Liberation or Racism?
The French government is at it again. France’s lower house just passed a law that would m
ake it illegal for women to wear the full Islamic veil (burqa or niqab) in public. It would fine women 150 euros for not complying. Sundari posted on this issue back in February, and now this attack on religious freedom has come one step closer to being the law of the land as the bill passed 335 to 1 in the National Assembly this week. The bill would have to be ratified in September by the Senate to become law.
Proponents of the law say the National Assembly vote is a victory for democracy and French Values. Justice Minister Michele Alliot-Marie stated it was a victory for, “Values of freedom against all the oppressions which try to humiliate individuals; values of equality between men and women, against those who push for inequality and injustice.”
What about the value to practice your religion freely and express your identity (religious or otherwise) through what you wear? Madeline Bunting, in a great column in the UK’s Guardian today, stated: “Women wearing the skimpiest of mini-skirts sit down on buses next to other women in saris, business suits, salwar kameez. None of these cultural codes expressed in dress are regarded as the business of the state. Nor should they be.”
Bunting continues, “French politicians insisted on Tuesday that women need to be liberated from the full veil. Forcing people to be free has a long and undistinguished history – well described by many, including George Orwell – yet too many times an age is blinded by its own prejudices and forgets that liberation can never be imposed.”
This isn’t about whether we think wearing burqas or niqabs is a good idea or not. The issue is whether a government should be able to impose its notion of national identity on its citizens (and non-citizens for that matter). Sikhs in France are all too familiar with the confines of French identity. This new law is a disturbing development that further pushes the French government’s racist, assimilationist assertion of a homogeneous French identity– all in the name of liberation.
412 Responses to “Liberation or Racism?”
i think this is out of order why should anyone be told how to live there life if muslim women want to cover there face it there choice if sikh women want to wear a turban its there choice if jewish women wera wigs its there choice why should any one be told how to act how to dress what to believe its freedom off choice i think this is very out of order i would never change my self or my beliefs because of the goverment think its anti social…!!!
muslim women should be allowed to cover their face, its their choice, and sikh women should be allowed to wear turbans, and jewish women can wear wigs, its their choice, if they're fine with dressing like that , thats all that matters, there shouldn't be any fines, this is all racism
i think this is out of order why should anyone be told how to live there life if muslim women want to cover there face it there choice if sikh women want to wear a turban its there choice if jewish women wera wigs its there choice why should any one be told how to act how to dress what to believe its freedom off choice i think this is very out of order i would never change my self or my beliefs because of the goverment think its anti social…!!!
muslim women should be allowed to cover their face, its their choice, and sikh women should be allowed to wear turbans, and jewish women can wear wigs, its their choice, if they're fine with dressing like that , thats all that matters, there shouldn't be any fines, this is all racism
"France does not recognise religious law, nor does it recognise religious beliefs or morality as a motivation for the enactment of prohibitions." – Wikipedia
"One reason is their century-old secular tradition, which fiercely defends the separation of faith and state, and makes most French people uneasy about conspicuous religion. Nativity plays or carol concerts in state primary schools are unthinkable, as would be the swearing-in of presidents over the Bible. When the Swiss voted recently to ban the construction of minarets on mosques, Mr Sarkozy urged believers of all faiths in France to “practise their religion with humble discretion”. Liberal outsiders see this as intolerance. But to the French, who fought hard-won battles against authoritarian clericalism, it stems from a secular wish to keep religion in the private sphere." – Economist
This is similar to what Guru Nanak suggested, if my memory has not failed me. Painful to see that such a forward looking philosophy as Sikhism is falling into the same trap as it was created to abhor. As a side note, people should do research on a nation's constitutional fundamentals before they decide to settle there.
"France does not recognise religious law, nor does it recognise religious beliefs or morality as a motivation for the enactment of prohibitions." – Wikipedia
"One reason is their century-old secular tradition, which fiercely defends the separation of faith and state, and makes most French people uneasy about conspicuous religion. Nativity plays or carol concerts in state primary schools are unthinkable, as would be the swearing-in of presidents over the Bible. When the Swiss voted recently to ban the construction of minarets on mosques, Mr Sarkozy urged believers of all faiths in France to “practise their religion with humble discretion”. Liberal outsiders see this as intolerance. But to the French, who fought hard-won battles against authoritarian clericalism, it stems from a secular wish to keep religion in the private sphere." – Economist
This is similar to what Guru Nanak suggested, if my memory has not failed me. Painful to see that such a forward looking philosophy as Sikhism is falling into the same trap as it was created to abhor. As a side note, people should do research on a nation's constitutional fundamentals before they decide to settle there.
Does a government have the right to ignore its citizen's requirements? Especially if those citizens such as Sikhs earned their right to live in France( by fighting in WWI and WWII) and French govenment let them, shouldn't the government be doing the research since its the one that decides if it should allow people to immigrate, settle and become citizens of France?? And how can immigrants do research when new laws and restrictions that weren't there when they applied for citizenship keep popping up. Its as if the French government will never think of its immigrants as citizens, it keeps putting restrictions and laws out there for them.
If Guru Nanak Dev Ji did go against outer show of religion (only because it was only outer show nothing inside) Did not Guru Gobind Singh Ji create Khalsa to look distinct, to stand out?? Which the French govt is so against….
