Statpadder Inc
Local Club Regular
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2023
- Runs
- 1,540
No true scotsman fallacy and laughably false
That is impossible, I am afraid no Indian party could ever do that
-
Contact the PP Team
[VIDEO] BJP leader threatens to ‘slaughter 200,000 Muslims’ over cow incident
- Thread starter The Bald Eagle
- Start date
Stewie
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Runs
- 14,950
Feel free to open a separate thread on the topic and post a poll asking Pakistanis how they feel about Pakistan being a muslim state. You will get your answer.
regarding the second- well you know what they say about opinions. They are like an unmentionable body part and everybody has one.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 40,404
Is Jainism different to the Buddhism practised in Myanmar? They don't seem to take the idea of ahimsa so seriously over there.
JaDed
ODI Star
- Joined
- May 5, 2014
- Runs
- 35,993
I’m sure a simple google would had sufficed , Buddhism can be radical as seen historically (Lanka China Myanmar Japan).
Jainism and Buddhism are entirely different religions.
The most radical Jains would go about being most non -violent even to vegetables, insects.
Religion is judged by its followers and Jain Radicals actually are extremly Non-violent.
Responding to some comparisons made in this thread between RSS and the Muslim League/TLP/all parties in Pakistan: we must not treat Hindu nationalism and Muslim nationalism as monolithic and entirely analogous categories.
There is a spectrum. In the case of Hindu nationalism that spectrum ranges from a ‘soft’ position which sees Hinduism as occupying a place in India as first among equals to the minority and politically marginalised position of a Hindu theocracy. Within these two positions, there are other shades of Hindu nationalist opinion.
It would be fair to say that in general Hindu nationalism is not primarily about theology, nor are Hindu nationalists motivated chiefly by a desire to establish ‘Hindu laws’. The Hindu Rashtra is more a cultural vision, which is animated by issues pertaining to identity, and concerned with reforming the way the citizens of the country think and relate to India.
The case of RSS is particularly interesting. It was set up with the specific objective of engendering a transformation in the subjective consciousness of the people of India. The RSS were seeking not so much a revolution from above as a revolution from below. It was to be an anthropological revolution: the creation of a new man; an active, muscular new man. The principal domain was therefore the cultural and social spheres rather than the political arena. One swayamsevak recorded in his diary: “Government cannot change the nation; selfless people change it.”
Not all Hindu nationalists were impressed with the singular focus on character building. Savarkar noted in a pithy comment: “The epitaph for the RSS volunteer will be that he was born, he joined the RSS and he dies without accomplishing anything.”
Of course the RSS itself is and was not a homogeneous body and there has always existed those who have pushed it to take a more politically activist stance, a position that became more influential after independence.
The final point to make in respect of the RSS is that - like many European movements that emerged in the inter-war period - it was a uniformed movement. This was the era that witnessed the rise of the masses combined with the availability of new techniques of propaganda. Symbols - like clothing - became useful affective tools to engineer the shaping of souls and the making of new societies. There was also - perhaps partly a legacy of the first World War - a certain vision of violence possessing a therapeutic quality. Uniforms also provided a sense of brotherhood and belonging.
Within Pakistan there is also a spectrum of opinion from those who seek to ‘secularise’ religious identity, to those who aim to implement a codified version of the shari’a. In the case of parties led by the ulama or ‘Islamists’, there is no question as to their desire to implement the law of God, as they interpret it. This is different to the mainstream Hindu nationalist movement in India which is primarily concerned with culture. The question for such parties in Pakistan is not whether Islamic law should apply but rather how it should be implemented.
But there has historically been disagreement within and between the parties. Mawdudi, for instance, spoke of the ulama as those individuals “steeped in conservatism to such an extent that they have lost touch with the modern world. Their education has lost all contact with the practical problems of life and has become barren and lifeless.” For ulama like the Deoband, Taqi Usmani, the problem with Mawdudi and his ilk was that, “in their zeal to counter secularism, and in their focus on the political dimension of the shari’a, they have made all of Islam a political religion, instead of making politics a part of religion.” Nevertheless in spite of critical differences such parties have often managed to present a united front when seeking to undermine their opponents.
