Ayodhya Ram Mandir: India PM Modi inaugurates Hindu temple on razed Babri mosque site [Update in post#488]

[cricketjoshila]

Yes its his fault to try and make Hindus progressive and taking off polygamy.

It is his fault that he thought that only hindus be bound to the constitution while muslims get extra rights. Not going to work anywhere with a majority.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Joshilay for PM

I have said it many times. Make the country full secular. Remove religious specific laws.

Else we risk becoming another country with a state religion.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The unlawful part is taking a huge army of fools and getting it destructed, no issue with court cases and their decisions but is the same logic again going to be applied to the Mosques in your mind..destroy them and then go to court to claim them?

Good.

Now let me present a few facts.

MATHURA: The court awarded the land to the hindus. But the govt forced an agreement on the managing committee that said that while hindus will have ownership of the land, muslims will have posession and continue to have the mosque on sri Krishna janmabhoomi. Fair? Lawful?

The PVNR govt passed the places of worship act 1992.It says that the nature of any religious building cannot be changed from what it was in 1947. It forbids anyone to even go to court and stake claim. Fair? Lawful?

FYI, the court case in Ram Janmabhoomi was filed long before 1992.

You try to artificially suppress a majority, one day they will have their way and overthrow you.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Good.

Now let me present a few facts.

MATHURA: The court awarded the land to the hindus. But the govt forced an agreement on the managing committee that said that while hindus will have ownership of the land, muslims will have posession and continue to have the mosque on sri Krishna janmabhoomi. Fair? Lawful?

The PVNR govt passed the places of worship act 1992.It says that the nature of any religious building cannot be changed from what it was in 1947. It forbids anyone to even go to court and stake claim. Fair? Lawful?

FYI, the court case in Ram Janmabhoomi was filed long before 1992.

You try to artificially suppress a majority, one day they will have their way and overthrow you.

There must be a Peace And Reconciliation Commission so that the Hindu Civilization's wounds are healed. Till that happens the historically oppressed hindus will keep on oppressing the weaklings in search for closure.

 

[cricketjoshila]

India is a civilization that has come to be profoundly marked by defeat. There were multiple desecrations of Hindu temples by British soldiers, and for a while it seems that the defeat perceived as simply the result of many centuries of foreign domination, not only that of the British Raj but of the long period of Muslim rule before that. The wound perceived is much deeper than the injuries inflicted by alien conquerors. In the end the wound is seen to be self-inflicted: India is a defeated civilization because it is a civilization shaped by Hinduism.
All India is trying to do now under Modi now is to heal this wounded civilization.
No wonder there are great chances of him winning again. there is no opposition who can withstand him for next 10 years at least.

Which temples were desecrated by British?

The muslim conquerors conquered many lands and were thrown out by many. The jews returned to their homeland after more than a millenia. The christians threw out the arabs from spain. The marathas conquered back majority of territories.

Today US can bomb a muslim nation whenever they want.

Indian civilization still follows its age old culture. It has not vanished like the pre islamic culture of Arabs, Persians Afghans or pakistanis. Infact the defeat of these people is so complete that they think they are the conquerors while they are actually the vanquished.

 

[Slog]

Which temples were desecrated by British?

they were the first ones who took control of hindu temples from local communities which you had mentioned was a problem a few weeks ago. it exists till today and many hindus dont like it

The muslim conquerors conquered many lands and were thrown out by many. The jews returned to their homeland after more than a millenia. The christians threw out the arabs from spain. The marathas conquered back majority of territories.

The marathas peak laster shorter than Umar Akmals Also they had to get support from foreign invaders british to fight muslim rulers such as tipu sultan. Some great conquering happened im sure.
[MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] - this is the fake maratha love i was talking about. They are bothered by the greatness of the Mughals and that mughal culture, food and structures are still the main identifiers of India in modern discourse so they try to equate a relatively unknown empire like marathas to the mughals.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

they were the first ones who took control of hindu temples from local communities which you had mentioned was a problem a few weeks ago. it exists till today and many hindus dont like it


The marathas peak laster shorter than Umar Akmals Also they had to get support from foreign invaders british to fight muslim rulers such as tipu sultan. Some great conquering happened im sure.
[MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] - this is the fake maratha love i was talking about. They are bothered by the greatness of the Mughals and that mughal culture, food and structures are still the main identifiers of India in modern discourse so they try to equate a relatively unknown empire like marathas to the mughals.

mughals are not the main cultural identifiers of India. Same as British are not.
India is too diverse and a mix of cultures.
Have you ever been in India and travel its length and breadth.. There is a new and different culture at at every 100KMs of India. Just take a train journey from Delhi to Bangalore once for 3 days.. it would clear your misconceptions.

 

[Rajdeep]

India is a civilization that has come to be profoundly marked by defeat. There were multiple desecrations of Hindu temples by British soldiers, and for a while it seems that the defeat perceived as simply the result of many centuries of foreign domination, not only that of the British Raj but of the long period of Muslim rule before that. The wound perceived is much deeper than the injuries inflicted by alien conquerors. In the end the wound is seen to be self-inflicted: India is a defeated civilization because it is a civilization shaped by Hinduism.
All India is trying to do now under Modi now is to heal this wounded civilization.
No wonder there are great chances of him winning again. there is no opposition who can withstand him for next 10 years at least.

Hinduism is the oldest surviving religion in the world. It is true that for centuries, many external and internal forces tried to destroy it but they all have failed spectacularly. Hindusim still stands strong in Indian and sanatan dharma is still followed. What Modi did is nothing special, he just made people connect to their roots more. He just made people realize that India was not born in 1947 and there is a history of 5000 years. He just made people realize that anti hinduism was termed as secularism in Nehruvian era.

With this Ram Temple and PM himself sitting in the ceremony with RSS head....India has now unofficially declared itself to be a hindu rastra.

 

[kaayal]

Would you still be crying if Babri masjid was getting rebuilt there instead of Ram Mandir?

Or

You’ll be rejoicing like many libtards?

It doesn’t matter whether a temple or a Masjid is built there. I will never support those thugs who did a criminal activity in Ayodhya. Unfortunately there is still some constitutional morality left in me.

 

[CricketCartoons]

It doesn’t matter whether a temple or a Masjid is built there. I will never support those thugs who did a criminal activity in Ayodhya. Unfortunately there is still some constitutional morality left in me.

Those criminals had to do what they did because the justice had eyes closed for decades. First blame should go to the authorities who just kept eyes closed on a centuries old dispute. Vigilantism fills the vacuum when there is no justice.

Now when some feel that the temple is unjust, and justice was denied, more radicalism will fill the emptiness.

All in all, it is quite entertaining to see the cycle of action and reaction.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Hinduism is the oldest surviving religion in the world. It is true that for centuries, many external and internal forces tried to destroy it but they all have failed spectacularly. Hindusim still stands strong in Indian and sanatan dharma is still followed.

