Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  


Rate this topic

Recommended Posts


I meant to convey that the approach of always expecting to be protected is wrong. Get protected today from something wrong. Tommorow, be able to protect someone from wrong.

May be I should have started my example with "Even a child..."





Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hare Krishna Rakesh,


"But posting here in this forum is different than doing it. You try it and , forget muslims or christians, Hindus will be the first ones to slaughter you in case you dare.


As I said I can take anybody's life for Ram janam bhumi, anybody's means anyone whoever comes in my way, whether the person is a muslim, hindu or anyone.

Rakesh you don't know anything about me, had you known me you would have not written that quote.

Anyway let the time come, i will show you what I am.

Regarding shvu he is a poor chap, he doesn't know the situation of hindus in India, so forget his case, he only knows to juggle with the words, & put things in presentable manner that's it, nothing more than that.


Hari Bol,


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by dubeyrakesh:

Please visit www.hinduism.org site and see for yourself how openly the sanatan dharma is abused by that B******.


Hinduism is getting raped and the irony is that the victim is almost enjoying the rape.


We can and will do nothing more than react here in this forum; or wait for Kalki!


Mr Das, just a reminder, you havent acknowledged my email sent to you about 2 weeks back.


Thanks all,





The Site is a piece of crap with false references and bad language.

The contents of the site points to http://www.megasonic.o.uk registered to VISIONTECH SOLUTIONS LTD



It appears that the site could be owned by the so called rakesh dubey, and he is into advertising it.


The site is created by a Muslim guy who probably lives in England spreading hatred against Hindusim.


Mr.Rakesh Dubey is just one of the desperate anti-hindu guys who put up false propaganda. These include tarnishing the various gods of hinduism by false references from scriptures. This guy shouldn't be taken seriously.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gauracandra ji,

I think you are surprised because of the name "Rakesh Dubey". Posted Image

Well, don't be surprised. It is not an uncommon name. It is quite possible for two (even more) different persons to have this name.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


I hope I am not getting you correclty. If u mean to say that I am the owner of the site and trying to advertise it,

then lemme tell you that I have been posting here long before this post.But then u may consider that to be "confidence buliding".

I sincerely hope that you misinterpreted something before posting. I hope that u are referring to 2 different

Rakesh Dubeys (That would be height of coincidence)




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sushil sorry if I hurt you. Sorry to make that statement. It was a conclusion based upon people I have seen.

But I think the "time" has already come.

I hope Gaurachandra's ????? imply my words in the previous post.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please correct me if I am wrong.

While in India I read a little bit about the years before and during partition.

One of the books was by the brother of the killer of Gandhi, what was his name? Gopal or Nathuran Godse???

In that book he said that the main reason for hating Gandhi so much was that they though that him (Gandhi) was always putting the Hindus down. In the name of ahimsa and tolerance, the Hindus were the givers and the muslims the takers.


In the book by Lapierre and Collins about partition, Mounbattem conceded that if he knew at that time that Jinna was dying of tuberculosis, maybe he could had stopped it.


India didn't lose Kashmir because Nehru was extremely attached to it because he was born there and Mounbatten was fond of Nehru (and his wife).


Reading newspapers in India I noticed that any act of violence perpretated by the Hindus was considered an act of shame and barbaric but when 'minorities ' did it it was accepted as an act of defending their rights and religion.


I don't believe in violence of any kind but in the name of secularism Hindus are losing the battle.


The politicians ruined everything in the past and they continue doing so trying to get votes. Fake sadhus don't help the cause either.


BTW, the ashes of the killer of Gandhi are still kept in the brother's house because of 2 reasons: 1- Because the Ganges got contaminated with Gandhi's ashes.

