Indian Governments Hard on Hindus, Their Temples

[Guest guest]

Indian Governments Hard on Hindus, Their Temples

Posted by: "EagleSM23" eaglesm23

Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:54 am (PST)

In a message dated 6/18/2006 10:07:26 AM Pacific

Daylight Time, nkk1113 writes:

 

Indian Governments Hard on Hindus, Their Temples

 

18 June, 2006 by pravakta

By Yatindra Bhatnagar

 

Everything against Hindus seems to be justified in

India, a country dominated by 82 percent Hindus. There

are no such things as Hindu rights, safety of Hindu

temples and their money, Hindu pilgrimages and the

Hindu way of life. Instead, every effort is made to

favor, appease, fund and tolerate others, especially

Muslims who are doubly benefited by the secular

policies of the Government of India, and states ruled

by the Congress Party and its coalition partners.

Their Sharia laws give them an added advantage.

 

Muslims get money from Hindu temple funds and are also

allowed to practice their own Sharia (Islamic) laws

for marriage, divorce, family inheritance and other

customs. Civil laws are not uniformly applied to

Muslims and their rights, real or imaginary,

traditional or just made up, are generously

safeguarded. They are permitted practices even if some

of them are in direct conflict with India's laws on

divorce, maintenance money after divorce, and other

social, religious and cultural practices.

 

Some time back International Opinion carried an

article detailing the takeover of Hindu temples in

Karnataka and transfer of large chunks of their funds

to mosques, churches, Islamic schools (madarsas) that

churn out radical Muslims, and Christian schools. The

die-hard Christians merrily go on converting simple,

less educated, tribals, socially and economically

weaker sections of Hindu population all over India.

 

The Roman Catholic Pope, when he visited India last

year, had bluntly told his audience in Hindu-dominated

India that his mission is to convert people to

Christianity (Roman Catholic version, of course). It

was a slap on Hindus and should have been on the face

of the Government of India that had invited him and

that claims to be "secular."

 

A part of the Hindu money also goes to Christian

Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), who utilize these

funds for the spread of Christian religion, education,

social and cultural practices. Evidently, Hindu money,

Hindu temples, Hindu religion, Hindu rights, and Hindu

population, everything is going down.

 

The Congress policy is to take over Hindu temples that

are a big source of money from millions of devotees

every year. That money is fully controlled by

governments run by Congress Party, and its coalition

partners. Hindu Temple Trusts, or traditional priests,

no longer run those Temples. They are, instead, run by

government-appointed Boards or Managing Committees

consisting of bureaucrats from other communities also.

 

Thus a very large amount of Hindu money is going to

government coffers and through them to others to the

detriment of Hindus, and Hindu temples. That is a

clear case of discrimination on the basis of religion,

and partisan policies of the government at the Center

and Congress-ruled states. This is wrong, and a

violation of constitutional norms. This is blatantly

unfair policy towards Hindus. And this is arbitrary,

to say the least.

 

There has been no take over of mosques, churches or

institutions run by Muslims and Christians. Only Hindu

temples are targeted. Why is this discrimination and

differential treatment? And the meek, tolerant,

submissive Hindus don't raise a finger to protest it!

And when they do, they are branded "communalists" by

Muslims, leftists, and even some sections of so-called

secular Hindus. How surprising!

 

This should be challenged in the highest court of the

country, and other forums.

 

The new arbitrary development is about one of the most

famous Hindu temples in Mumbai – Siddhivinayak. The

Maharashtra government of Congress and its junior

partner, Sharad Pawar's Nationalist Congress Party

(NCP), have conveniently managed to take over

Siddhivinayak Temple Trust that gets huge amount of

money from Hindu devotees. These devotees include top

movie stars such as Amitabh Bachchan and Aishwarya Rai

who regularly visit Siddhivinayak and offer big money

and jewelry.

 

Siddhivinayak is a temple of Ganesh, the most popular

deity in Maharashtra, and also many other parts of

India. No traditional religious function is complete

without first praying to Ganesh, the son of Shiva and

Parvati.