Hinduism has survived but its space has spectacularly shrunk. While other religions expanded and became global, Hinduism is not even the state religion in any country, and Hindus in India are getting excited after getting one solitary temple in their favour.

But congratulate yourself on having being shrunk and confined into a rat hole.

 

[Romali_rotti]

It doesn’t matter whether a temple or a Masjid is built there. I will never support those thugs who did a criminal activity in Ayodhya. Unfortunately there is still some constitutional morality left in me.

That's good to see, now I know you don't support that thug cournel/army commander of Babri that destroyed the temple in the first place and built that mosque..

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That's good to see, now I know you don't support that thug cournel/army commander of Babri that destroyed the temple in the first place and built that mosque..

Maybe she can get access to a time machine and go back 300 years to sign a protest petition against temple demolition.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Maybe she can get access to a time machine and go back 300 years to sign a protest petition against temple demolition.

Maybe you should do some research Cap, findings by archaeologist KK Mohammad found a destroyed broken temple structure beneath Babri.

P.S. Or maybe Pakistanis should be as patriotic as Britstanis

 

[CricketCartoons]

Maybe she can get access to a time machine and go back 300 years to sign a protest petition against temple demolition.

You don't need a time machine to condemn historical injustice. I always condemn any historical injustice as long as it was the hindus at the receiving end.

 

[CanadianG00se]

It doesn’t matter whether a temple or a Masjid is built there. I will never support those thugs who did a criminal activity in Ayodhya. Unfortunately there is still some constitutional morality left in me.

Why is it “Unfortunate” that you still obide nation’s constitution? Are you planning to be a rebel?
Regarding thugs, you mean BJP goons in 90s as well as Babri thugs in 1500s?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Maybe you should do some research Cap, findings by archaeologist KK Mohammad found a destroyed broken temple structure beneath Babri.

P.S. Or maybe Pakistanis should be as patriotic as Britstanis

I doubt Bristanis would have the slightest clue about archeology of Babri, but seems like Aussie Indians really study it in detail I would actually love to hear about Oz Indians and their life down under, we never really see them much in media or public life.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

I have said it many times. Make the country full secular. Remove religious specific laws.

Else we risk becoming another country with a state religion.

Does BJP not have the majority now? Whats stopping them for removing these laws? Do they want to wait before the next election?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Lol Lol. Have you the Muslim Board statements, it's all veiled threats including from several posters here. It's important to recognize that this public site of Ram Mandir will have to be the most secured, protected place. Such is the bitterness, hatred, from your side.

What threats are you talking about ? They said they accepted the verdict, but they dont have to like it. They dont have to do Bhangra, and give ladoos in celebration. They can hope that one day they get the site back.


But in reality they know Babri Masjid is gone forever, but they are worried about other mosques, so by giving statements they are hoping this is the last one.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

India is a civilization that has come to be profoundly marked by defeat. There were multiple desecrations of Hindu temples by British soldiers, and for a while it seems that the defeat perceived as simply the result of many centuries of foreign domination, not only that of the British Raj but of the long period of Muslim rule before that. The wound perceived is much deeper than the injuries inflicted by alien conquerors. In the end the wound is seen to be self-inflicted: India is a defeated civilization because it is a civilization shaped by Hinduism.
All India is trying to do now under Modi now is to heal this wounded civilization.
No wonder there are great chances of him winning again. there is no opposition who can withstand him for next 10 years at least.

Is England a wounded civilization because Romans ruled for 400 years, then Anglo Saxons ruled for around 600 years, then French for like 400 years?

The name England comes from people who conquered the land. The English language comes from people who conquered the land. The English language changed forever when other people who conquered the land brought in French as the official language. England's most famous architecture was built by descendants of people who conquered the land. England's flag comes from a Greek crusader who never set foot in England.

Did this wound England? Or are the English right in accepting that their culture has been influenced by many different groups, and that there is nothing wrong with that?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

That's good to see, now I know you don't support that thug cournel/army commander of Babri that destroyed the temple in the first place and built that mosque..

Human values were different in 1500's then they were in the 1990's. You cant compare the two.


And for Muslims Babri Masjid significance was that it was a historic mosque, not the location where it was located. Had they waited for the court to give them the site, the mosque could have been relocated to another location, and Hindus could have had the land.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Why is it “Unfortunate” that you still obide nation’s constitution? Are you planning to be a rebel?
Regarding thugs, you mean BJP goons in 90s as well as Babri thugs in 1500s?

Babur should be judged by the human values that existed in the 1500's, and the BJP/RSS/VHP who destroyed the mosque should be judged by human values that exist in the 1990's.

 

[JaDed]

Is England a wounded civilization because Romans ruled for 400 years, then Anglo Saxons ruled for around 600 years, then French for like 400 years?

The name England comes from people who conquered the land. The English language comes from people who conquered the land. The English language changed forever when other people who conquered the land brought in French as the official language. England's most famous architecture was built by descendants of people who conquered the land. England's flag comes from a Greek crusader who never set foot in England.

Did this wound England? Or are the English right in accepting that their culture has been influenced by many different groups, and that there is nothing wrong with that?

Your example makes me think Religion is the issue..everyone in England adopted Christianity.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Your example makes me think Religion is the issue..everyone in England adopted Christianity.

Yes, religion has a big part in it. Look at the Mughals. Mughals defeated the following:

Muslim Lodi Empire
Muslim Sur Empire
Muslim Bengal Sultanate
Muslim Malwa Sultanate
Muslim Gujarat Sultanate
Muslim Kashmir
Muslim Ahmednagar
Muslim Bijapur
Muslim Golconda

But when subcontinent Muslims think of the Mughals they just think of the cultural contributions they made in architecture, cuisine, clothing, poetry etc. Depending on what part of the subcontinent they are from, there ancestors might have fought against the Mughals invading their territory. But no one cares about that.

 

[JaDed]

Yes, religion has a big part in it. Look at the Mughals. Mughals defeated the following:

Muslim Lodi Empire
Muslim Sur Empire
Muslim Bengal Sultanate
Muslim Malwa Sultanate
Muslim Gujarat Sultanate
Muslim Kashmir
Muslim Ahmednagar
Muslim Bijapur
Muslim Golconda

But when subcontinent Muslims think of the Mughals they just think of the cultural contributions they made in architecture, cuisine, clothing, poetry etc. Depending on what part of the subcontinent they are from, there ancestors might have fought against the Mughals invading their territory. But no one cares about that.

Good point, unfortunately it has become like us vs them w.r.t religion could be because of Pakistan's formation.