2- He wanted his ashes in the river Sindhu that now belongs to Pakistan.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

<h3>When war becomes dharm</h3>


By Francois Gautier

The Indian Express


In the Bhagvad Gita Arjun once throws down his bow and tells Krishna, "I will not fight." Many scholars consider this an exhortation to an inner war instead of a physical one, against one's own ego and weaknesses. While the Gita is essentially a divine message of yoga -- of transforming one's own nature while reaching for the

absolute -- it reconciles war with the notion of duty and dharma. Since the beginning of times, war has been an integral part of man's quest.


Yet, war is the most misunderstood factor of human history. Shri Aurobindo in his remarkable "Essays on the Gita" writes:"Man's natural tendency is to worship nature as love and life and beauty and good and to turn away from her grim mask of death." War has always

repelled man: Ashoka turned Buddhist after the battle of Kalinga, American youngsters refused to participate in the Vietnam war, and we are witnessing today massive

protests against the atom bomb.


Yet, the Gita says that while protecting one's borders, wives, children and culture, and when all other means have failed, war can become dharma. War is a universal principle of our life as Shri Aurobindo argues: "it is

evident that the actual life of man can take no real step forward without a struggle between what exists and what seeks to exist". And that humanity periodically experience time in which great forces clash together,

resulting in destruction and reconstruction,

intellectual, social, moral, religious, andpolitical.


According to the Gita, there exists a struggle between righteousness and unrighteousness, between the self affirming law of good and the forces that oppose its

progression. Its message is, therefore, addressed to people whose duty in life is to protect those who are at the mercy of the strong and the violent. "It is only a

few religions," writes Shri Aurobindo, "which have had the courage, like the Indian, to lift up the image of the force that acts in the world in the figure not only of the beneficent Durga, but also of the terrible Kali in her blood-stained dance of destruction."


Has India understood this great nationalist message of the Gita? Yes and no. On the one hand, you have had a Shivaji, a Rani of Jhansi, and a Shri Aurobindo, who, let

us remember, gave a call as early as 1906 for the eviction of the British -- by force if need be -- at a time when the Congress was not even considering independence. On the other hand, the Indian masses seem never to have resisted invasions for centuries. Wave

after wave of Muslims intruders were able to loot, rape, kill, raze temples and govern India, because Hindu chieftains kept betraying each other and no national

uprising occurred against them; the British got India for a song, bled it dry (20 millions Indians died of famine during British rule), because except for the Great

(misguided) Mutiny, there was no wave of nationalism opposed to them until very late.


We witnessed how in 1962 the Indian army was routed because Nehru had refused to heed the warnings posed by the Chinese. Just a year ago, we also witnessed how India reacted during the hijack of the IC flight from

Kathmandu: instead of storming the plane when it was in Amritsar, India's leaders got cowed down by the prospect of human casualties from their own side and surrendered to terrorism. But in the process India's image and self-

esteem suffered a lot and the liberated separatists are now spitting even more venom and terror.


Why is this nationalistic message of the Gita forgotten? There are two main reasons: Buddhism and Mahatma Gandhi. Buddhism made of non-violence an uncompromising, inflexible dogma. Thus it was literally wiped-off the

face of India within a few centuries. Buddhism indirectly influenced Hinduism and Mahatma Gandhi, whose sincere but rigid adherence to non-violence may have indirectly

precipitated the 1947 Partition. Today, well-meaning "secular" Indians intellectuals still borrow from the Buddhist and Gandhian creed of non-violence to demonstrate why India should not have the bomb and get

wiped-out by Pakistan or China, countries which have no such qualms.


There is, however, a lining in the sky: the Kargil war has shown that Hindu, Muslim and Christian soldiers can put their country above their religion and fight alongside each other. Today, we see a new wave of

nationalism, both in India, as well as amongst its influential expatriate community, particularly in the US. The nationalist message of the Gita is still relevant

today as well as essential for India's survival in the face of so many threats. One would be tempted to say "arise again O India and remember Krishna's message to Arjun: truth is the foundation of real spirituality and courage its soul."