It pays to do a little bit of reading, instead of typing away in disgust on hearing about this ban. There is a world beyond one's narrow minded, myopic, religious perspective with all its dogmas. Turkey, a muslim country, has banned headscarves (forget veils) from public places for time immemorial. Syria, another fanatic muslim country, has just recently banned veils in universities …. and here we have people crying hoarse over a similar ban in a western country that is fanatically proud of its secularism. …. <sigh>
Does a government have the right to ignore its citizen's requirements? Especially if those citizens such as Sikhs earned their right to live in France( by fighting in WWI and WWII) and French govenment let them, shouldn't the government be doing the research since its the one that decides if it should allow people to immigrate, settle and become citizens of France?? And how can immigrants do research when new laws and restrictions that weren't there when they applied for citizenship keep popping up. Its as if the French government will never think of its immigrants as citizens, it keeps putting restrictions and laws out there for them.
If Guru Nanak Dev Ji did go against outer show of religion (only because it was only outer show nothing inside) Did not Guru Gobind Singh Ji create Khalsa to look distinct, to stand out?? Which the French govt is so against….
It pays to do a little bit of reading, instead of typing away in disgust on hearing about this ban. There is a world beyond one's narrow minded, myopic, religious perspective with all its dogmas. Turkey, a muslim country, has banned headscarves (forget veils) from public places for time immemorial. Syria, another fanatic muslim country, has just recently banned veils in universities …. and here we have people crying hoarse over a similar ban in a western country that is fanatically proud of its secularism. …. <sigh>
Unfortunately Sikhs will always get dragged into matters that have no concern to us. Osama wears a turban which has not significance to the Arabs but because of this Sikhs become victims of mistaken identity. The French want to control the extremist Muslims in their country so they ban religious symbols in schools and so Sikh kids get thrown out of school. Instead of supporting women who basically want to withdraw from the world and wear the veil because they have been taught that men cannot control their base urges and so women should cover themselves, Sikhs if not directly supporting the ban should at least stay out of the debate. If the male posters on this site are ok with with being thought of as potential rapists by these veiled holier than thou daft bints then that is their choice. But what I ask is that don't be taken in by the bukwas that these veiled women feel 'liberated' by wearing the veil. We have suffered enough for the acts of Muslim terrorists and yet rather than taking the Muslim community to task for their silence in the face of acts of terrorism done by their co-religionists we start to poke our noses into issues that don't concern us. The sooner Europe bans the veil the better. If these women want to cut themselves off everyday social intercourse within the society then it's best they stay within the four walls of their homes which is exactly what Islam teaches.
Unfortunately Sikhs will always get dragged into matters that have no concern to us. Osama wears a turban which has not significance to the Arabs but because of this Sikhs become victims of mistaken identity. The French want to control the extremist Muslims in their country so they ban religious symbols in schools and so Sikh kids get thrown out of school. Instead of supporting women who basically want to withdraw from the world and wear the veil because they have been taught that men cannot control their base urges and so women should cover themselves, Sikhs if not directly supporting the ban should at least stay out of the debate. If the male posters on this site are ok with with being thought of as potential rapists by these veiled holier than thou daft bints then that is their choice. But what I ask is that don't be taken in by the bukwas that these veiled women feel 'liberated' by wearing the veil. We have suffered enough for the acts of Muslim terrorists and yet rather than taking the Muslim community to task for their silence in the face of acts of terrorism done by their co-religionists we start to poke our noses into issues that don't concern us. The sooner Europe bans the veil the better. If these women want to cut themselves off everyday social intercourse within the society then it's best they stay within the four walls of their homes which is exactly what Islam teaches.
Can Sikhs afford to stand by and not say anything? It's already affecting them too much like you pointed out. If we do stand by and watch then it will be like the Holocaust(WWII) Oh Hitler is only killing the Jews/Catholics/criminals/cripples thats not me, but then it was my turn to die in gas chambers and nobody cried out. If we let France win this religion and choice vs. secularism debate than who is to stop them from going further than the veil afterwards? What if this same religion phobia spreads to UK and USA after its success in France. Our religion requirements(turban and kirpan) can be viewed as "oppresive and against freedom and liberty too" . So we have every motive not to stand by but to oppose this law.
And doesn't Islam require the veil to be worn when going into public so how does wearing veil equal staying at home?
Can Sikhs afford to stand by and not say anything? It's already affecting them too much like you pointed out. If we do stand by and watch then it will be like the Holocaust(WWII) Oh Hitler is only killing the Jews/Catholics/criminals/cripples thats not me, but then it was my turn to die in gas chambers and nobody cried out. If we let France win this religion and choice vs. secularism debate than who is to stop them from going further than the veil afterwards? What if this same religion phobia spreads to UK and USA after its success in France. Our religion requirements(turban and kirpan) can be viewed as "oppresive and against freedom and liberty too" . So we have every motive not to stand by but to oppose this law.
And doesn't Islam require the veil to be worn when going into public so how does wearing veil equal staying at home?
It's affecting Sikhs because of fools who want to stand by the side of Muslims against the Europeans. In the UK we have had support for the Kirpan and Turban from both the Labour and Conservative parties. These parties might be against a burka ban now but wait until a few more 7/7 style attacks happen and these parties wont be able to withstand the clamour from the British people for a ban on the burka. Already a majority of the population want a ban. Please spare us your activism and if you want to stand on the side of one of the most intolerant religions in the world then do so as an individual and don't be waving a Sikh identity in peoples' faces and give them the idea that all Sikhs support Islam. Please do not compare the situation of Muslims in Europe today with the Jews of the 1930s. The Jews were well assimilated into society and were not going around blowing people up. The Muslim mentality is that they will always take from a society and never contribute. They want their mosques, their halal meat and their beliefs to be respected but they never recipriocate. They make demands and have hissy fits if they don't get their way. A Burka ban is coming to most of Europe and any liberal Sikh fool who want to stand on the side of the Muslims will only be damaging their own community in the eyes of the rest of the population. I suppose you will be waving a banner 'We are all daft veiled bints'!