Congress tried to make it a concept of Indian subcontinent... unfortunate some of their massive missteps gave rise to BJP Hindutva.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Good point, unfortunately it has become like us vs them w.r.t religion could be because of Pakistan's formation.

Congress tried to make it a concept of Indian subcontinent... unfortunate some of their massive missteps gave rise to BJP Hindutva.

I think the Pakistani "establishment" would have a bigger role in pushing the us vs them narrative then the formation of Pakistan. They have historically supported BJP, as that strengthens them. How the Pakistani people feel is best reflected in who they choose in democratic elections, and in the last 3 elections PPP (2008), PML N (2013), and PTI (2018) all have supported improved relations with India.


The formation of Pakistan was a result of Congress and the Muslim League unable to come to a power sharing agreement.


The 3 most important people in pushing Muslim nationalism were Jinnah, Iqbal, and Sir Syed who all supported Hindu Muslim unity before.

Jinnah - was first ambassador of Hindu Muslim unity, then the leader of the Pakistan movement

Iqbal - wrote Saare Jahan se Ache Hindustan then was to suggest that Muslim majority areas of Northwest should be a separate country

Sir Syed - first stated "We (Hindus and Muslims) eat the same crop, drink water from the same rivers and breathe the same air. As a matter of fact Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of the beautiful bride that is Hindostan. Weakness of any one of them will spoil the beauty of the bride"

then he went on to say "Now suppose that all the English were to leave India—then who would be rulers of India? Is it possible that under these circumstances two nations, Mohammedan and Hindu, could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not. It is necessary that one of them should conquer the other and thrust it down. To hope that both could remain equal is to desire the impossible and inconceivable"

 

[JaDed]

My point was after Partition [MENTION=148149]Gharib Aadmi[/MENTION] ....

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

My point was after Partition [MENTION=148149]Gharib Aadmi[/MENTION] ....

Ok. I get the logic of the BJP supporters then. If Pakistan is created on Muslim Nationalism then India should be created on Hindu Nationalism. They have a point.

I guess one solution would be like how in the US the GOP says the US culture is based on Judeo-Christian values, Pakistan and India could take Sir Syed's Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of Hindustan, and change it to make Hindus and Muslims the two eyes of the Subcontinent.


However for that to happen you would need really good relations with Pakistan and India, and that does not seem likely anytime soon.

 

[pillionrider]

Hinduism is the oldest surviving religion in the world.

As a religion, Hinduism is younger than you seem to think it is. Judaism is the oldest religion. But never mind

 

[CricketCartoons]

As a religion, Hinduism is younger than you seem to think it is.

What about not as a religion?

 

[CricketCartoons]

However for that to happen you would need really good relations with Pakistan and India, and that does not seem likely anytime soon.

Sir sayyid said hindus and muslims can co-exist only when one subjugates the other. I agree with him.

 

[pillionrider]

What about not as a religion?

You mean from the time of the Vedas or when the Upanishads separated from them

 

[CanadianG00se]

Babur should be judged by the human values that existed in the 1500's, and the BJP/RSS/VHP who destroyed the mosque should be judged by human values that exist in the 1990's.

Lame.

People who did this in 90s are either mostly dead or in their final stages of life.

People need to just move on and accept the new norms. Longer they drag, harder to overcome.

Muslim Indian board or whatever the organization was fighting the case, should just accept and move on rather than issuing threats and make it even harder for newer generations. Holding grudge is biggest obstacle for peace( I just don’t see why can’t Mosque and Temple co-exists in same neighbourhood)

 

[BreadPakoda]

Lol Lol. Have you the Muslim Board statements, it's all veiled threats including from several posters here. It's important to recognize that this public site of Ram Mandir will have to be the most secured, protected place. Such is the bitterness, hatred, from your side.

From my side?

 

[Rajdeep]

As a religion, Hinduism is younger than you seem to think it is. Judaism is the oldest religion. But never mind

Wrong. Hindusim is older than Judaism.

Judaism started in 2000 BCE.

Hinduism in 2300 BCE.

Have you ever wondered what is the oldest religion? Most religions claim it has existed since the dawn of time. Most research however points to Hinduismas the oldest form of practicing religion. It was founded in approximately 2300 BC.

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/god/what-is-the-oldest-religion.html

https://travel.earth/oldest-religions-in-the-world/

 

[fitCricFan]

My earlier post was removed but anyways asking again....

How many times has the Pakistan govt relocated or provided alternate location for church's, temple's or gurudwara's that were destroyed,vandalized or forcibly taken over in the country since 1947.

yes this is a very uncomfortable question.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

The English did their best to destroy other cultures, decimate and subjugate the populations and loot and massacre their land. So Please don't give sermons about English civilization because they are the last example of civilized people.
India was plundered by multiple invaders in last 300-400 years.Invaders from completely different culture. Its still raw. Romans ruled some 1000 years ago. Also England and Roman have one shared bond, The Western Civilization. So i would say its still same culture and civilization.

Also, Do English accept French language as part of their culture. As far as i know, there always has been a push to make English the dominating language. So They want to push their own values and language.
What's wrong in Indians doing the same now. Push for their values and civil structures which existed before the invaders came.

Do English accept French language as part of their culture??

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

The English did their best to destroy other cultures, decimate and subjugate the populations and loot and massacre their land. So Please don't give sermons about English civilization because they are the last example of civilized people.

Everyone did that.

However the point was that those people who invaded England, and looted and subjugated the population, also made England there home. They were born and bred there, and the people in England dont consider Anglo-Saxons, Normans, etc to be invaders.

They view them as English.

India was plundered by multiple invaders in last 300-400 years.Invaders from completely different culture. Its still raw. Romans ruled some 1000 years ago. Also England and Roman have one shared bond, The Western Civilization. So i would say its still same culture and civilization.

Same religion is the reason. No way would Hindus have considered Muslim Kings who were born and bred in subcontinent as invaders had they converted to Hinduism, or had majority of Hindus converted to Islam.

Also, Do English accept French language as part of their culture. As far as i know, there always has been a push to make English the dominating language. So They want to push their own values and language.

They accept the influence that French has had on English and have no problem with it.

The English language completely changed after William the Conqueror became King of England. French was the official language, and the English language has thousands of loan words from French. No one in England, talks about making English free of these loanwords.

They also dont consider English Kings from 1066 to 1485 to be French. They dont think the French ruled England for 400 years. They consider these Kings to be English.

Also English itself came from the Anglo Saxons who invaded England. People in England spoke Celtic languages before. No one in England says lets get rid of English and go back to the Celtic language.

What's wrong in Indians doing the same now. Push for their values and civil structures which existed before the invaders came.

Do English accept French language as part of their culture??

Nothing wrong with it. However Indian Muslims and liberal Hindus dont consider Muslim Kings who were born and bred in the subcontinent to be invaders, and dont consider their culture to be foreign.

