From: bhatnagr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Raj Bhatnagar)
Subject: Re: What is and isn't Hindutva (Was Re: Dr. Jayaraman's article)
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:44:25 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.015813.7848@newshost.lanl.gov> lahiri@pion.lanl.gov (Amitabha Lahiri  505-667-6825) writes:
>In article <C184o0.DJ8@ucunix.san.uc.edu> bhatnagr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Raj  
>Bhatnagar) writes:
>> " " Concept of Islamic State
>(Concept deleted)
>> Therefore, a Muslim is not just one who worships in a specific way,
>> but also one who must strive to adopt the above political structure
>> for the society he/she lives in. 

>I guess I am missing something here. The description of the Islamic 
>state is just that. The description did not include a statement of
>the sort "And therefore, it is the divine duty of all muslims to
>make their state an Islamic one". So how does one arrive at the
>conclusion above? 

You are right in saying that Islam dos not clearly ask its adherents
to seek Islamic states. Javed has pointed out the same thing in his
response too. But as he points out that after the Caliphates, it has
kind of become the Islamic tradition to seek Islamic States. 
This was the philosophy guiding the movement to create Pakistan out of
India. A reading of the writings by Iqbal very clearly suggests his
conviction about the desirability of Islamic State being carved out of
India. And carving out of this state resulted in eviction of 5+ million
non-adherents out of Pakistan-to-be. It is being repeated in Kashmir.
This history, and the continuing influence in Islamic community of
the proponents of islamic States are the biggest barriers between the
Hindu and Muslim communities in the sub-continent. And to make it very
clear again, I am indifferent to how one worships, or calls him/herself
Muslim/Hindu/Pseudowhatever, but I will always oppose the politics of 
seeking Islamic States out of India because that directly affects,and
that too severly, the lives of those non-adherents who live in these areas.

>India is not a religious
>state, at least not yet. So why is the red cloth of Islamic states
>being waved in front of Indian Hindus?
>

Parts of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, have been converted into
religious States. Those philosophies that sought such states are still
actively campaigning in india. Kashmir is the current area of struggle.
Consolidating the perception of India being a nation-based-State and
not willing to acknowledge any religious ideological sub-states is the
only solution to preventing future Kashmirs, Pakistan and Bangladeshs out
of India. I am not waving the red cloth of islamic states out of a 
clear vacuum. I see various things that are tantamount to negating the
nation-based-State concept of India and pointing towards the goal of
Ideological Islamic State. I think the nationalist attitude was very well
reflected when in response to a question, Dr Rahi Masum Raza, the writer
of Mahabharat TV serial's script had said that he did not see any conflict
between his being Muslim and his writing script for Mahabharat. According to
him, Islam was his religion and Mahabharat the story of his civilization.
I would like his views to become more popular.
How many Muslims are willing to view Indian heritage from this operspective
and how many are blindly rejecting it branding it "Hindu"? Refusal to sing
Vande mataram, etc, carving out of Muslims majority districts in Kerala
and TN, Shahabuddin's demand that destricts with significnat Muslims
population should have two sets of administrators - one to deal with Muslims
and the other to deal with HIndus reminds very much of the separate electorates
demand of the Muslim League in the 20's and the Morley-Minto package 
that it had sought and obtained. It is this political separatism 
that MUST be curbed; and I don't have anything to say on how one
worships his/her God/Goddess/book/Stone/Marx.

>Amitabha 
>--
>Amitabha Lahiri, e-mail:lahiri@pion.lanl.gov
>Disclaimer: No one else is responsible for what I say, and vice versa.