It's affecting Sikhs because of fools who want to stand by the side of Muslims against the Europeans. In the UK we have had support for the Kirpan and Turban from both the Labour and Conservative parties. These parties might be against a burka ban now but wait until a few more 7/7 style attacks happen and these parties wont be able to withstand the clamour from the British people for a ban on the burka. Already a majority of the population want a ban. Please spare us your activism and if you want to stand on the side of one of the most intolerant religions in the world then do so as an individual and don't be waving a Sikh identity in peoples' faces and give them the idea that all Sikhs support Islam. Please do not compare the situation of Muslims in Europe today with the Jews of the 1930s. The Jews were well assimilated into society and were not going around blowing people up. The Muslim mentality is that they will always take from a society and never contribute. They want their mosques, their halal meat and their beliefs to be respected but they never recipriocate. They make demands and have hissy fits if they don't get their way. A Burka ban is coming to most of Europe and any liberal Sikh fool who want to stand on the side of the Muslims will only be damaging their own community in the eyes of the rest of the population. I suppose you will be waving a banner 'We are all daft veiled bints'!
Spot on Bik and congrats for correctly identifying the community which has vitiated political environment where ever they have germinated on our planet earth.
Just a reminder to these burqa-clad jathedars, while they are defending the indefensible Islamic tradition, Muslim zealots are busy beheading Sikhs in Pakistan. They are also extorting 'Jaziya' from non-Muslims in tribal bellt of pakistan.
For reasons best known to SGPC, mosques are being built/restored by sikh jathebandis in east Punjab these days.
Ever burgeoning number of advocates of Sikh-Muslim brotherhood would do a great favour if they can name just one instance where Muslims have returned the compliment or where a 'practicing' (as in maulvis, sufis, etc) muslim has offered prayers at a Sikh gurudwara.
Let me remind them there is no place for Muslim friendship with a kaafir in Quran. i can quote dozens of verses from quran where muslims have been urged to slaughter non-muslims (kaafirs) which they did for centuries leading to the initiation of Khalsa.
History stands witness, Muslims have ALWAYS persecuted Sikhs and Hindus.
Sher
At no point I am advocating 'revenge' against Muslims but just reminding that a distance need to be maintained
for Sunni wahabi species (and may be
…..just read this news online, another Hindu temple in Pakistan has been demolished in Rawalpindi this time.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/demolition-of-h…
Probably this was the temple which has been 'partially' razed:
http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Asia/Pakistan/Ea…
All we hear is criticism of Babri Masjid demolition by Hindu fanatics, there are hundreds of temples and (probably) gurudwaras which were destroyed before and after 1947 Partition. Nobody has even cared to list temples demolished after Babri in both Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The fate of a writer Taslima Nasreen who wrote book 'Lajja' (Shame) after post Babri atrocities on Hindus in Bangladesh is well known to our secular opinion-makers, yet no protests as they are doing for Burqas all over the world.
Sher
Spot on Bik and congrats for correctly identifying the community which has vitiated political environment where ever they have germinated on our planet earth.
Just a reminder to these burqa-clad jathedars, while they are defending the indefensible Islamic tradition, Muslim zealots are busy beheading Sikhs in Pakistan. They are also extorting 'Jaziya' from non-Muslims in tribal bellt of pakistan.
For reasons best known to SGPC, mosques are being built/restored by sikh jathebandis in east Punjab these days.
Ever burgeoning number of advocates of Sikh-Muslim brotherhood would do a great favour if they can name just one instance where Muslims have returned the compliment or where a 'practicing' (as in maulvis, sufis, etc) muslim has offered prayers at a Sikh gurudwara.
Let me remind them there is no place for Muslim friendship with a kaafir in Quran. i can quote dozens of verses from quran where muslims have been urged to slaughter non-muslims (kaafirs) which they did for centuries leading to the initiation of Khalsa.
History stands witness, Muslims have ALWAYS persecuted Sikhs and Hindus.
Sher
At no point I am advocating 'revenge' against Muslims but just reminding that a distance need to be maintained
for Sunni wahabi species (and may be
…..just read this news online, another Hindu temple in Pakistan has been demolished in Rawalpindi this time.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/demolition-of-h…
Probably this was the temple which has been 'partially' razed:
http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Asia/Pakistan/Ea…
All we hear is criticism of Babri Masjid demolition by Hindu fanatics, there are hundreds of temples and (probably) gurudwaras which were destroyed before and after 1947 Partition. Nobody has even cared to list temples demolished after Babri in both Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The fate of a writer Taslima Nasreen who wrote book 'Lajja' (Shame) after post Babri atrocities on Hindus in Bangladesh is well known to our secular opinion-makers, yet no protests as they are doing for Burqas all over the world.
Sher
Thanks Sher. Nice to see that there are some sane people on this blog. The liberal Sikhs will always try and present these issues as one of white racism against a beleagured minority which is patently wrong. If anything the issue is one of a generally tolerant society having to take steps against an aggressive, litigious minority hell bent ion changing that very society into into an islamic one. While our 'progressive' friend brooklynwala is defending the veiling of women, Muslims on the comments pages of newspapers are trying to link the wearing if the veil with the wearing of a turban and the freedom to wear a Kirpan thereby linking the two issues in the minds of the general population. If the west ever decides to ban the Kirpan it will be down to people like Brooklywala and his Islamophilia and the attempts by Muslims to link the veil issue with the Kirpan.