So to give an example Timur sacked the subcontinent and left. He was an invader. Babur conquered the subcontinent, however his family established a dynasty in India and stayed there. So they dont view the Mughals as invaders.

However if the majority of Indians want to go back to the culture that existed before Muslims ever came there, then that's their choice.

 

[Romali_rotti]

As a religion, Hinduism is younger than you seem to think it is. Judaism is the oldest religion. But never mind

Did your role model Rahul Puppu tell you the above :

 

[Slog]

The basis or partition was that hindu and muslims cant live together and hence there needs to be a separate country for muslims. Muslims got that separate country.

The muslims who stayed back were given no guarantee under any agreement in 1947 that India will have no state religion. It was only in 1950 that under the constitution it was declared that there would be no state religion and it was only in 1976 that the word secular was inserted into the preamble.

So to say that any guarantees were given to muslims during the partition or before it in terms of secularism is not correct.

Wasn’t the whole argument during partition that the Indian side wanted an undivided secular country with no
State religion and Pakistani side wanted a partition with a country for Muslims? When the India pitch was for a united secular country how can you say that it is not a fair expectation for Muslims who stayed back to have expected a country where there would be no state religion.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Wasn’t the whole argument during partition that the Indian side wanted an undivided secular country with no
State religion and Pakistani side wanted a partition with a country for Muslims? When the India pitch was for a united secular country how can you say that it is not a fair expectation for Muslims who stayed back to have expected a country where there would be no state religion.

the idea was to have a secular country with uniform civil code. That means equal laws for marriage, banking, land holding etc. That clearly did not happen and congress appeasement policies were the major cause of that resentment. Read up the Shah bano case that in my opinion was the trigger for where we are today. that case spooked lot of people believing in secularism upto that point.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Wasn’t the whole argument during partition that the Indian side wanted an undivided secular country with no
State religion and Pakistani side wanted a partition with a country for Muslims? When the India pitch was for a united secular country how can you say that it is not a fair expectation for Muslims who stayed back to have expected a country where there would be no state religion.

There was pitch for united india, but never secular. That word wasn't used anywhere in the pitch. Happy to be proved wrong.

 

[CricketCartoons]

the idea was to have a secular country with uniform civil code. That means equal laws for marriage, banking, land holding etc. That clearly did not happen and congress appeasement policies were the major cause of that resentment. Read up the Shah bano case that in my opinion was the trigger for where we are today. that case spooked lot of people believing in secularism upto that point.

Any evidence that the leaders of congress stated that they wanted a secular country?

 

[OldWarHorse]

There was pitch for united india, but never secular. That word wasn't used anywhere in the pitch. Happy to be proved wrong.

The word secular in its own is not important. It was the idea of India not having a state religion which was clearly described by the leaders who championed for it and got it through the Constitution which came into force in 1950. There was a reason why the 'secular' was not used due to its intonation of separation of state and religion in India which was not going to be achieved especially considering the need to reform religious laws in the state. They managed to do it with the Hindu code bill but obviously due to appeasement never went ahead with UCC.
The guys who made the Constitution were all lawyers so they worked around the word 'secular' by incorporating the key articles 25-28 which ensures India will never have state religion. Its a basic feature. Cant be amended.

 

[CricketCartoons]

The word secular in its own is not important. It was the idea of India not having a state religion which was clearly described by the leaders who championed for it and got it through the Constitution which came into force in 1950. There was a reason why the 'secular' was not used due to its intonation of separation of state and religion in India which was not going to be achieved especially considering the need to reform religious laws in the state. They managed to do it with the Hindu code bill but obviously due to appeasement never went ahead with UCC.
The guys who made the Constitution were all lawyers so they worked around the word 'secular' by incorporating the key articles 25-28 which ensures India will never have state religion. Its a basic feature. Cant be amended.

Even Q-e-A didn't talk about a state religion, so Pakistan was envisioned as a secular country?

Why was the constitution designed with motifs from Ramayana, why did Gandhi want a ban on cow slaughter, and why was it added in the constitution? Because the founders wanted a secular nation?

 

[OldWarHorse]

Even Q-e-A didn't talk about a state religion, so Pakistan was envisioned as a secular country?

Why was the constitution designed with motifs from Ramayana, why did Gandhi want a ban on cow slaughter, and why was it added in the constitution? Because the founders wanted a secular nation?

I dont know or care about Pakistan Constitution. I know about the Indian one. The Constitution was inspired and adopted from various sources like US, British, Japanese, South African, Russian,Irish constitutions etc etc. It has all sorts of ideals. It has Hindu traditions as well. So nothing path breaking about it.

Secondly prevention of cow slaughter, along with other draught and milch animals (which means goat as well), is mention in Directive Principle of state policy, which are not legally enforceable. These are ideals the govt should try for but not mandatory. They talk about prevention of accumulation of wealth,mimimise inequality of income, equal pay for equal work for men and women, make workers part of decision makers in factories etc. That tells you everything about its importance. If it was that important it would have been a basic article.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I dont know or care about Pakistan Constitution. I know about the Indian one. The Constitution was inspired and adopted from various sources like US, British, Japanese, South African, Russian,Irish constitutions etc etc. It has all sorts of ideals. It has Hindu traditions as well. So nothing path breaking about it.

Secondly prevention of cow slaughter, along with other draught and milch animals (which means goat as well), is mention in Directive Principle of state policy, which are not legally enforceable. These are ideals the govt should try for but not mandatory. They talk about prevention of accumulation of wealth,mimimise inequality of income, equal pay for equal work for men and women, make workers part of decision makers in factories etc. That tells you everything about its importance. If it was that important it would have been a basic article.

I didn't mention pakistani constitution. Just that it's founder didn't talk about a state religion and said all will be able to practice their religion. Do you think the founder was talking about a secular state?

The COI had hindu traditions as well? So why didn't it have muslim traditions? Why were motifs from Ramayan was used to decorate the constitution?

DPSP is not legally enforceable, sure, but it is set as the ideals the country should aim for. So why was cow slaughter ban set as the ideal, if it was supposed to be a secular country?

 

[OldWarHorse]

I didn't mention pakistani constitution. Just that it's founder didn't talk about a state religion and said all will be able to practice their religion. Do you think the founder was talking about a secular state?

The COI had hindu traditions as well? So why didn't it have muslim traditions? Why were motifs from Ramayan was used to decorate the constitution?

DPSP is not legally enforceable, sure, but it is set as the ideals the country should aim for. So why was cow slaughter ban set as the ideal, if it was supposed to be a secular country?