Gita's message is forgotten today because of Buddhism and Mahatma Gandhi.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nathuram assasinated Gandhi. I m 99.99% sure that his brother's first name was Gopal.


Jinnah was terminally ill for sure during partition. Was that known, partition could/would really be stopped. Thankfully it wasnt. He died in Sept 1948 which about an year after India's independance.


The thing about Nehru is confirmed by many authentic people to me but there is no proof of it.


It seems that you are much more alienated from India than what your name indicates. The statements you made about Gandhi/India/Hindus seem absolutely true to me. Some people call that pessimism. I call it realism. At least I "hate" Gandhi for that. It was a mistake India is still paying for and will pay for and should pay for.


I know nothing about Gandhi's ashes. I also cant figure out why you posted this is this thread.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

<H4>The Rediff Interview/ Gopal Godse</H4>

<H3>'Gandhi used to systematically fool people. So we killed him'</H3>


Posted Image

<font size=+2>T</font>he lights go off as you reach the dilapidated building in Santa Cruz, in Bombay's western

suburbs. With great difficulty you navigate the stairs and knock on a first-floor door.


"What do you want," asks the lady who

opened the door.


You tell her you have come to

meet Gopal Godse.


"Yes, I'm here," a voice comes from a

corner of the dark room. The lady brings a lighted candle and you see the 76-year-old man who underwent 18 years imprisonment

for conspiring in Mahatma Gandhi's assassination.


"I'm sorry the lights are off," Nathuram Godse's brother says, "You know, this is India and even after 50 years of Independence we have not improved.


"Since Independence our people are accustomed to forget history. Today no one is bothered about the Partition. And no one wants to reunite India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.


"Gandhi systematically fooled the people by saying, 'I'll accept the Partition of the country over my dead body.' But still he partitioned India. So we killed him..."


Godse, in an exclusive interview

with Firdaus Syed Ashraf:


Do you ever regret Mahatma Gandhi's killing?


Posted Image

No, never. Gandhi used to claim the Partition

would be over his dead body. So after Partition when he didn't die, we killed him. Usually an assassination of a leader is either for personal benefit or to acquire power. We killed Gandhi because he was harmful to India. And it was a selfless act. No one paid us a single penny for it. Our love for the motherland made us do it. We are not ashamed of it. Gandhi should have been honest to admit that his life was a failure.


You see, right from Pakistan and Bangladesh

every Muslim is a converted Hindu. Gandhi's appeasement attitude (towards the Muslims) went far too much. That

was why we killed him. Two hundred and fifty thousand Hindus were killed in Noakhali

in October 1946. Hindu women were forced to remove their sindhoor and do Muslim rituals. And Gandhi said, 'Hindus must

bow their heads if Muslims want to kill them. We should follow the principle of ahimsa (non-violence).' How can any sensible person tolerate this? Our action was not for a handful of people -- it was for all the refugees who came from Pakistan.


So, till this day, I have never regreted being one of the conspirators in Gandhi's assassination. In fact, many of Nathuram's friends told me after my release, 'Nathuram ni gadhav pana kela, tyani

majha chance ghalavla' (Nathuram did you an injustice. He made you miss your chance to kill Gandhi).


Did your family undergo any social pressure after the assassination?


Yes, very much. No one used to be ready to marry girls from my family. So we decided that the first thing we should put across to the bridegroom was that we are related to Nathuram Godse. It is only now that people appreciate our honesty. Now they are ready for marriage (into my family).


If the Muslim League could influence the Muslims in 1947, why was it that the Hindu Mahasabha could not influence Hindus?


(That was) because I don't have any leadership quality. My talent is to write. And I have convinced my readers with

my writing.


Unfortunately, the so-called secular Hindu leaders from the Congress have been ruling

the masses since 1885. And they have ruled the country for another 50 years. It is only now that Hindus have become conscious (about the Congress). They have thrown the party out from Maharashtra and

all over India.