Thanks Sher. Nice to see that there are some sane people on this blog. The liberal Sikhs will always try and present these issues as one of white racism against a beleagured minority which is patently wrong. If anything the issue is one of a generally tolerant society having to take steps against an aggressive, litigious minority hell bent ion changing that very society into into an islamic one. While our 'progressive' friend brooklynwala is defending the veiling of women, Muslims on the comments pages of newspapers are trying to link the wearing if the veil with the wearing of a turban and the freedom to wear a Kirpan thereby linking the two issues in the minds of the general population. If the west ever decides to ban the Kirpan it will be down to people like Brooklywala and his Islamophilia and the attempts by Muslims to link the veil issue with the Kirpan.
I think that the main idea of the french government is freedom at all levels and this has nothing to do with the sikh turban. There are many differences between the muslim veil and the sikh turban. Only women wear the veil or cover their whole body while men can war regular clothes. Sikhs have the freedom to wear turban both men and women and most sikhs do wear a turban. The purpose of the sikh turban is different from that of the muslim women's veil, and in many cases I think that muslim women would like to be freer but they just can't do anything about it because they are so much dominated and controlled. Unlike sikh men and women whose circumstances are so much different from those of the muslim people. Peace! Sat Nam!
I think that the main idea of the french government is freedom at all levels and this has nothing to do with the sikh turban. There are many differences between the muslim veil and the sikh turban. Only women wear the veil or cover their whole body while men can war regular clothes. Sikhs have the freedom to wear turban both men and women and most sikhs do wear a turban. The purpose of the sikh turban is different from that of the muslim women’s veil, and in many cases I think that muslim women would like to be freer but they just can’t do anything about it because they are so much dominated and controlled. Unlike sikh men and women whose circumstances are so much different from those of the muslim people. Peace! Sat Nam!
I can't belive governments still do this, deciding oh this religion is too weak, or too extremist it needs a ban. During Babar times when he forcibly took off the janeo (janeu?) it was expected because he was an invader. And Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji give his life for another religion. He did not consider all Hindus to be bad because Chandu tortured Guru Arjan Dev ji,
The fact that the Muslim women aren't staying "within the four walls of their homes" shows that they are moving towards equality and freedom. And so they wear the veil as a religious symbol not as an opression.
I can't belive governments still do this, deciding oh this religion is too weak, or too extremist it needs a ban. During Babar times when he forcibly took off the janeo (janeu?) it was expected because he was an invader. And Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji give his life for another religion. He did not consider all Hindus to be bad because Chandu tortured Guru Arjan Dev ji,
The fact that the Muslim women aren't staying "within the four walls of their homes" shows that they are moving towards equality and freedom. And so they wear the veil as a religious symbol not as an opression.
"Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji give his life for another religion. He did not consider all Hindus to be bad because Chandu tortured Guru Arjan Dev ji….."
so much distortion of history… amazing.
Nimarta (thats a 'bloody sanskrit' word!!!) ji,
when did GTB leave Hinduism? which Guru said "Here goes sangato, now you have a new religion" and started living their own lives very differently from Hindus?
Amazing because even English speaking (so assumed to be 'educated') Sikhs refuse to question what is preached to them by a grade 5 passed mad monks like Bhindranwala.
Nimrata ji, go back to school and re-read history.
]
Sher
"Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji give his life for another religion. He did not consider all Hindus to be bad because Chandu tortured Guru Arjan Dev ji….."
so much distortion of history… amazing.
Nimarta (thats a 'bloody sanskrit' word!!!) ji,
when did GTB leave Hinduism? which Guru said "Here goes sangato, now you have a new religion" and started living their own lives very differently from Hindus?
Amazing because even English speaking (so assumed to be 'educated') Sikhs refuse to question what is preached to them by a grade 5 passed mad monks like Bhindranwala.
Nimrata ji, go back to school and re-read history.
]
Sher
@ Sher: Its not we Sikhs here, who have read enough non-distorted history, who need to go to school, but definitely Indian Nationalists (general Indians too) like you who have never questioned whatever is taught in India as history – everytime any one of the two government comes at the center there are respective changes accordingly – either saffronization or gandhiazation!! Sikhs have so much much more valorous history other than just making Indians learn about Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Gobind Singh, and yes of course how can you forget to make Indians learn of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji to showcase that Sikhs are Hindus' personal bodyguards and angels.
This is how Indian history is distorted by your saffron parivar:
QUOTE
There is a concerted global effort by Hindutva groups to distort and whitewash Indian history to suit their false narrative which denies foreign origins of Aryans and evils of the caste system and misogyny that still characterize life in India.
Not only have the BJP led governments in India fundamentally altered India's history textbooks, the BJP allies around the world are attempting to the same in textbooks as far as California.
Here are some excerpt from "HISTORY TEXTBOOKS IN INDIA: NARRATIVES OF RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM" by K.N.PANIKKAR:
"The introduction of new textbooks by the NCERT (under BJP) was inspired by the political purpose of seeking rationale from history for constructing India as a Hindu nation. The textbooks were, therefore, recast as narratives of Hindu religious nationalism. Claimed as an effort to retrieve the true nationalist history from the motivated distortions of colonial historiography they attribute to Indian nation an exclusively Hindu character."