It doesnt need to follow every religion does it, it just follows what they felt right. If they found something useful in the Indic culture they included it. If you love Indic culture be happy about it. It doesn't have to be about Hinduism the religion only. Also now we are talking about artwork to justify they wanted Hindu state??? One of the greatest epics written on this land is inspiring the art, so what? Just so you know there are depictions of Guru Gobind, Ashoka, Mahavira, Buddha, Akbar, Tipu Sultan in these illustrations as well. Its the Indian culture which was celebrated in the calligraphy, stop looking for agenda here.
Again its not just cows but all draught and milch animals (which means including goat, sheep, camel etc) whose slaughter was prohibited there. These are the Gandhian principles. Its not just restricted to the animals we worship. There is a sentimental values attached to these animals among the people in this country and thats why they were mentioned as an ideal.

 

[CricketCartoons]

It doesnt need to follow every religion does it, it just follows what they felt right. If they found something useful in the Indic culture they included it. If you love Indic culture be happy about it. It doesn't have to be about Hinduism the religion only. Also now we are talking about artwork to justify they wanted Hindu state??? One of the greatest epics written on this land is inspiring the art, so what? Just so you know there are depictions of Guru Gobind, Ashoka, Mahavira, Buddha, Akbar, Tipu Sultan in these illustrations as well. Its the Indian culture which was celebrated in the calligraphy, stop looking for agenda here.
Again its not just cows but all draught and milch animals (which means including goat, sheep, camel etc) whose slaughter was prohibited there. These are the Gandhian principles. Its not just restricted to the animals we worship. There is a sentimental values attached to these animals among the people in this country and thats why they were mentioned as an ideal.

Whose sentimental values? Whose indic culture? The answer is the majority. Majoritarian. Not secular. The majoritarian beliefs are embedded in the constitution and were promoted by the founders. Just because muslim were given rights doesn't mean india was meant to be secular.

The motifs had people from other religions, but were there motifs from christianity or islam present? Why not?

The secular word was added to the constitution in 70s as indira had to join hand with leftists.

 

[OldWarHorse]

Whose sentimental values? Whose indic culture? The answer is the majority. Majoritarian. Not secular. The majoritarian beliefs are embedded in the constitution and were promoted by the founders. Just because muslim were given rights doesn't mean india was meant to be secular.

The motifs had people from other religions, but were there motifs from christianity or islam present? Why not?

The secular word was added to the constitution in 70s as indira had to join hand with leftists.

Again you will look for agenda when there isnt one. What beliefs are you talking about?..One article out of 400 plus, that too in the DPSP, which is just for an ideal, preventing slaughter of ALL milch animals and not just cows and has 10 more articles supporting Communism? Cmon man. I know more people who eat goats than those who dont and most people who dont know or want communism. Its not just majoritarian its about ideals. Hell its not religious even.

Again Guru Gobind, Mahavira, Buddha are not just people of different religions but religious figures. Their depictions clearly describes its not just Hinduism which belongs to this country. Christianity and Islam were not founded in this country or have their roots here. So I can understand them missing from artwork celebrating Indian culture. Though as far as i know isnt drawing of Islamic figures frowned upon,not sure though. Please correct me on the last part if Iam incorrect.

Once again if you are using a few pages of artwork on the longest constitution ever written ignoring the numerous articles which support equality of all religions and basically preventing India being a single religious state ever, to justify that India is a Hindu state then thats just being pedantic.

Again the word 'secular' doesnt need to be enshrined for it to be followed in the country. Indian system of religious equality is not same as the western concept of the word 'secular' which was why it was not included originally. Read about the deliberations of the Constitution Assembly on this matter in 1947-49. The SC in 1962,72 etc, even before it being added to preamble, spoke about how India was a secular state as described in the articles i mentioned previously. Why Indira did what she did is not important in this matter.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Wasn’t the whole argument during partition that the Indian side wanted an undivided secular country with no
State religion and Pakistani side wanted a partition with a country for Muslims? When the India pitch was for a united secular country how can you say that it is not a fair expectation for Muslims who stayed back to have expected a country where there would be no state religion.

Undivided country could have been one with no state religion as Congress may have wanted the same.

But once partition happened and muslims had their share of land, why the expectations of other country of no state religion in the other country. Muslims were free to have islamic republic in their majority area, similarly the other side had the freedom of deciding what they wanted in the non muslim majority area.

Muslims cannot have the expectation of both an islamic and secular republic.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Again you will look for agenda when there isnt one. What beliefs are you talking about?..One article out of 400 plus, that too in the DPSP, which is just for an ideal, preventing slaughter of ALL milch animals and not just cows and has 10 more articles supporting Communism? Cmon man. I know more people who eat goats than those who dont and most people who dont know or want communism. Its not just majoritarian its about ideals. Hell its not religious even.

Again Guru Gobind, Mahavira, Buddha are not just people of different religions but religious figures. Their depictions clearly describes its not just Hinduism which belongs to this country. Christianity and Islam were not founded in this country or have their roots here. So I can understand them missing from artwork celebrating Indian culture. Though as far as i know isnt drawing of Islamic figures frowned upon,not sure though. Please correct me on the last part if Iam incorrect.

Once again if you are using a few pages of artwork on the longest constitution ever written ignoring the numerous articles which support equality of all religions and basically preventing India being a single religious state ever, to justify that India is a Hindu state then thats just being pedantic.

Again the word 'secular' doesnt need to be enshrined for it to be followed in the country. Indian system of religious equality is not same as the western concept of the word 'secular' which was why it was not included originally. Read about the deliberations of the Constitution Assembly on this matter in 1947-49. The SC in 1962,72 etc, even before it being added to preamble, spoke about how India was a secular state as described in the articles i mentioned previously. Why Indira did what she did is not important in this matter.

Mahavira, Guru Govind Singh etc are religious figures, but for INDIC religions. No islamic or christian religious figures in the constitution. Why?

I didn't say india is a hindu state, but a majoritarian state. hindus consider indic religions as their own.

What did Gandhi have to say about cow slaughter? Read it. His writings are out in the open. Cow slaughter ban was very close to his heart and he wanted hindus to convince muslims ( as opposed to lynching).

Non muslim cannot become head of state is also only ONE out of many articles in neighbour country's constitution. Dont give this stupid argument.

I read only few lines of your post. I won't read essays unless you write intelligently. Answer to each question in 2 lines.

 

[OldWarHorse]

Mahavira, Guru Govind Singh etc are religious figures, but for INDIC religions. No islamic or christian religious figures in the constitution. Why?

I didn't say india is a hindu state, but a majoritarian state. hindus consider indic religions as their own.

What did Gandhi have to say about cow slaughter? Read it. His writings are out in the open. Cow slaughter ban was very close to his heart and he wanted hindus to convince muslims ( as opposed to lynching).

Non muslim cannot become head of state is also only ONE out of many articles in neighbour country's constitution. Dont give this stupid argument.

I read only few lines of your post. I won't read essays unless you write intelligently. Answer to each question in 2 lines.