In turn, such parties that focus on the implementation of the shari’a, need to be distinguished from the modernists, who in fact spearheaded the campaign for Pakistan. For the modernists Islam and the shari’a were not coterminous. In contrast to juristically inclined parties, the modernists believed foremost, to quote the scholar Muhammad Qasim Zaman, “that Islam had a pronounced ethical dimension to it, and it was these ethical precepts that would guide the new state.” Rather than a set of rigid laws as interpreted by the ulama, they saw in Islam a set of general principles and a moral spirit, capable of being adapted to the modern world. The ‘ecumenical’ modernists saw Islam as a focus for unity. This unity was stressed against both theological distinctions amongst Muslims and non-religious differences - such as ties of kinship - that also divided Muslims.
In Pakistan, Islamic modernism reached its political apogee during the rule of Ayub Khan. The Central Institute of Islamic Research set up by the government in 1960 reflected modernist principles, with the government explaining that the purpose of the institute was “to define Islam in terms of its fundamentals in a rational and liberal manner and to emphasise…the basic Islamic ideas of universal brotherhood, tolerance and social justice” as well as to “interpret the teachings of Islam in such a way as to bring out its dynamic character in the context of the intellectual and scientific progress of the modern world.”
Of course the modernists have become a beleaguered force. This was not inevitable and there are many reasons for this, but to merely bundle the modernists with the more juristically inclined parties represented by the ulama and Islamists, is to seriously misread Pakistani politics and misunderstood the many varying aspirations and competing visions on the role of Islam in the state.
In short it is complex and a 'primary colour' approach does scant justice to historical understanding.
There is a spectrum. In the case of Hindu nationalism that spectrum ranges from a ‘soft’ position which sees Hinduism as occupying a place in India as first among equals to the minority and politically marginalised position of a Hindu theocracy. Within these two positions, there are other shades of Hindu nationalist opinion.
It would be fair to say that in general Hindu nationalism is not primarily about theology, nor are Hindu nationalists motivated chiefly by a desire to establish ‘Hindu laws’. The Hindu Rashtra is more a cultural vision, which is animated by issues pertaining to identity, and concerned with reforming the way the citizens of the country think and relate to India.
The case of RSS is particularly interesting. It was set up with the specific objective of engendering a transformation in the subjective consciousness of the people of India. The RSS were seeking not so much a revolution from above as a revolution from below. It was to be an anthropological revolution: the creation of a new man; an active, muscular new man. The principal domain was therefore the cultural and social spheres rather than the political arena. One swayamsevak recorded in his diary: “Government cannot change the nation; selfless people change it.”
Not all Hindu nationalists were impressed with the singular focus on character building. Savarkar noted in a pithy comment: “The epitaph for the RSS volunteer will be that he was born, he joined the RSS and he dies without accomplishing anything.”
Of course the RSS itself is and was not a homogeneous body and there has always existed those who have pushed it to take a more politically activist stance, a position that became more influential after independence.
The final point to make in respect of the RSS is that - like many European movements that emerged in the inter-war period - it was a uniformed movement. This was the era that witnessed the rise of the masses combined with the availability of new techniques of propaganda. Symbols - like clothing - became useful affective tools to engineer the shaping of souls and the making of new societies. There was also - perhaps partly a legacy of the first World War - a certain vision of violence possessing a therapeutic quality. Uniforms also provided a sense of brotherhood and belonging.
Within Pakistan there is also a spectrum of opinion from those who seek to ‘secularise’ religious identity, to those who aim to implement a codified version of the shari’a. In the case of parties led by the ulama or ‘Islamists’, there is no question as to their desire to implement the law of God, as they interpret it. This is different to the mainstream Hindu nationalist movement in India which is primarily concerned with culture. The question for such parties in Pakistan is not whether Islamic law should apply but rather how it should be implemented.