"During this period the political climate in the country turned in favour of the Hindu fundamentalist forces, which enabled them in 1998 to lead a coalition government in which the Ministry of Human Resource Development which dealt with education was headed by a long standing cadre of the Hindu fundamentalist organization, Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh( RSS). Under his stewardship the government spared no effort to change the content and character of education, of which the introduction of new textbooks, was perhaps the most prominent and indeed controversial."
he fanatic Hindu nationalists tried to do in California what their Indian counterparts have already done in India. They attempted to pollute California history textbooks in 2006, when they argued unsuccessfully to include lies like the indigenous origins of Aryans and tried to deny the terrible impact on hundreds of millions of Indians of the caste system and misogyny prevalent in Hindu texts and Aryan culture.
Hundreds of history scholars from US and South Asia helped defeat this reprehensible attempt by Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and its allies in the United States.
While the biggest victims of Hindu fundamentalists are the women and the D alits of India, non-Hindu minorities and the neighboring states have not been spared either.
They are cowards and they prey upon unarmed Muslim, Christian and Sikh minorities in organized pogroms in what American scholar Paul Brass calls "production of violence" in India with many Indian intellectuals and some in Indian the press justifying the actions of the murderers.
The big brothers of these fanatic Hindutva terrorists occupy high positions in the Indian security establishment, according to former Maharashtra police chief SM Mushrif. These Hindutva allies in Indian government conduct covert warfare via terrorist actions in neighboring states including Pakistan through RAW.
All these people are a product of Indian education that teaches hatred against Muslims and Pakistanis, as evident by the following excerpts from Gujarat textbooks:
*Gujarat is a border state. Its land and sea boundaries touch the boundaries of Pakistan which is like a den of terrorism. Under such circumstances, it is absolutely necessary for us to understand the effects of terrorism and the role of citizens in the fight against it
*If every countryman becomes an ideal citizen and develops patriotism, the National Population Policy can definitely be achieved
*When people used to meet earlier, they wished each other saying Ram Ram and by shaking hands. Today, people enjoy their meeting by speaking Namaste. Is it not a change?
*Making full use of Muslim fanaticism, Osama Bin Laden organized die-hard Muslims and founded the International Jihad Organization in the name of the Jehedi movement*
[Excerpted from Social Science textbooks, standard nine (2005) and standard eight (2004)]
The Hindu fundamentalists are as serious a threat to peace in South Asia as their Muslim militant counterparts.
UNQUOTE
I don't have much time, but as to your comment to Nimarta, this eye-opener might put your ego and arrogant saffron blood to rest:
QUOTE
We must remember that the term “hindu” is not even Sanskrit. Numerous scholars say it is not found in any of the Vedic literature. So how can such a name truly represent the Vedic path or culture? And without the Vedic literature, there is no basis for “Hinduism.”
"The word 'hindu' is a non-Indian word, it's origin is Persian/Arabic. It's original meaning is 'dog,' 'low life' or 'slave'."
"The word 'Hindu' is not found in any Hindu religious text or any other ancient writing. People who lived on the western side of Hindu Kush (killers of Hindus) mountains gave this name to the natives of India. The word Hindu means black, slave, robber, thief and a waylayer."
UNQUOTE
Sher what I am doing now doesn't makes any sense of telling you the ACTUAL truth, however it'll be worth the effort if NUMEROUS UNINFORMED AND HINDU-INFLUENCED SIKHS try to see it through their own eyes and know for their own self what's the whole truth. That's it.
@ Sher: Its not we Sikhs here, who have read enough non-distorted history, who need to go to school, but definitely Indian Nationalists (general Indians too) like you who have never questioned whatever is taught in India as history – everytime any one of the two government comes at the center there are respective changes accordingly – either saffronization or gandhiazation!! Sikhs have so much much more valorous history other than just making Indians learn about Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Gobind Singh, and yes of course how can you forget to make Indians learn of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji to showcase that Sikhs are Hindus' personal bodyguards and angels.
This is how Indian history is distorted by your saffron parivar:
QUOTE
There is a concerted global effort by Hindutva groups to distort and whitewash Indian history to suit their false narrative which denies foreign origins of Aryans and evils of the caste system and misogyny that still characterize life in India.
Not only have the BJP led governments in India fundamentally altered India's history textbooks, the BJP allies around the world are attempting to the same in textbooks as far as California.
Here are some excerpt from "HISTORY TEXTBOOKS IN INDIA: NARRATIVES OF RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM" by K.N.PANIKKAR:
"The introduction of new textbooks by the NCERT (under BJP) was inspired by the political purpose of seeking rationale from history for constructing India as a Hindu nation. The textbooks were, therefore, recast as narratives of Hindu religious nationalism. Claimed as an effort to retrieve the true nationalist history from the motivated distortions of colonial historiography they attribute to Indian nation an exclusively Hindu character."
"During this period the political climate in the country turned in favour of the Hindu fundamentalist forces, which enabled them in 1998 to lead a coalition government in which the Ministry of Human Resource Development which dealt with education was headed by a long standing cadre of the Hindu fundamentalist organization, Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh( RSS). Under his stewardship the government spared no effort to change the content and character of education, of which the introduction of new textbooks, was perhaps the most prominent and indeed controversial."
he fanatic Hindu nationalists tried to do in California what their Indian counterparts have already done in India. They attempted to pollute California history textbooks in 2006, when they argued unsuccessfully to include lies like the indigenous origins of Aryans and tried to deny the terrible impact on hundreds of millions of Indians of the caste system and misogyny prevalent in Hindu texts and Aryan culture.
Hundreds of history scholars from US and South Asia helped defeat this reprehensible attempt by Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and its allies in the United States.