I have already your questions regarding why no Islamic or Christian figures in my previous post. Go read them if you want the answers. Some times long post help explain stuff, you can ignore if you want.

What is this about a majoritarian state? You have specifically being talking about India having a state religion and not being secular, I was responding that it clearly is. Anyways Hindus can consider Sikhism, Buddhism, Jains etc to be their own and hence part of majority, but officially it isn't. They are classified as minorities in the constitution.

I know what Gandhi felt about cow slaughter and how he wanted to convince the Muslim brothers. But even he recognised you can't force anybody to do that.
Thats why it is only spoken about in a sub-point of one single article in the DPSP, even then its about all milch animals and not just cows. It could have been just about cows you know if they wanted it to be religious. You get that right how much religious that point is whatever Gandhi's beliefs?

And DPSP is not a law, unlike other articles and that's why IT IS different than a law talking about non-Muslims leaders in Pakistani constitution. If it were, we would be a communist state for ever.

 

[CricketCartoons]

What is this about a majoritarian state? You have specifically being talking about India having a state religion and not being secular, I was responding that it clearly is.

Are you really this dumb? Where did I talk about india having a state religion. Quote me.

 

[CricketCartoons]

And DPSP is not a law, unlike other articles and that's why IT IS different than a law talking about non-Muslims leaders in Pakistani constitution. If it were, we would be a communist state for ever.

DPSP is the ideal the state should aspire to. Just because it is not a law yet, doesn't mean it has no meaning. The state should try to make it a law sometime in future, that is idea behind DPSP. Do you support india banning cow slaughter and having UCC as this is what the founders wanted india to become?

 

[CricketCartoons]

I have already your questions regarding why no Islamic or Christian figures in my previous post. Go read them if you want the answers. Some times long post help explain stuff, you can ignore if you want.

You did not answer. Why are religious figures/motifs of christianity and islam missing and only indic religions present in the constitution.

Was the answer that it is to honour the sentiments of the people? Ok then why doesn't it honour the sentiments of abrahamic religion people?

 

[OldWarHorse]

Are you really this dumb? Where did I talk about india having a state religion. Quote me.

You may not have to say it directly, but you have been arguing about India not having secular status all the time. Though the point regarding secularism still stands. India has always been secular since the day constitution was drafted.

 

[CricketCartoons]

You may not have to say it directly, but you have been arguing about India not having secular status all the time. Though the point regarding secularism still stands. India has always been secular since the day constitution was drafted.

You said that I specifically said india has a state religion. You can't show it. You are a liar.

I have clearly mentioned I am talking about india being majoritarian. Right from the founders.

 

[Abdullah719]

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli this week attempted to ignite a fresh row over Lord Ram’s birthplace, telling a delegation that he was convinced that Lord Ram was born in south Nepal’s Ayodhyapuri and not Uttar Pradesh’s Ayodhya.

PM Oli’s remark on Ayodhya, the second in a month, comes against the backdrop of an acrimonious power struggle within the ruling Nepal Communist Party that is widely seen headed for a split. PM Oli has made it clear that he isn’t going to step down anytime soon as demanded by the rival camp led by the party’s co-chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal and the two other former PMs, Madhav Nepal and Jhalanath Khanal.

Spoiler

PM Oli’s rivals have the majority within the party but have been unable to dislodge the prime minister who has been needling India - Nepal’s new map was one such effort - to endear himself to China’s communist party.

PM Oli’s claim last month that Lord Ram was born in south Nepal’s Ayodhyapuri, and not UP’s Ayodhya, was delivered in this context. The remark was described as “ludicrous” by his party who spotted a pattern in the prime minister’s “undiplomatic” and “irritating” pinpricks targeting India.

New Delhi had then let it pass after the foreign ministry in Kathmandu rushed to put out a clarification, clarifying that the prime minister only meant to highlight the importance of further studies and research of the cultural geography represented by Ramayana.

PM Oli worked hard to rake it up again on Saturday.

The prime minister, who has been bunking meetings of the NCP’s top leadership for weeks, took out two hours to meet a delegation from Madi in Chitwan district to discuss his plans for Lord Ram’s birthplace. He told the delegation led by Madi mayor Thakur Prasad Dhakal that they should get down to prepping for Lord Ram’s idol and promote Ayodhyapuri as his place of birth. A suggestion to rename the municipality to Ayodhyapuri was also floated at this meeting.

PM Oli’s continuing effort to appropriate Lord Ram’s birthplace has drawn sharp reactions from religious leaders in Nepal including the priests at the Janaki temple. Acharya Durga Prasad Gautam, the Nepalese priest who participated in the bhumi poojan at Ayodhya, had run down PM Oli’s claims, describing the claim as absurd.

Kathmandu watchers say the shrewd communist leader’s sudden interest in religion lately appeared to be designed to signal to China and its ambassador Hou Yanqi that he was their best bet against India and should receive Beijing’s support.

Ambassador Hou, derisively described as Nepal’s new viceroy to reflect her influence over the prime minister, has been quietly working to avoid a split in the Nepal Communist Party. At one point, she is learnt to have messaged to Oli’s rivals that the Chinese Communist Party’s sole interest was to ensure that the NCP - formed in 2018 after the merger of Nepal’s two communist parties - did not split.

“PM Oli is trying hard to tell China that he is indispensable to serving Beijing’s interests in Kathmandu,” a Kathmandu watcher in New Delhi said.

PM Oli last month made it clear that the NCP could split if he was pushed out of the government when his camp re-registered his old party CPN-UML as a political party with the election commission. The ruling NCP was formed with the merger of the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) and Dahal’s Communist Party of Nepal- Maoist Centre in 2018

PM Oli hasn’t spoken about it. But Dahal, who suspects the move to register the new party is part of PM Oli’s Plan B; to split the NCP in case he is forced to resign, has told his followers to prepare for the “worst”.

Diplomats in Kathmandu said they had not been able to decipher why Dahal, a former guerilla leader, and Madhav Nepal had not pushed PM Oli hard enough so far though he has had the numbers on his side.

“It is a little curious,” he said, wondering if PM Oli’s upper hand over his rivals had something to do with some “political vulnerabilities”.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...rn-in-nepal/story-SreuEJe32EohO1O0WtOJoN.html

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You may not have to say it directly, but you have been arguing about India not having secular status all the time. Though the point regarding secularism still stands. India has always been secular since the day constitution was drafted.

When was the constitution drafted?

 

[OldWarHorse]

You did not answer. Why are religious figures/motifs of christianity and islam missing and only indic religions present in the constitution.

Was the answer that it is to honour the sentiments of the people? Ok then why doesn't it honour the sentiments of abrahamic religion people?

