal relationships with several
> leaders in the Congress
> > and Socialist parties, and they in turn respected him
> even if they did not
> > fully agree with his ideology. (A rare example of a
> Marxist intellectual's
> > appreciation of Golwalkar has come in Dr. Ashok
> Mitra's recently released
> > memoirs.) Golwalkar often sharply criticized
> Nehru's policies. But when
> > India's first Prime Minister passed away in May
> 1964, he penned a heartfelt
> > homage praising Nehru's patriotism and lofty
> idealism and hailing him as a
> > "great son of Mother India". Sharma does not
> mention this in his book. But
> > he deserves credit for mentioning the RSS chief's
> respectful attitude
> > towards Mahatma Gandhi. Despite Golwalkar's
> disagreement with Gandhiji on
> > certain issues, in 1946 "he called the Mahatma
> vishwavandaneeya, or one who
> > is worthy of being praised across the world" and,
> on another occasion,
> > "praatahsmaraneeya" – one worthy of being
> reverentially remembered in the
> > morning.
> >
> >
> >
> > Critics of the RSS never tire of alleging that it is
> anti-dalit and
> > supports discrimination and inequality on the basis of
> caste. However, as
> > Sharma grudgingly informs his readers, the RSS
> ideologue rejected
> > untouchability and held that "the sentiment of
> 'high' and 'low' within the
> > caste system is not right." Does this make his
> vision 'terrifying'?
> >
> >
> >
> > Was Golwalkar anti-Islam and anti-Muslim?
> > I now turn to Golwalkar's other alleged aversion:
> Muslims. Much of the
> > intellectual debate on this subject has so far centred
> on certain passages
> > in his most controversial book We or Our Nationhood
> Defined (1938). However,
> > the RSS has now disowned and withdrawn it. (Sharma
> mentions this and even
> > states that Golwalkar did not author We.. ) Therefore,
> Golwalkar's views on
> > Muslims should be evaluated on the basis of the
> totality of what he wrote
> > and spoke on the subject.
> >
> >
> >
> > The RSS chief was indeed highly critical of what he
> perceived as the
> > "separatist mindset" of a section of Indian
> Muslims and their tendency to
> > valorize invaders and bigoted Muslim rulers. This
> criticism was rooted in
> > the specific context of the Muslim League's demand
> for India's division and
> > the support it received from a vocal class of Indian
> Muslims. Golwalkar
> > believed that this mindset persisted even after the
> Partition. This belief
> > is debatable. However, two points are in order here.
> Firstly, there is a
> > category of "secular" intellectuals in India
> who consider any criticism of
> > political Islam and of the separatist conduct of a
> section of Muslims, as
> > "anti-Muslim" and unacceptable. Sharma
> belongs to this category. He refers
> > to the Gujarat riots of 2002 (which were a blot on
> India and on Vajpayee's
> > six-year premiership) as an "example of the
> impact of Golwalkar's legacy".
> > But he finds nothing terrifying in the murderous
> campaign launched by jehadi
> > terrorists in India, for he makes no mention of it at
> all.
> >
> >
> >
> > Secondly, was Golwalkar alone in criticizing Muslim
> separatism, supremacism
> > and aggression as a threat to India's unity and
> integrity? One only has to
> > read Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's book Pakistan or The
> Partition of India (1940) to
> > know that his views were harsher than anything that
> Golwalkar has written on
> > this subject. But then, it is not politically correct
> for anti-RSS
> > intellectuals to critique Ambedkar's views on this
> matter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Three important articulations suppressed
> >
> >
> > But is Sharma factual and fair in his critique of
> Golwalkar's own views on
> > Islam and Muslims? "For him," he writes,
> "Muslims were enemies who had to be
> > fought and defeated. He did not even consider Muslims
> civilized. They were
> > barbarians and raakshasas or demons." He adds,
> "Golwalkar was categorical
> > that all those Muslims and Christians, whose ancestors
> were Hindu, must
> > abandon their newly acquired faiths and return to the
> Hindu fold." He gives
> > no references to show where Golwalkar said so.