While the biggest victims of Hindu fundamentalists are the women and the D alits of India, non-Hindu minorities and the neighboring states have not been spared either.
They are cowards and they prey upon unarmed Muslim, Christian and Sikh minorities in organized pogroms in what American scholar Paul Brass calls "production of violence" in India with many Indian intellectuals and some in Indian the press justifying the actions of the murderers.
The big brothers of these fanatic Hindutva terrorists occupy high positions in the Indian security establishment, according to former Maharashtra police chief SM Mushrif. These Hindutva allies in Indian government conduct covert warfare via terrorist actions in neighboring states including Pakistan through RAW.
All these people are a product of Indian education that teaches hatred against Muslims and Pakistanis, as evident by the following excerpts from Gujarat textbooks:
*Gujarat is a border state. Its land and sea boundaries touch the boundaries of Pakistan which is like a den of terrorism. Under such circumstances, it is absolutely necessary for us to understand the effects of terrorism and the role of citizens in the fight against it
*If every countryman becomes an ideal citizen and develops patriotism, the National Population Policy can definitely be achieved
*When people used to meet earlier, they wished each other saying Ram Ram and by shaking hands. Today, people enjoy their meeting by speaking Namaste. Is it not a change?
*Making full use of Muslim fanaticism, Osama Bin Laden organized die-hard Muslims and founded the International Jihad Organization in the name of the Jehedi movement*
[Excerpted from Social Science textbooks, standard nine (2005) and standard eight (2004)]
The Hindu fundamentalists are as serious a threat to peace in South Asia as their Muslim militant counterparts.
UNQUOTE
I don't have much time, but as to your comment to Nimarta, this eye-opener might put your ego and arrogant saffron blood to rest:
QUOTE
We must remember that the term “hindu” is not even Sanskrit. Numerous scholars say it is not found in any of the Vedic literature. So how can such a name truly represent the Vedic path or culture? And without the Vedic literature, there is no basis for “Hinduism.”
"The word 'hindu' is a non-Indian word, it's origin is Persian/Arabic. It's original meaning is 'dog,' 'low life' or 'slave'."
"The word 'Hindu' is not found in any Hindu religious text or any other ancient writing. People who lived on the western side of Hindu Kush (killers of Hindus) mountains gave this name to the natives of India. The word Hindu means black, slave, robber, thief and a waylayer."
UNQUOTE
Sher what I am doing now doesn't makes any sense of telling you the ACTUAL truth, however it'll be worth the effort if NUMEROUS UNINFORMED AND HINDU-INFLUENCED SIKHS try to see it through their own eyes and know for their own self what's the whole truth. That's it.
The day a white woman can wear a "BIKINI" in Mecca and Median that day France should allow veils in public life.
Life today is about give and take .
Thanks for your 'eyeopener' as I could not have done this tiny piece of research with my eyes (and mind) closed. You may not like the end result of my research but then you are a ….
forget it, just have a read ands top acting like a moron.
"The word Hindu is the mispronunciation of the Sanskrit word Sindhu by the Persians, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent.[3] and is first seen as a reference to the river Sindhu in the Rig Veda.[4]The word Hindu is found in Persian literature. Hindu-e-falak. The usage of the word Hindu was further popularized by the Arabic term al-Hind referring to the land of the people who live across river Indus.[5] By the 13th century, Hindust?n emerged as a popular alternative name of India, meaning the "land of Hindus".[6]" UNQUOTE
(3) ^ "India", Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, 2100a.d. Oxford University Press.
(4) ^ <a href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=EWlHPAkjBKUC&pg=PA782&lpg=PA782&dq=rig+veda+sindhu+hindu&source=bl&ots=BEN5WftdIe&sig=3Vn5iQSXAQ2OhxEE6cTeAzgYSow&hl=en&ei=dd4jTKjYI4H7lwf8tc2FAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=rig%20veda%20sindhu%20hindu&f=false" rel="nofollow"> <a href="http://;http://books.google.ca/books?id=EWlHPAkjBKUC&…” target=”_blank”>;http://books.google.ca/books?id=EWlHPAkjBKUC&…
(5)^ Thapar, R. 1993. Interpreting Early India. Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 77
(6) ^ Thompson Platts, John. A dictionary of Urdu , classical Hind?, and English. W.H. Allen & Co., Oxford University 1884.
The day a white woman can wear a “BIKINI” in Mecca and Median that day France should allow veils in public life.
Life today is about give and take .
Eyes still wide open
The names Hindu Kush (Persian: ????????), Hindu K?h (????????) and K?h-e Hind (???? ????) are usually applied to the entire range separating the basins of the Kabul and Helmand rivers from that of the Amu River (ancient Oxus) or more specifically to that part of the range that is northwest of Kabul.
James Rennell, writing in 1793, referred to the range as the "Hindoo-Kho or Hindoo-Kush"[3] "The same hindu- 'mountain' (in Scythian or Saka languages) is in the name Hind?-kuš, where the kuš means 'side, region' connected with Chr. Sogd. qwšy 'side' with -ti- Armenian Parthian k'oušt 'side, region' …. Old Indian has both ko?a- and ko?a- ….", neither of which mean "mountain".