See here:

Again Guru Gobind, Mahavira, Buddha are not just people of different religions but religious figures. Their depictions clearly describes its not just Hinduism which belongs to this country. Christianity and Islam were not founded in this country or have their roots here. So I can understand them missing from artwork celebrating Indian culture. Though as far as i know isnt drawing of Islamic figures frowned upon,not sure though. Please correct me on the last part if Iam incorrect.

Again don't club Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism etc with the Hindu Religion to make them a single entity, at least as far as a legal document is concerned, they are recognised separate as per Indian law.

Also creativity and art used for decorating the COI celebrating Indian culture is no argument against whats actually written in the critical articles clearly specifying there can never be a religious state in India as it is secular in its basic feature. And it cant be amended. Simple as that. Try taking that to a court of law for your argument, you will be laughed out of there.

 

[OldWarHorse]

On 26th November 1949, it was officially adopted on 26th January 1950 for symbolic reasons and it became our Republic Day. It took a massive 3 years to complete though, starting from Dec 1946.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

What was adopted on 26th November 1949?

 

[OldWarHorse]

What was adopted on 26th November 1949?

The Constitution in its final form was drafted on 26th Nov 1949. It was officially adopted on 26 Jan 1950.

 

[kaayal]

Those criminals had to do what they did because the justice had eyes closed for decades. First blame should go to the authorities who just kept eyes closed on a centuries old dispute. Vigilantism fills the vacuum when there is no justice.

Now when some feel that the temple is unjust, and justice was denied, more radicalism will fill the emptiness.

All in all, it is quite entertaining to see the cycle of action and reaction.

Tbh I don’t feel the temple is unjust there but the SC giving a “populist justice” so as to appease the majority masses is what concerning me. I truly hope this is just a right wing phase in our history and soon the balance will come back.

 

[CricketCartoons]

See here:


Again don't club Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism etc with the Hindu Religion to make them a single entity, at least as far as a legal document is concerned, they are recognised separate as per Indian law.

Also creativity and art used for decorating the COI celebrating Indian culture is no argument against whats actually written in the critical articles clearly specifying there can never be a religious state in India as it is secular in its basic feature. And it cant be amended. Simple as that. Try taking that to a court of law for your argument, you will be laughed out of there.

Another dumb post. I talked about religious figures/motifs. Did you miss the motif part?

You concede that indic religions have a special status compared to abrahamic religions, that is why they are used in the constitution. Good that you agree here. Now don't make the dumb assumption that I am mixing them with hindu religion. I will ask you to quote and you will prove yourself to be a liar once again. Not intesrested in someone who is operating with such poor comprehension.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Tbh I don’t feel the temple is unjust there but the SC giving a “populist justice” so as to appease the majority masses is what concerning me. I truly hope this is just a right wing phase in our history and soon the balance will come back.

Appeasing the majority is better than appeasing the minority. Minorities should behave like minorities and don't expect the same privileges the majority gets. True for all countries.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The Constitution in its final form was drafted on 26th Nov 1949. It was officially adopted on 26 Jan 1950.

I see. Is the constitution written in Hindi? Is there a Hindi version of the word constitution? I am just trying to get a grasp on history here given the seeming connection of the constitution date-wise to the relinquishing of the Indian colony by the British.

 

[OldWarHorse]

Another dumb post. I talked about religious figures/motifs. Did you miss the motif part?

You concede that indic religions have a special status compared to abrahamic religions, that is why they are used in the constitution. Good that you agree here. Now don't make the dumb assumption that I am mixing them with hindu religion. I will ask you to quote and you will prove yourself to be a liar once again. Not intesrested in someone who is operating with such poor comprehension.

If there is anyone that is struggling to comprehend it might be you man. Anyways i wont go into all that. I have the patience to answer you again.

Well you have been clubbing them together as Indic religions, though they are all separate religions as per law. Having their own special provisions, separate from those of Hindus in the COI itself sometimes as minorities alongwith Muslims, Christians, Parsis etc. So by essence the religious figures in the COI, are of different religions. Just like a Christian, in say, Turkey is a minority and even though they are all Abrahamic. Yes they belong to our country and are special but they are still separate nonetheless. Stop clubbing them as one(Indic religions or Majority) as far as the Constitution is concerned.

You do understand what Motif means right and why they are used? The motifs itself contain these religious figures as well as non religious once like Indus Valley, Ashoka, courts of Akbar, Tipu Sultan, Guptas, Gandhi, Sivaji etc. Basically higlighting Indian history not religions. These figures are part of the motif, why do you need separate explanations for them. Anyway they are for decorative purpose and have no legal one whatsoever.

Why are you so stuck on the artwork is beyond me though. Who cares of the artwork or the influence behind it, when the document itself describes itself to be stating equality of religion and is secular by nature.

 

[kaayal]

Appeasing the majority is better than appeasing the minority. Minorities should behave like minorities and don't expect the same privileges the majority gets. True for all countries.

This is what going on in India right now but I still have hope in our people. Let’s see how long this Savarna dream run continues.

 

[OldWarHorse]

I see. Is the constitution written in Hindi? Is there a Hindi version of the word constitution? I am just trying to get a grasp on history here given the seeming connection of the constitution date-wise to the relinquishing of the Indian colony by the British.

In English and Hindi. You have to understand that the idea was that the British would leave on June 1948, so the Constituent Assembly which started drafting in Dec 1946 supposedly had time. But as you know the separation was hastened and everything went into all sorts of confusion.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

In English and Hindi. You have to understand that the idea was that the British would leave on June 1948, so the Constituent Assembly which started drafting in Dec 1946 supposedly had time. But as you know the separation was hastened and everything went into all sorts of confusion.

You will have to pardon me, in all this talk of English constitutions I have lost my train of thought. How is it relevant to demolishing mosques and raising Hindu temples in their place again?

 

[OldWarHorse]

You will have to pardon me, in all this talk of English constitutions I have lost my train of thought. How is it relevant to demolishing mosques and raising Hindu temples in their place again?

Just an indication that secularism has always been a distinct feature of the Constitution and thus of India itself, basically since the laws of the land were formulated at the time of Independence.

 

[Slog]

Undivided country could have been one with no state religion as Congress may have wanted the same.

But once partition happened and muslims had their share of land, why the expectations of other country of no state religion in the other country. Muslims were free to have islamic republic in their majority area, similarly the other side had the freedom of deciding what they wanted in the non muslim majority area.

Muslims cannot have the expectation of both an islamic and secular republic.

Why are you treating Muslims as one monolith group. Perhaps some wanted an Islamic majority country and those moved to Pakistan and those who wanted undivided secular stayed back in India. They were certainly given enough confidence that there will be such. The Sikhs were given similar indication otherwise their demand for a Sikh homeland at the time would have been much stronger r

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Just an indication that secularism has always been a distinct feature of the Constitution and thus of India itself, basically since the laws of the land were formulated at the time of Independence.