> >
> >
> >
> > In fact, many of Golwalkar's significant
> articulations on Islam and Muslims
> > completely contradict what Sharma has ascribed to him.
> Sharma's omission –
> > shall we say, suppression? – of these articulations
> amounts to intellectual
> > dishonesty. Let me cite here three important
> interviews that Golwalkar gave
> > on the subject. (They are contained in his Collected
> Works, which were
> > published in Hindi in 12 bulky volumes to mark his
> birth centenary in 2006)
> > – to Khushwant Singh, who was then the editor of The
> Illustrated Weekly of
> > India; Dr. Saifuddin Jeelani, a journalist and Arabic
> scholar in 1971; and
> > K.R. Malkani, who was then the editor of Organiser,
> the weekly journal of
> > the RSS.
> >
> >
> >
> > Khushwant Singh begins the interview (Illustrated
> Weekly of India, 17
> > November 1972; reproduced in 'Guruji'
> Collected Works, volume 9, page 200)
> > with these words: "There are some individuals
> whom we start to hate without
> > even bothering to know them. Guru Golwalkar comes
> first in my list of such
> > persons."
> >
> >
> >
> > Question: What are your thoughts on Muslims'
> issues?
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar: I have not the slightest doubt that
> historical factors alone are
> > responsible for the divided loyalty that Muslims have
> towards India and
> > Pakistan. Moreover, both Muslims and Hindus are
> equally to blame for this.
> > Nevertheless, it is not right to hold the entire
> community responsible for
> > the guilt of some people. (All emphases are mine.)
> Elsewhere in the
> > interview, Golwalkar says, "We have to win over
> the loyalty of Muslims with
> > love. I am optimistic and I believe that Hindutva and
> Islam will learn to
> > co-exist with one another."
> >
> >
> >
> > In the interview given to Dr. Jeelani (Bunch of
> Thoughts by M.S. Golwalkar,
> > page 639), he says: "According to our religious
> belief and philosophy, a
> > Muslim is as good as a Hindu. It is not the Hindu
> alone who will reach the
> > ultimate Godhead. Everyone has the right to follow his
> path according to his
> > own persuasion." Citing what he once told a
> Muslim gentleman from Kashmir,
> > Golwalkar says, "Follow your own religion. The
> God of Islam, Christianity
> > and Hinduism is the same and we are all His
> devotees…Give people true
> > knowledge of Islam. Give people true knowledge of
> Hinduism. Educate them to
> > know that all religious teach men to be selfless, holy
> and
> > pious…Indianisation does not mean making all people
> Hindus."
> >
> >
> >
> > Contrast all these articulations with Sharma's
> fanciful assertion that
> > Golwalkar believed in "the intrinsic superiority
> of Hindus over all other
> > people" and that "fanaticism and religious
> frenzy mark all his
> > formulations".
> >
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar opposed Uniform Civil Code
> >
> >
> > Sharma's most inexcusable omission pertains to his
> failure to let his
> > readers know that Golwakar was opposed to the idea of
> Uniform Civil Code, an
> > issue which agitates a majority of Indian Muslims.
> Consider these excerpts
> > from the interview he gave to Malkani (Organiser, 23
> August 1972; reproduced
> > in 'Guruji' Collected Works, Volume 9, page
> 165).
> >
> >
> >
> > Question: Don't you think that Uniform Civil Code
> is needed to nurture the
> > sense of nationalism?
> >
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar: I do not think so. What I say on this issue
> might surprise you
> > and many others, but this is my view. And I must speak
> out the truth as I
> > see it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Question: Don't you agree that uniformity is
> needed to promote national
> > unity?
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar: Harmony and uniformity are two different
> things. For harmony,
> > uniformity is not necessary. There have always been
> limitless diversities in
> > India. In spite of this, our nation has remained
> strong and well-organised
> > since ancient times. For unity we need harmony, not
> uniformity….Nature does
> > not like excessive uniformity. I think that diversity
> and unity can
> > co-exist, and they do co-exist.