As a corruption of Hindu K?h, meaning "Hindu Mountains" or "Indian Mountains", from the (modern) Persian word K?h (???), meaning mountain. The Persian word with Perso-Arabic alphabet or New Persian "K?h" (???) exist at least since the ninth century. Ferdousi writes in its book Shahnameh K?h-e Hind (??? ???, "Indian Mountain").[4] it seems to be hind- o- kash the line which divide to territorial limits. in local language kash mean wool. similarly kash mir or kash nmir mean eastern kash and kash ghar mean westren kash. if you see kash mir and kash ghar on the maps it is exactly eash and west
UNQUOTE
Closing eyes now my bigoted friend HS ….time to sleep
Thanks for your 'eyeopener' as I could not have done this tiny piece of research with my eyes (and mind) closed. You may not like the end result of my research but then you are a ….
forget it, just have a read ands top acting like a moron.
"The word Hindu is the mispronunciation of the Sanskrit word Sindhu by the Persians, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent.[3] and is first seen as a reference to the river Sindhu in the Rig Veda.[4]The word Hindu is found in Persian literature. Hindu-e-falak. The usage of the word Hindu was further popularized by the Arabic term al-Hind referring to the land of the people who live across river Indus.[5] By the 13th century, Hindust?n emerged as a popular alternative name of India, meaning the "land of Hindus".[6]" UNQUOTE
(3) ^ "India", Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, 2100a.d. Oxford University Press.
(4) ^ http://books.google.ca/books?id=EWlHPAkjBKUC&…
(5)^ Thapar, R. 1993. Interpreting Early India. Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 77
(6) ^ Thompson Platts, John. A dictionary of Urdu , classical Hind?, and English. W.H. Allen & Co., Oxford University 1884.
Eyes still wide open
The names Hindu Kush (Persian: ????????), Hindu K?h (????????) and K?h-e Hind (???? ????) are usually applied to the entire range separating the basins of the Kabul and Helmand rivers from that of the Amu River (ancient Oxus) or more specifically to that part of the range that is northwest of Kabul.
James Rennell, writing in 1793, referred to the range as the "Hindoo-Kho or Hindoo-Kush"[3] "The same hindu- 'mountain' (in Scythian or Saka languages) is in the name Hind?-kuš, where the kuš means 'side, region' connected with Chr. Sogd. qwšy 'side' with -ti- Armenian Parthian k'oušt 'side, region' …. Old Indian has both ko?a- and ko?a- ….", neither of which mean "mountain".
As a corruption of Hindu K?h, meaning "Hindu Mountains" or "Indian Mountains", from the (modern) Persian word K?h (???), meaning mountain. The Persian word with Perso-Arabic alphabet or New Persian "K?h" (???) exist at least since the ninth century. Ferdousi writes in its book Shahnameh K?h-e Hind (??? ???, "Indian Mountain").[4] it seems to be hind- o- kash the line which divide to territorial limits. in local language kash mean wool. similarly kash mir or kash nmir mean eastern kash and kash ghar mean westren kash. if you see kash mir and kash ghar on the maps it is exactly eash and west
UNQUOTE
Closing eyes now my bigoted friend HS ….time to sleep
You're wrong here. So the word Kush is a corruption of the word Kuh. Even though both words are still in use in Afghanistan and amongst the Pathans in NWF. Usually corrupted words get shorter not LONGER. Hindu Kuh becomes Hindu Kush lol. Btw the Arya Samaj in the 1920s tried to ban the use of the word Hindu as they stated it was a derogatory word coined by invaders for the Indians. HIndu means black, dog, ursuers.. so say with pride with the rest of your Hindu brothers.. Gaurav Se Kahin Hum Kuttay Hain!!
You're wrong here. So the word Kush is a corruption of the word Kuh. Even though both words are still in use in Afghanistan and amongst the Pathans in NWF. Usually corrupted words get shorter not LONGER. Hindu Kuh becomes Hindu Kush lol. Btw the Arya Samaj in the 1920s tried to ban the use of the word Hindu as they stated it was a derogatory word coined by invaders for the Indians. HIndu means black, dog, ursuers.. so say with pride with the rest of your Hindu brothers.. Gaurav Se Kahin Hum Kuttay Hain!!
First, glad to note that people are using references to support their Point of view. I am pleased and enjoying the discussion.
Second,
@Sher, can you stop turning discussion of every entry into a Hindu-Sikh issue or a diatribe against The Big B. As you've claimed that you're Hindu, your passion for Sikh history and contemporary cultural practices is noteworthy but does not give you license to hijack the thread. Makes sense??
First, glad to note that people are using references to support their Point of view. I am pleased and enjoying the discussion.
Second,
@Sher, can you stop turning discussion of every entry into a Hindu-Sikh issue or a diatribe against The Big B. As you’ve claimed that you’re Hindu, your passion for Sikh history and contemporary cultural practices is noteworthy but does not give you license to hijack the thread. Makes sense??
I want everyone (especially uninformed and liberal Sikhs, who have a tendency to assume justice seeking and truth speaking Sikhs are angry for no reason) to read atleast the excerpts of this essay by Dr. Amartya Sen (Nobel Laureate) on distortion of south asian history by Hindutva brigade in the given link. Just to let you know what it is about, if you chose not to read it, this is what the starting paragraph says:
QUOTE
In his engaging essays from The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2005), Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen lucidly explains the strategy behind the attempts of Hindutva supporters to re-invent India’s history, an effort that has now unfortunately reached the shores of California via organizations such the Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation.
UNQUOTE
"In his engaging essays from The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2005), Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen lucidly explains the strategy behind the attempts of Hindutva supporters to re-invent India’s history, an effort that has now unfortunately reached the shores of California via organizations such the Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation."