Yes but the temples and mosques were formulated long before the Indian constitution even going by the dates you provided yourself. That would suggest to me that maybe Indian psyche is still rooted in history formulated hundreds of years ago whatever might be written in the 'constitution'.

I am putting marks around the word 'constitution' to highlight this very point.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Tbh I don’t feel the temple is unjust there but the SC giving a “populist justice” so as to appease the majority masses is what concerning me. I truly hope this is just a right wing phase in our history and soon the balance will come back.

Its populist because it goes against muslims?

You have no faith in the govt. You have no faith in the parliament. You have no faith in judiciary. So which part of the constitution you have faith on?

 

[MenInG]

After former Pakistani cricketer Danish Kaneria expressed his desire to visit the Ram mandir in Ayodhya, chairman of Sri Ram Janmabhoomi Tirath Kshetra Trust, Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, on Tuesday said that Ram belongs to everyone and that those who wish to visit Ram temple are most welcome.

“Pakistan is a part of Akhand Bharat and Hindus living there are our brothers. If he (Kaneria) wants to visit Ram Mandir and offer prayers, then he is most welcome,” said Nritya Gopal Das.

“Anyone from Pakistan who has faith in lord Ram can come to Ayodhya. The deity has a global presence and is not limited to Bharat alone,” Das said.

The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) also welcomed spinner Kaneria’s wish and demanded special visa for him from the government of India to visit the country.

“Pakistani Hindus have a blood relation with us and Kaneria’s statement proves this,” said Sharad Sharma, regional spokesperson, VHP, who operates from Karsevakpuram, Ayodhya. “We welcome every Hindu from Pakistan to Ayodhya. We owe more to them (Pakistani Hindus) as they have suffered a lot,” he said.

Priest Raju Das of Hanuman Garhi invited Kaneria to lord Hanuman’s temple also. “Pakistani Hindus are the most persecuted community in the world. If Danish Kaneria wants to visit Ram Mandir, he is most welcome at Hanuman Garhi also,” said Das.

Kaneria, who is the second Hindu cricketer to play for Pakistan after Anil Dalpat, tweeted several times in the last one week with the religious slogan ‘Jai Shri Ram’.

In his tweet, Kaneria, said: “The beauty of Lord Ram lies in his character, not in his name. He is a symbol of the victory of right over evil. There is a wave of happiness across the world today. It is a moment of great satisfaction. #JaiShriRam.”

In a recent interview to a news channel, Kaneria expressed his desire to offer prayers at the Ram temple in Ayodhya.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi laid the foundation stone of the temple on August 5 in a grand ceremony at Ram Janmabhoomi. Soon after PM Modi performed the Bhoomi Pujan, the former Pakistani cricketer posted an image on social media platforms featuring Ram Mandir’s digital image on a giant billboard at New York’s Times Square.

Sharing the image, Kaneria had also tweeted, “Today is the historical day for Hindus across the world. Lord Ram is our ideal.” A few reports stated that the leg-spinner received backlash over the post as Islamists threatened him leading to the deletion of the tweet by the Pakistani cricketer.

“There is a wave of happiness across the world today. It is a moment of great satisfaction,” the 39-year-old former spinner was quoted as saying.

Being one of the most successful bowlers in Test cricket history of Pakistan with 261 wickets, Kaneria had reportedly been ‘mistreated’ by his former teammates for being a Hindu.

And this was revealed by former Pakistani pacer Shoaib Akhtar, who in a chat show, had claimed how Kaneria used to be humiliated and mistreated by teammates because he was a Hindu. “Other players used to refuse to eat with him because of his Hindu faith,” Akhtar had said.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...trust-chief/story-8JYboUV7ihtpBkEegTveNK.html

 

[BreadPakoda]

Not that Akhand Bharat crap again.

 

[MenInG]

On the occasion of the Bhumi pujan of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, on August 06, several celebrities and cricketers took to social media to share congratulatory posts. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated that the event brings curtains to the long-wait by many for the establishment of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya.

On the other hand, Pakistan former spinner Danish Kaneria, only the second Hindu-cricketer to represent the Men in Green, had also tweeted, "Today is the Historical Day for Hindus across the world. Lord Ram is our idea."

Following his tweet, many thought he tried to gain fame courtesy the historical occasion. However, Kaneria opened up on his tweet and even stated that he wishes to come to the neighbouring country to see the Ram Mandir. In an interaction with India TV, the controversial spinner stated, "Being a religious person, I am a devoted Hindu and I always try to follow the path shown by Lord Ram. Since childhood, we have seen Ramayana and I worship Lord Ram and his ideals of life. The tweet that I did about Bhoomi Poojan of Ram Mandir was not done to hurt or tease anyone. I believe in Lord Ram and that's why I tweeted about it. If almighty Lord Ram desires, I will definitely come to India to see the temple."

In addition, Kaneria shed light on playing for Pakistan, in a career that spanned from 2000-2010. He opined, "Playing for the Pakistan cricket team has been a matter of pride for me. Playing for my country and being a Hindu cricketer, representing the Pakistan team and winning matches for my team is like an achievement for me and it is a matter of pride and honor for me," said the retired cricketer, who played 61 Tests and 18 ODIs.

On the occasion of the Ram Mandir's Bhumi pujan, PM Modi had pointed out, "Ramji, who for years was consigned to a tent, has finally been liberated from the cycle of destruction and construction. During our freedom movement, many generations sacrificed all that they had. The period of foreign occupation saw ceaseless striving for independence and there was no part of the country which did not witness sacrifice for the sake of freedom. August 15 symbolises the commitment, the struggle, the endless sacrifices as well as the indefatigable spirit for freedom. Just like that, today’s date symbolises the commitment, sacrifice and resolve of several generations who through centuries struggled relentlessly for Ram Mandir with single-minded resolve."

https://www.timesnownews.com/sports...former-pakistan-spinner-danish-kaneria/635532

 

[Rajdeep]

Hasin Jahan, cricketer Mohammed Shami’s estranged wife, receives threat for congratulatory messages on Ram temple bhoomi pujan

Hasin Jahan, the estranged wife of India cricketer Mohammed Shami, has received death as well as rape threats from unknown people for sharing a congralutory messages on Ram temple Bhoomi Pujan in Ayodhya on her social networking sites, a police officer of Kolkata Police said on Monday.

Jahan has lodged a complaint with the Kolkata Police Cyber Crime department at its Lalbazar headquarters on Sunday, he added.

Jahan, currently working as a model, had posted congratulatory messages on her different social media accounts after the Bhoomi Puja of Ram Mandir was held in Ayodhya on August 5 and since then she started receiving several such threats.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cric...hoomi-pujan/story-KcmXOD4lrzfk5Sd2z6cTmK.html