 

My friend Devendra Singh has complained that the

Congress and NCP have divided the Shirdi Sai Baba

Sansthan and Siddhivinayak Temple Trust amongst

themselves as if these Trusts are commodities to be

used and exploited by the Government for its

anti-Hindu and anti-national policies of minority

appeasement.

 

He adds: "Hindu Janjagruti Samiti (hindujagruti.org)

appeals to all devotees of Lord Ganesh to avoid making

donations to the Siddhivinayak Temple. Instead

donations may be made in any local Ganesh Temple after

paying obeisance to the Siddhivinayak idol."

 

This is only one way to protest the government action.

But its doubtful if this will be effective as Hindus

are, by and large, naïve, indifferent, and oblivious

to the far-reaching consequences of government

policies. They have to be really jolted to awaken

them.

 

The government is always looking to the other side

when there is an issue of Muslim intransigence,

incongruity, or even violation of established and

acceptable norms of civilized behavior. Some time back

in a Northern Indian town, a father-in-law was found

to have physical relations with his daughter-in-law.

Whether they were consensual or not is not valid here,

but the fact was that the local Muslim religious

leadership ruled that since the woman had relations

with her father-in-law, she is now to be recognized as

his wife, and consequently, the mother of her husband.

 

A more ludicrous ruling would be difficult to find.

And all that was claimed to be in accordance with

Islamic laws. Obviously, the government did not want

to interfere in an Islamic matter. It's a mockery of

the Indian Constitution, and denigration for the

woman.

 

Islam and its followers are very strict in matters of

conversion. Once a Muslim, always a Muslim. He or she

can convert to other religions at the risk of their

lives. A celebrated case was about the movie super

star of yesteryears, Nargis, who was the first

recipient of Padma Shri and had access to Prime

Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru.

 

Nargis was born a Muslim to a Muslim lady, Jaddan Bai.

There were all kinds of rumors about her father being

a Hindu but that is not very relevant here. She

married another movie star Sunil Dutt, a Hindu. It was

well known that the marriage ceremony was performed

with Hindu rites and rituals, and that Nargis lived

like a Hindu, observing various practices of Hinduism.

 

When Nargis died, Dutt prepared to take the body for

cremation and to perform Hindu rituals for the

departed soul. It was reported that the

brothers/cousins of Nargis, insisted that the body be

taken to the Muslim burial ground and be buried with

Islamic rituals and customs. Dutt, a gentleman that he

was, did not want to create a scene, and quarrel

before the dead body of his beloved wife. He allowed

the body to be whisked away by the intolerant Muslim

relatives. The Islamic intransigence prevailed upon

Hindu tolerance.

 

Recently in Malaysia, the country supposed to be a

moderate Muslim nation, a shocking case, somewhat

similar to that of Nargis, was reported. A Hindu

wife's complaint is that her husband's body was buried

by claiming that he had converted to Islam. The man, a

celebrated former Olympian, had died in coma, and

Islamic courts ruled that he had converted. Some

paperwork was produced by the local Mullah to bolster

their claim. The man's wife, his other relatives, and

friends had no information about his alleged

conversion, yet the body was snatched away from a

Hindu wife.

 

Malaysian Hindus have taken up the case but it did not

attract worldwide attention, as it is a case of an

aggrieved Hindu, and not a Muslim or a Christian. The

Hindus themselves have to raise their united voice

louder, clearer, effectively and aggressively. They

don't have to take up arms like radical Muslims, but

can make their point known worldwide through

relentless campaign for truth, justice, fairness,

religious and social freedom - and no discrimination

whatsoever. They should not take any injustice lying

down, or they would continue to be trampled upon by

this or that religion.

 

Yet another recent case has become a 'cause celebre'

worldwide. But this one is related to a Muslim in

Afghanistan facing death for converting to

Christianity. Abdul Rahman had converted years back

but when other people found that out, he was sentenced

to death by an Islamic court – the only kind of court

in that country. Radical Muslims and Islamic courts

ruled that by abandoning his religion, Rahman had

insulted Islam and deserved death penalty.

 

Rahman's case is being fought by public opinion,

Christian groups, and even Christian governments,

worldwide. Consequently he might be released. But, I

will not be surprised if, without adequate security,

and safe journey to a democratic, religion- tolerant

country, he is killed after his release by the same

radical Muslims. Muslim clerics keep clamoring for his

death. This is Islam, the religion touted as

compassionate, kind and tolerant.