But there has historically been disagreement within and between the parties. Mawdudi, for instance, spoke of the ulama as those individuals “steeped in conservatism to such an extent that they have lost touch with the modern world. Their education has lost all contact with the practical problems of life and has become barren and lifeless.” For ulama like the Deoband, Taqi Usmani, the problem with Mawdudi and his ilk was that, “in their zeal to counter secularism, and in their focus on the political dimension of the shari’a, they have made all of Islam a political religion, instead of making politics a part of religion.” Nevertheless in spite of critical differences such parties have often managed to present a united front when seeking to undermine their opponents.
In turn, such parties that focus on the implementation of the shari’a, need to be distinguished from the modernists, who in fact spearheaded the campaign for Pakistan. For the modernists Islam and the shari’a were not coterminous. In contrast to juristically inclined parties, the modernists believed foremost, to quote the scholar Muhammad Qasim Zaman, “that Islam had a pronounced ethical dimension to it, and it was these ethical precepts that would guide the new state.” Rather than a set of rigid laws as interpreted by the ulama, they saw in Islam a set of general principles and a moral spirit, capable of being adapted to the modern world. The ‘ecumenical’ modernists saw Islam as a focus for unity. This unity was stressed against both theological distinctions amongst Muslims and non-religious differences - such as ties of kinship - that also divided Muslims.
In Pakistan, Islamic modernism reached its political apogee during the rule of Ayub Khan. The Central Institute of Islamic Research set up by the government in 1960 reflected modernist principles, with the government explaining that the purpose of the institute was “to define Islam in terms of its fundamentals in a rational and liberal manner and to emphasise…the basic Islamic ideas of universal brotherhood, tolerance and social justice” as well as to “interpret the teachings of Islam in such a way as to bring out its dynamic character in the context of the intellectual and scientific progress of the modern world.”
Of course the modernists have become a beleaguered force. This was not inevitable and there are many reasons for this, but to merely bundle the modernists with the more juristically inclined parties represented by the ulama and Islamists, is to seriously misread Pakistani politics and misunderstood the many varying aspirations and competing visions on the role of Islam in the state.
In short it is complex and a 'primary colour' approach does scant justice to historical understanding.
Justcrazy
ATG
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Runs
- 105,839
Practicality in the sense you need violence of some kind to maintain Peace in the society.
I do not think they need protection , they are pretty affluent and secuted. Parsis numbers are dwindling because they do not accept others to become Parsi unless both parents are same.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2023
- Runs
- 10,809
One who eats beef shows Lord Shiva’s picture in Parliament: Rajasthan BJP chief’s veiled jibe at Rahul Gandhi
"If someone labels Hindus as terrorists, calls them violent, and opposes Ram Mandir, will we remain silent? Those who mock President Droupadi Murmu for her skin colour will continue to succeed if we remain a mute spectator," Rajasthan BJP chief C P Joshi said
In an apparent attack on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Rajasthan BJP chief C P Joshi has said those who “consume beef” show picture of Lord Shiva in Parliament.
Joshi made the remarks at a party meeting in Dausa on Wednesday. A video of his speech has surfaced on social media.
“In the India-China fight, there is tension on the international border and Rahul Gandhi sits with the Chinese ambassador… One who consumes beef brings a picture of Mahadev to Parliament. This cannot be tolerated,” Joshi said, without taking any names.
Source: The Indian Express
Bhaijaan
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Runs
- 58,761
- Post of the Week
- 1
I don’t support this however the minorities must learn to behave and if they don’t strict action must be taken against them for as long we are not talking about riots and killings. I do not support mob justice. This has to be sorted out by the local police.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2023
- Runs
- 10,809
@rpant_gabba you have an issue with major eating beef outside India. Now recall the terrorist definition that you cherry picked and apply it to yourself as you are dictating others what to eat or not.
Similar threads