> >
> >
> >
> > Question: Don't you believe that Muslims are
> opposing Uniform Civil Code
> > only because they want to maintain their separate
> existence?
> >
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar: I have no quarrel with any caste, community
> or section wanting
> > to maintain its own individual identity or existence,
> until and unless this
> > desire for a separate existence causes them to
> distance themselves from a
> > feeling of nationalism. Many people insist on Uniform
> Civil Code because
> > they think that the Muslim population is growing in a
> disproportionate
> > manner since their men are allowed to have four wives.
> I am afraid that this
> > is a negative way of looking at the problem…There is
> no basic difference
> > between those who favour appeasement and those who
> favour uniformity. So
> > long as Muslims love this nation and its culture, they
> have a right to live
> > according to their way of life.
> >
> >
> >
> > Question: Is it proper to let our Muslim sisters
> become victims of purdah
> > and polygamy?
> >
> >
> >
> > Golwalkar: If your objection to Muslim customs is
> based on broad
> > considerations of humanism, then it is proper.
> Reformist outlook in these
> > matters is welcome. But it is not proper to try to
> bring about equality in a
> > mechanical manner through the external instrumentality
> of laws. It is better
> > that Muslims themselves reform their outdated laws and
> customs. I'll be
> > pleased if they come to the conclusion that polygamy
> is not good for them.
> > But I would not like to impose my views on them.
> >
> >
> >
> > Indeed, Golwalkar concludes the interview with a
> warning. "I firmly believe
> > that uniformity is a pointer to the downfall of
> nations. I am in favour of
> > preservation of diverse ways of life. At the same
> time, we should pay
> > attention to ensure that these diversities nurture
> unity of the nation."
> >
> >
> >
> > Terrifying vision? Hardly.
> >
> >
> > The Organiser is significant for another reason. For
> it demolishes the
> > whole notion that there was no place in his worldview
> for diversities,
> > either within the Hindu fold or, much less, in
> India's multi-faith society.
> > Sharma's book devotes pages after pages to
> construct this false notion.
> >
> >
> >
> > A good part of the book is devoted to debunking
> Golwalkar's concept of
> > India as a "Hindu Rashtra" (Hindu Nation).
> According to me, the term suffers
> > from both conceptual and semantic weaknesses. The RSS
> chief repeatedly
> > emphasized that he used the word "Hindu" to
> connote a national community and
> > not a particular religious entity. This distinction,
> however, is not
> > satisfactory. Firstly, neither Golwalkar nor any other
> proponent of "Hindu
> > Rashtra" has been consistent in the manner in
> which they have used the word
> > "Hindu". Secondly, in a multi-faith nation
> such as India, this
> > terminological conflation creates both confusion and
> legitimate concerns
> > among non-religious Hindus. BJP, the party to which I
> belong, does not use
> > the term "Hindu Rashtra" either in its
> constitution or in its political
> > propaganda.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > A book in which prejudice has triumphed over truth
> >
> >
> > Sharma's book, which has come out immediately
> after the conclusion of the
> > Golwalkar birth centenary celebrations, disappoints
> for all these and yet
> > another reason – it is too brief to capture and
> comment upon the life of a
> > remarkable personality and a huge organization that he
> built with his
> > inspiring leadership. The occasion demanded a more
> comprehensive and
> > better-researched critique, one capable of provoking a
> serious debate not
> > only outside the RSS but also, hopefully, within.
> Sharma's book will make
> > little contribution to this debate because the
> portrait of Golwalkar
> > sketched by him has, in most parts, no basis in
> reality. It is imagined by
> > the author, with the pre-determined objective of
> demonizing him. He has
> > distorted and suppressed vital facts about
> Golwalkar's life and thoughts,
> > thereby doing injustice both to his readers and to his
> subject.
