| Author | Message | ||
Awara1984 Junior Artist Username: Awara1984 Post Number: 631 Registered: 12-2010 Posted From: 125.16.29.3 Rating: |
The best definition of Hinduism was given by none other than Mahatma Gandhi, who called it a �relentless pursuit of truth�. If we expand his definition, anywhere in the world, whoever pursues the �truth� is a Hindu. So, where is the question of differentiating between state and religion? If tolerance towards all religions is secularism, we have gone a step further to respect all religions and philosophies. The whole idea of secularism and democracy, and the state being separated from religion, will all have to be revisited with a fresh and clear outlook, not with the coloured vision of western ideas or some other colour.// idi text books lo pettali | ||
Tilak Hero Username: Tilak Post Number: 16979 Registered: 02-2012 Posted From: 14.99.45.32 Rating: N/A |
Deserves more than 5 stars!!! A community that can break the country is no minority - Sardar Patel "Congress Mukt Bharat" - www.narendramodi.in | ||
Awara1984 Junior Artist Username: Awara1984 Post Number: 629 Registered: 12-2010 Posted From: 125.16.29.3 Rating: |
doggy gaadi reply It is an absolute propaganda of the Hindu fundamentalists. Hinduism cannot be a fundamentalist religion. We believe in the principle of ‘vasudeva kudumbhakam’, that the whole universe is one family. Therefore, this criticism comes only from the followers of the ‘Sangh’. In fact, to quote Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, majority fundamentalism or fanaticism is more dangerous than a minority fundamentalism or fanaticism, because the majority fundamentalism hides under the pretext of nationalism that creates doubt in the minds of the majority community that following fundamentalist, fanatic thought is indeed Indian nationalism. The Congress has always fought the ideology of fanatics, religious fanatics, whether they were from the Hindu Maha Sabha or the Sangh or the Muslim League. Even in recent years, the fanatics of the Sikh religion. | ||
Awara1984 Junior Artist Username: Awara1984 Post Number: 628 Registered: 12-2010 Posted From: 125.16.29.3 Rating: |
Seshadri Chari I don’t necessarily look at the Government of India’s views on secularism as a Nehruvian legacy, because the country as a whole adopted the Westminster System and almost everything that was in it – including multi-party democracy, first-past-the-post system and secularism. But if you carefully analyse the period 1947-50, we had a very tragic partition on the basis of religion, on the basis that Hindus and Muslims cannot live together, which was a very flawed basis. Notwithstanding that flaw and the partition, when we adopted the Constitution in 1950, it is very strange that its framers wrote a preamble that did not contain two words – secularism and socialism. Does it mean that in 1950, we were not a secular country? Does it also mean we became secular only in 1976 when the Constitution was amended to include the two words? Does it also mean that the economic policies, which we are pursuing today has anything to do with socialism? So, strangely, the words ‘secularism’ and ‘socialism’ have not been defined in the Constitution even today. We should think about why our Constitution’s framers did not think it necessary to include the word ‘secularism’. That is because they had a vision and a view of the history of the country. In the 5,000-10,000 years of our history, we never had a theocratic state. Our statecraft had no place for theology. That is why, in 1950, nobody thought of introducing the word ‘secularism’ [when the Constitution was adopted]. The state as well as society was considered to be secular enough and it was taken for granted. Although Pakistan declared itself as an Islamic Republic, we never thought in terms of declaring ourselves as a Hindu Republic. Hinduism is not one religious practice. It is a conglomeration of various values/ways of life. The best definition of Hinduism was given by none other than Mahatma Gandhi, who called it a ‘relentless pursuit of truth’. If we expand his definition, anywhere in the world, whoever pursues the ‘truth’ is a Hindu. So, where is the question of differentiating between state and religion? If tolerance towards all religions is secularism, we have gone a step further to respect all religions and philosophies. The whole idea of secularism and democracy, and the state being separated from religion, will all have to be revisited with a fresh and clear outlook, not with the coloured vision of western ideas or some other colour. } | ||
Awara1984 Junior Artist Username: Awara1984 Post Number: 627 Registered: 12-2010 Posted From: 125.16.29.3 Rating: N/A |
http://www.thehinducentre.com/the-arena/article4880550.ece |
