From: dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Diatribes of Mehul Sanghvi (Re:Hindu-Muslim violence)
Date: 12 Dec 92 23:53:38 CST
Distribution: alt
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <MSANGHVI.92Dec9210114@cs.ulowell.edu>, msanghvi@cs.ulowell.edu 
>(Mehul Sanghvi) writes:
> 
>................ (deleted) ...... The "Hindu revivalists" need to be taught a
> lesson.
>....... (deleted)......
> that the next time one of them comes up with a crazy idea like the
> Ayodhya-Babri Masjid thing they'll think twice before they go on the warpath. 
>
 The author of the above article takes refuge in Hindu-bashing, IMHO. While it
 is true that "Hindu fundamentalists" have started the bellicose patriotism, I
 think that there is much more deeper truth than the one presented by the
 author. To this end, Edward A.Gargan (NYT, correspondent in New Delhi) has made
 the fundamental difference between the two warring factions pretty clear. I
 would suggest the naive author (Mr.Sanghvi) to read the article that Mr.Gargan
 has written in NYT, Dec. 12th issue, page A10. (The article is titled: The 
 Hatreds of India.) Mr.Mehul Sanghvi would hopefully revise his standpoint - 
 which is biased and thus his arguments are inept and amateurish.

  In the said article, the author interviews one Mr.Rasheeduddin Khan (the
  director of Indian Insitute of Federal Studies and a former member of the
  Upper House of the Parliament). Mr.Khan finally contends that it is *not*
  possible to accept an amicable solution. The reason is that, as stated by
  Mr.Khan, that what is *most* abhorrent in Islam is considered as the normal
  practice for Hindus. (Idol worship). Moreover, Muslims in India are governed
  by laws of the Sharia while Hindus, Jews, Christians and other minorities
  are subject to the Federal laws. The famous Shahbano case is a glaring
  example. Moreover, as the author (Gargan) contends, that Hindus for the past
  1000 years have seen demolition of their cultural existences. The author
  makes a very apt statement: " .... For centuries after, Muslim invaders
  ruled large chunks of India, allying themselves with Hindus when convenient,
  obliterating Hindu influence when necessary."

   Mr.Sanghvi may of course have his own revelation of Indian history. The
   NYT article expresses exactly what a Hindu amongst (882 million) feels today
   about Muslims. " Many Hindus, probably a vast majority, think of themselves
   as a second class citizens in their own land, somehow shunted aside as the
   Muslims are granted as special privileges."

    The above statement is a *fact* compared to what the situation of Hindus
    and other minorities in Islamic countries are ! In Bangladesh, if a Hindu
    wishes to sell his/ her property and migrate to India, situations are
    extremely hostile. That is a Hindu property is an "enemy" property. So, by
    religious of the state (probably Sharia) the Hindu has to give up about
    40% of what he/ she would have made, and, then go. (I have direct personal
    experience in this, and I am *not* lying here to raise a voice of protest.)

   In Pakistan and other Islamic countries intolerance is practised to its
   extreme. Moreover, in all Muslim dominated cities/ states whenever there
   is something anti-Muslim, a huge uproar occurs. (In the Gulf War time, one
   saw clearly how Muslims were cajoled by Rajiv Gandhi and supporting the 
   cause of Saddam Hussein. As Gargan reports, the hostility shown by most
   Muslims towards India whenever there is an India-Pakistan cricket match, 
   is surprising.)

    In short the Indian Muslims enjoy themselves as an extremely privileged
    class - 150 million out of 882 million Indian population. 

    There could be a good solution to this, and, in *all* civilized countries
    including the one where Mr.Sanghvi lives and spreads his ignorant hate
    for Hindus there is probably one uniform code. The Mormon dominated Utah
    was allowed to join the Union provided they agreed to accept law
    probibiting polygamy. Could there be *one* single of civil laws for *all*
    Indians ? Can Muslims accept the laws of the Qur'an, Sharia, Hadith and
    Sunnah be overruled ? I am just asking Mr.Sanghvi to answer this question
    in a reasonable manner - assuming that he (Mr.Sanghvi) has a working 
    knowledge of the Islamic laws and strictures. The colossal waste of money
    and effort in cajoling  a *single* minority community - and *not* others
    is what making the troubles in India pretty worse today. 

    Forgetting what had happened in the past, will it be physically possible
    to implement one single code of laws to givern civic life ? If that is
    really possible, then  the problems (communal) would subside considerably.
    Given the average Indian Muslim, and, noticing the ant-India/ Hindu
    feeling he has, one cannot dream of amicability. This is not possible as
    (1) Indian Muslims would cry hoarse and (2) Pakistan and Bangladesh and
    subsequently all Islamic countries would jump onto the bandwagon of India
    bashing till the sun and the moon exchanged places.

     Lastly, it must be noted that Cong.(I) has always been adept in the
     philosophy of "crisis management". To subdue one crisis there has been
     creation of another crisis. (Mrs. Gandhi, however world-class charismatic
     leader she might have been, was an expert in this.) Starting with the
     toppling of the Namboodripad Govt. in 1957 in Kerala, and, upto the
     creation of the Sikh crisis (rise of Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale)
     one sees all her tactics - which made her pay at the cost of her life.

     Thus, a Hindu in India who has no other country to identify with - a more
     cultural dilemma than anything else, is pushed to wall to exercise 
     intolerance. The recent incidents at Ayodhya show that this intolerance
     will continue. The GOI *will never* attempt to make a single uniform law
     for *all Indians* irrespective of religion. Elementary analysis of the
     historical situations show that there is still a fierce danger in the
     making. 

              - deb chatterjee
             (a good samaritan)
    

   
>....... (deleted)..........
> 
> 
> --
> ===============================================================================
> Mehul "raja lakhan" Sanghvi        |  UMass-Lowell Dept. of Computer Science
> Inet: msanghvi@cs.ulowell.edu      |  SnailNet: 754 Aiken St. #11
> UUCP: ...!harvard!ulowell!msanghvi |            Lowell, MA 01850-1804
> BITNET: msanghvi%cs.ulowell.edu@{cunyvm.cuny, mitvma.mit, talcott.harvard}.edu
> 
> Jone's Law:
> 	The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone
> 	to blame it on.