> >
> >
> >
> > The anti-RSS and Hindu-baiting fraternity will of
> course hail it because
> > anything that describes the Sangh's vision as
> "terrifying" gives it the
> > illusion of having won the ideological battle. For it
> has never let
> > facts-based and truth-respecting intellectual quest
> come in the way of
> > declaring Golwalkar as the "Hitler of the
> Hindutva Brigade".
> >
> >
> >
> > (The reviewer, a columnist with The Indian Express,
> was formerly an aide to
> > Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 3:51 AM, Amaresh Misra wrote:
> >
> >
> > YOU ARE LAUGHABLE PADHI; MY BOOK ON 1857 HAS SEVERAL
> CHAPTERS ON SANATAN
> > DHARMA SADHUS PARTICIPATING IN 1857. MUSLIMS DECLARED
> JIHAD AND HINDUS
> > DHARMYAUDDHA AGAINST THE BRITISH. YOU ARE
> ANTI-NATIONAL AND A BRITISH
> > STOOGE--THAT IS WHY YOU ARE DEAD AGAINST HINDU-MUSLIM
> UNITY EVEN WHEN
> > MUSLIMS AND HINDUS DIED HAND IN HAND RIGHT NEAR
> AYODHYA, RIGHT NEAR WHERE
> > YOU FRIENDS DEMOLISHED THE BABARI MASJID, IN 1857.
> >
> >
> > EVEN NOW LET THE READERS NOTE, THIS PADHI PERSON GIVES
> AS PROOF OF RSS'
> > PARTICIPATION IN FREEDOM STRUGGLE THEIR ROLE DURING
> CALCUTTA RIOTS! WAS THAT
> > A FREEDOM STRUGGLE--GO AND READ YOU FOOL--CALCUTTA
> RIOTS WERE A BRITISH
> > CONSPIRACY TO DIVIDE THE INDIAN FREEDOM MOVEMENT
> CAN'T YOU SEE? AND BOTH
> > MUSLIM LEAGUE AND RSS HELPED THE BRITISH.
> >
> >
> > RAJESHWAR DAYAL, THE FIRST --HOME SECRETARY OF UP
> AFTER INDEPENDENCE HAD
> > GONE ON RECORD IN HIS BOOK THAT HE FOUND TRUNKS FULL
> OF MAPS--WHICH COULD
> > HAVE BEEN SUPPLIED ONLY BY THE BRITISH ARMY--IN RSS
> OFFICES IN UP. THESE
> > MAPS HAD MUSLIM AREAS MARKED OUT FOR EXTERMINATION. SO
> AT A TIME WHEN THE
> > WHOLE NATION WAS STRIVING HARD FOR INDEPENDENCE THE
> RSS WAS MAKING PLANS TO
> > KILL MUSLIMS!
> >
> >
> > THEN MY FAMILY GURU, SWAMI SWARUPANAND SARASWATI, THE
> SHANKARACHARYA OF
> > DAWARIKA AND BADRINATH, DEBATED WITH GOLWALKAR ABOUT
> THE STATUS OF LORD RAM.
> > GOLWALKAR SAID THAT HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT RAM IS A
> GOD--ACCORDING TO
> > GOLWALKAR RAM WAS ONLY A MAHAPURUSH--AND THE
> SHANKARACHARYA REPLIED THIS IS
> > WHAT RAVANA USED TO SAY--SO MR. GOLWALKAR IN WHICH
> CATEGORY DO YOU STAND!
> >
> >
> > SO RSS HAS ALWAYS BEEN ANTI-SANATANI BECAUSE RSS DOES
> NOT BELIEVE IN THE
> > HINDU-SANATANI CONCEPT OF ONE GOD, ONE BRAHMA-- AND
> REST BEING MAYA!