You cannot gauge a nation in merely five

decades. It took 500 years for the Christians to drive away Muslims from Europe. Muslims ruled right up to Spain and Portugal. I don't

know how many years it will take for Hindus to rule the entire Bharat. It may be a decade, or it may be a century.


Did you ever contest elections?


Yes, I contested from Ranchi in Bihar. People asked me why I was contesting there. I said my slogan is 'Ab ke bar Ranchi se agli bar Karachi se'. (This election I will contest from Ranchi and the next from Karachi). I was able to secure only 7,000 votes because I did not have any

mass support.


Can Muslims and Hindus ever live together in peace?


Yes, if the Muslims give up their blind faith. It is written in the Koran that idol worship is not permitted. If Muslims don't want Hindus to pray to their gods, how can they live together with them (the Hindus)? They want to convert Hindus to Islam not realising that their ancestors were Hindus. They must give up this attitude. Then only the two can live together.


And who created Pakistan? It wasn't the Arabs but the Muslims of Bharat. Who was Jinnah? His grandfather was a Hindu. Benazir Bhutto is also a Hindu Rajput.


Every Muslim nation keeps away from modern science. And when they do that they are

left far behind the rest of the world. When the telephone was invented, Muslim countries

were not using it. They said it is not mentioned in the Koran, that it was un-Islamic!


Of the 140 million Muslims in India, how many would you say want to convert Hindus to Islam?


The number is not important. What's important is that it is written in their religion. They have already shown that by creating Pakistan. No secular Hindu can go for Haj. Why is it so that only Muslims are allowed there? Is it because only Muslims are secular?


Who wants to expand Islam in India? Can you name them?


No. You have to understand one thing. Individually a Muslim may be good to the Hindus. But when in a group, he will be out of the national mainstream.


<FONT>Gopal Godse interview, continues</FONT>


[This message has been edited by rand0M aXiS (edited 07-13-2001).]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion is meant to unite all men,poltics

causes war and bloodshed.I am a man of all

religions..I am Hindu,Muslim,as well as Jew

and Christian.My eyes are blue and if my brothers eyes are brown they make him no less

my brother.Hold in your arms a baby,be it

Hindu or Muslim,I assure you that it is

equally precious and tender.If the rainbow

was missing one hue it would not be complete.

The foolish do not look beyond physical appearances to see my true nature as the Lord of all creation.The knowledge of such deluded people is empty;their lives are fraught with disaster and evil and their work and hopes are in vain.But truly great souls seek my divive nature.They worship me with a one-pointed mind,having realized that

I am the eternal source of all.-BhagavadGita:9:11-13

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gandhiji is seen as a saint by some and as a

traitor by others.I can say with utmost cert-

ianty that he did not like the idea of his mother India being divided and that there was

little to none that he could have done to in

any way change the outcome.The truth is that India was devided long before the physical

boundaries of Pakistan came into existence.

There was,is,and shall remain both Hindus and

Muslims,as well as the other sects that gives

the motherland her vibrant color.How you view

Gandhiji is something that you must decide; however,it should be tempered with truth rather bias and untruth.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the whole Hindu-Muslim (India v Pakistan) divide will never be bridged. Just as the Jewish-Muslim (Israel vs. Palestinian) divide will never be resolved. So what to do? The only thing is to maintain both sides at bay and hope the violence never gets out of control. This is my thinking.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Atma ji,

I have read many books on Gandhi ji and Nathuram Godse. But when I read those books, I felt that the authors were either clearly biased in favour of or against Gandhi. But there is one book which did not give me this feeling. That is "The life and death of Mahatma Gandhi" by Robert Payne. Please read this book. It is really nice.

Please also read "India wins freedom: Maulana Abul Kalam Ajad" to know about India's partition.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you think of the movie "Gandhi"? Its been years since I've seen it, so I don't recall much. Is it accurate in its portrayal? Is it worth me renting and watching? Its just been too long so I don't remember if its any good or not.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...