 

This is happening in a country liberated by the US-led

coalition from the hands of ultra radical Talibans who

had shown no religious tolerance whatsoever. On the

contrary, they had even blasted the world famous

towering Buddha statues at Bamiyan. The statues were

not converting, but only silently witnessing the

atrocities on girls and women, other religions and

opponents of Talibans. They were blasted in the name

of Islam, and Allah.

 

That happened in Afghanistan under the Talibans.

Rahman's case is under Hamid Karzai's government, a

man put there by the Americans.

 

A thing like that could have happened in India too.

Islamic laws would have issued death sentence. It

would not have had the legal sanction of Indian courts

but when it comes to Islamic Sharia laws, who cares?

Fatwas, and radical Islamists could do the dirty work.

 

Recently India did have a weird case that should have

shocked the people. According to a report by the main

news agency, Press Trust of India, a Muslim in his

sleep had uttered the word "Talaq" three times. That

was enough, and the local Mullahs accepted it as the

man's decision to divorce his wife. No amount of

explanations would satisfy the local Muslim religions

leaders and they asked the couple to split.

 

PTI reported that Sohela Ansari told friends that her

husband Aftab had uttered the word

 

"talaq" three times in his sleep. When local Islamic

leaders came to know that, they said Aftab's words

constituted a divorce under the Islamic procedure

known as "triple talaq." The West Bengal couple,

married for 11 years, have three children.

 

The local Mullahs also ruled that if the couple wanted

to remarry the mandatory waiting period is 100 days.

Meantime, Sohela would have to spend at least one

night with another man (deemed to be a marriage) and

then be divorced by that other man before she can even

think of remarrying her original man. What a religious

decree! What kind of justice!

 

The news is that the couple has refused to obey the

order and the issue has been referred to a local

family counseling center. Unless this Mullahcracy

ends, the couple is doomed.

 

The silver lining in the case is that Zafarul-Islam

Khan, an Islamic scholar and editor of The Milli

Gazette, a popular Muslim newspaper, has said: "This

is a totally unnecessary controversy and the local

'community leaders' or whosoever has said it, are

totally ignorant of Islamic law."

 

"The law clearly says any action under compulsion or

in a state of intoxication has no effect. The case of

someone uttering something while asleep falls under

this category and will have no impact whatsoever,"

Khan opined. Would the radical Mullahs listen?

 

Ultimately the case might be settled in Sohela's

favor. However, the weird Islamic laws and their

inhuman interpretation by Sharia courts and radical

Muslim leaders, are clearly a gross violation of

India's Constitution. It's also a blunt challenge to

Indian justice system. All that is happening under the

very nose of governments – state and Central. And

nobody has the courage to do anything tangible, and

settle these matters once and for all by enforcing

uniform civil laws for all the citizens of India

irrespective of their religious affiliation.

 

The need for a Uniform Civil Code is one of the

Directive Principles under the Indian Constitution but

no government has shown courage to prepare and enforce

that. A really moderate Muslim, the then Chief Justice

of India's Supreme Court, Justice Ahmadi, a few years

back, had publicly asked the Central Government to

implement the Directive Principle related to the

Uniform Civil Code. But nothing has happened in all

these years.

 

As long as appeasement of the so-called minority

communities continues, and the rights of Hindus

trampled upon, the country will keep seeing these

types of unacceptable and weird behavior. The main

culprits are Muslim Mullahs and the followers of

Islam.

 

The Christian evangelical crowd is the other getting

preferential treatment at the expense of Hindus and

Hindu rights. This is strange in a country

overwhelmingly dominated by Hindus whose tolerance has

become their weakness for everyone to exploit.

 

By the way out of one billion plus of India's

population, the Muslims constitute only about 12

percent. The Christians are even less, only 2.3

percent. The Sikhs are even lesser, only 1.9 percent.

Out of the rest, over 82 percent are Hindus - mostly

sleeping.

 

Wake up Hindus before you are crushed beyond

recognition in your own country!