> > FOR THE RSS MATERIAL ENTITIES LIKE LAND, RACE ETC
> ARE DIVINE--FOR
> > SANATANIS AND PEOPLE OF ALL TRUE RELIGIONS, THE
> CONCEPT OF GOD IS A POWER
> > THAT STANDS OVER AND ABOVE ALL MATERIAL ENTITIES AND
> MAN. BUT THE RSS DOES
> > NOT RECOGNIZE THAT GOD! THEY DO NOT WORSHIP VISHNU OR
> SHIVA OR RAM OR
> > HANUMAN--THEY WORSHIP SOME VAGUE RACE OR LAND OR DO
> NOT WORSHIP AT ALL. SO
> > SANATANIS ALWAYS BRANDED THE RSS AS IRRELIGIOUS AND
> ANTI-HINDU.
> >
> >
> > THAT IS THE MAIN REASON WHY THE RSS AND ITS
> POLIICLA AVATAARS, LIKE JAN
> > SANGH AND BJP COULD NOT GET SEATS IN THE INDIAN
> PARLIAMENT. MAJORITY HINDUS
> > REGARDED THEM AS IRRELIGIOUS. IT WAS ONLY AFTER THE
> CYNICAL RAM MANDIR
> > RELIGIOUS CARD THEY PLAYED, AS IRRELIGIOUS PEOPLE,
> THAT THEY GOT SEATS. BUT
> > EVEN THEN IN A HINDU MAJORITY COUNTRY, THEY COULD NOT
> NEVER GET 200 SEATS IN
> > A 545 MEMBER PARLIAMENT--WHY? BECAUSE MAJORITY
> SANATANI HINDUS REGARDED THEM
> > AS IRRELIGIOUS.
> >
> >
> > THINK...
> >
> > AMRESH MISRA
> >
> > 9920684193
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/21/08, Manoj Padhi wrote:
> > Dear readers:
> >
> > When I came to know that Mr. Amresh Mishra, who claims
> that he is a
> > Sanatani Hindu (with absolutely no signs of a Hindu)
> and famous for cooking
> > up conspiracy theories (as opposed to reasoning /
> evidence based
> > theories/facts) has written two books and inaugurated
> by our vice-president,
> > I couldn't resist myself to forward this link [
> 1857-FIRST WAR OF INDIAN
> > INDEPENDENCE::Commemorating the 150th Anniversary - By
> Sadhu Prof. V.
> > Rangarajan ] in addition to some RSS- bashing content
> of Pakistan historian
> > 'Naveed Bhai' .
> >
> >
> > Mr. Amresh Mishra reminds me Prof. John Nash
> (Hollywood Movie- The
> > beautiful mind) and 'schizophrenia'. I wish
> all the best.
> >
> > I have not read Mr. Mishra's books but I would
> assume that his books will
> > not have any of the contents of the following book
> written by Sadhuji.
> >
> > Recalling Revolutionaries of India's Freedom
> Struggle - By V Sundaram
> >
> > Mr. Sundaram, writes in his book review..
> >
> >
> > "These inspiring thoughts and emotions rushed and
> gushed to my mind when I
> > read Sadhu Prof V.Rangarajan's introduction to his
> book 'SAGA OF
> > PATRIOTISM': He has clearly brought out the
> historic fact that in the last
> > two decades of our struggle for independence from 1927
> to 1947"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I would request readers and Mr. Amresh Mishra read the
> above book and
> > compare the contribution of RSS/Sangh/Hindu
> Saints/Sadhus etc.
> >
> >
> > RSS was not a political movement during Independence
> struggle. But, many of
> > them were participated on this in their individual
> capacity. After
> > independence, when INC started screwing up things ,
> the political wing
> > Bharatiya Jana Sangh ( Jan Sangh) was formed on 1951,
> which eventually would
> > become BJP around 1980.
> >
> >
> > I would request readers to read about Direct Action
> Day, also known as the
> > Great Calcutta Riot,[1] was on 16 August 1946 Wiki
> Link:
> >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Action_Day> >
> >
> > Also read
> >
>
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Programme_for_the_Day_(Direct_Action_Day)> >
> > Muslim League was a communal party and they declared
> 'Jihad' on Direct
> > Action Day. INC's freedom fighters were no match
> for them. So when riots
> > were started by Muslims by mass slaughtering of
> Hindus/Rape of Hindu Women,
> > the RSS was the only Hindu organization, which was
> capable (thanks to the
> > vision of Mr. Golwalkar) of a retaliatory response and
> saving thousands of
> > Hindu/Sikh lives.
> >
> >
> > Recommended book:
> >
> > [ Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh Releases a Book, 'M.S.
> Golwalkar: His Vision and
> > Mission' in New York. ]
> >
> >
> > How the Buddhists were annihilated from the Indian
> sub-continent ? Because
> > they didn't have a RSS like organization.
> >
> > After India's independence , minorities were
> became vote bank and started
> > getting VIP status. Today Jains demanding minority
> status - Why ? Find out
> > Why Gujjars demanded OBC status ?
> >
> >
> > Our PM, says Muslims have first claim to resource. [
> Muslim minorities must
> > have the first claim on resources -Manmohan Singh ].
> So there is a rush to
> > become minority. Sikhs in Punjab were claiming
> minority status to get
> > additional benefits until that was struck down byHigh
> Court. The alternate
> > meaning of Minority in India is VVIP. They have a
> commission to protect them
> > - "minority Commission", Hindu's have
> none . So RSS/VHP assume this
> > unofficial role. Whose fault is this ? Governments or
> RSSs?
> >
> >
> > Ater the NHRC/SHRC are formed, what is the relevance
> of Minority
> > Commission/SC/ST commission ?
> >
> > Obviously, Mr. Amresh Mishra and me are 180 degree
> apart in our views. His
> > Pakistan talk radio and Geo TV interviews remind me
> the popular proverb
> > "Eating from Pandavas and thinking about
> Kauravas".
> >
> >
> > His irritation is obvious as he publicly threatened me
> 'beat me up'. I
> > would also designated him as a 'Traitor'. So
> equation is even.
> >
> >
> > I am not a RSS/VHP advocate. But until our Hindu god
> assumes his 'Kalki
> > Avatar', I am in his role and whenever there will
> be 'ridiculous conspiracy
> > theories' as follows (add 9/11 is not by Bin-laden
> but by US Government to
> > that also), I will challenge these people with full
> force and I believe ,
> > several of you will join in this movement.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > DO SOMETHING...SAY OPENLY THAT THE RSS-MOSSAD ARE
> RESPONSIBLE--OTHERWISE BE
> > DAMNED AND CONSIDER THE NATION DOOMED. THEY KILLED
> KARKARE TO SEND A MESSAGE
> > THAT YOU CANNOT INVESTIGATE THE MOSSAD-RSS ANGLE.
> >
> >
> >
> > Could Mossad be behind recent blasts in India? By M. A
> Yusufzai
> >
> >
> > BENAZIR ASSASINATED THROUGH CONSPIRACY OF CIA AND
> MOSSAD - URDU TIMES, URDU
> > DAILY, MUMBAI
> >
> > No one is perfect. RSS/VHP may not be perfect all the
> time. The Hindu
> > majority community, in the absence of any
> constitutional protection for
> > majority for them, their temples, mis-use of their
> temple funds by
> > Governments (which otherwise would have been used for
> creating awareness
> > against Dalit discrimination), owe a lot to them.
> >
> >
> > Without their resistance, the missionaries would have
> converted Hindus in
> > an accelerated pace; the same missionaries are afraid
> to convert Muslims
> > because of 'fatwa' or getting killed. Hindus
> are peace loving in general.
> > But RSS/VHP keep reminding them that as long as you
> are in your limits, you
> > enjoy the additional constitutional protection. The
> day you cross your
> > limits and denigrate our religion or indulge in
> conspiracy, constitution
> > can't or may not be able to protect you.
> >
> >
> > "Sathe Sathyem Samachet" - This is the
> 'Mahamantra' of survival as a
> > 'majority' non-VIP community in a secular
> democracy.
> >
> >
> > Manoj Padhi
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> > Amaresh Misra
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Manoj Padhi
> >
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
No comments:
Post a Comment