Everyone: Read – The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2005), Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen
I want everyone (especially uninformed and liberal Sikhs, who have a tendency to assume justice seeking and truth speaking Sikhs are angry for no reason) to read atleast the excerpts of this essay by Dr. Amartya Sen (Nobel Laureate) on distortion of south asian history by Hindutva brigade in the given link. Just to let you know what it is about, if you chose not to read it, this is what the starting paragraph says:
QUOTE
In his engaging essays from The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2005), Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen lucidly explains the strategy behind the attempts of Hindutva supporters to re-invent India’s history, an effort that has now unfortunately reached the shores of California via organizations such the Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation.
UNQUOTE
"In his engaging essays from The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2005), Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen lucidly explains the strategy behind the attempts of Hindutva supporters to re-invent India’s history, an effort that has now unfortunately reached the shores of California via organizations such the Vedic Foundation and the Hindu Education Foundation."
Everyone: Read – The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity (Farrar Straus and Giroux, 2005), Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen
Everyone should condemn any effort to distort history. This group may be Hindu, christian, sikhs, etc.
"Christian, Jewish, Islamic and the two Hindu groups submitted their edits in autumn 2005. After intensive scholarly discussions, over 500 changes proposed by Jewish and Christian groups and c. 100 changes proposed by Muslims were accepted by the California Department of Education (CDE) and the State Board of Education (SBE); these scholarly discussions extended to Jan. 6, 2006. Some 170 edits proposed by two Hindu foundations were initially accepted, supported by the reviewer, appointed by the California's Board of Education, S. Bajpai. However, 58 of them met with opposition, including major points such as the alleged equal position of women (who merely had 'other rights than men'), the denial of the religious origin and backing of the class (caste) system ever since the earliest Indian text (Rigveda 10.90), alleged monotheism ('God -his name is Bhagwan'), and the denial of the so-called 'Aryan Invasion'.[2][3]"
500 changes suggested accepted without whimper. Wholesale rewriting the history by Chritistians and Jews is acceptable. 'good' distortions vs 'bad' distortions. There are GOOD talibans and then there are BAD taibans.No sir, a terrorist is a terrorist and a distortion is a distortion.
If Hindu groups were after some distortion in Indian history, they should be CONDEMNED. But if they could not get their changes through because of weak lobbying power, thats a bad commentary on the democracy in the US.
Sikhs have never lobbied for changes in California, no never. HS would deny that too.
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=264541
Sher
Everyone should condemn any effort to distort history. This group may be Hindu, christian, sikhs, etc.
"Christian, Jewish, Islamic and the two Hindu groups submitted their edits in autumn 2005. After intensive scholarly discussions, over 500 changes proposed by Jewish and Christian groups and c. 100 changes proposed by Muslims were accepted by the California Department of Education (CDE) and the State Board of Education (SBE); these scholarly discussions extended to Jan. 6, 2006. Some 170 edits proposed by two Hindu foundations were initially accepted, supported by the reviewer, appointed by the California's Board of Education, S. Bajpai. However, 58 of them met with opposition, including major points such as the alleged equal position of women (who merely had 'other rights than men'), the denial of the religious origin and backing of the class (caste) system ever since the earliest Indian text (Rigveda 10.90), alleged monotheism ('God -his name is Bhagwan'), and the denial of the so-called 'Aryan Invasion'.[2][3]"
500 changes suggested accepted without whimper. Wholesale rewriting the history by Chritistians and Jews is acceptable. 'good' distortions vs 'bad' distortions. There are GOOD talibans and then there are BAD taibans.No sir, a terrorist is a terrorist and a distortion is a distortion.
If Hindu groups were after some distortion in Indian history, they should be CONDEMNED. But if they could not get their changes through because of weak lobbying power, thats a bad commentary on the democracy in the US.
Sikhs have never lobbied for changes in California, no never. HS would deny that too.
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=264541
Sher
"Please do not compare the situation of Muslims in Europe today with the Jews of the 1930s. The Jews were well assimilated into society and were not going around blowing people up"
—————-^
My grandad, in the 1930's, move into what was then the heart of the UK's Sikh community ; The East End of London. That same East End was at that time a Jewish ghetto that housed even more Jews than New York's lower east side. Those same Jews, lived and wanted to live seperate from the mainstream……they wanted their children to receive a Jewish education away from non-jews so established Jewish schools…….their children were known as street savvy so were famous for being boxers and criminals……and as they moved slightly north to the neighbouring London borough they eastablished an understanding with the local police, local authorities and courts to establish a form of their own Jewish Law to settle disputes within the community. A practice still in place in that Stamford Hill area.
***I wish I knew how some people manage to post such long messages here. I'm constantly told to split my messages in two. Which obviously leaves both messages making not much sense and disjointed. Anyway……heres the bit that was supposed to fit at the end of the message above***
So you see…….if we learn one thing from history it is the fact that we learn nothing from history. History is repeating itself. Right under our very eyes we are sitting idly by whilst a minority community is vilified and discriminated against. (the muslims). If we let it happen, we are fools if we think we won't be next.
Why has this forum in the last few weeks become a Sikh Vs Hindu Ranh?
SIkhism relates to Punjab…and there is no tradtion in old punjab for muslim women to wear the extreme forms of the burqa..the less extreme forms were worn by Sikh and Hindu women even as recently as the sixties ( I have seen pictures)..the hijab is a wahabi arab outfit, and it is sad the post 9/11 generation have run towards it…as far as France goes…there is a danger they will ban the Dastaar next
"Please do not compare the situation of Muslims in Europe today with the Jews of the 1930s. The Jews were well assimilated into society and were not going around blowing people up"
—————-^
My grandad, in the 1930's, move into what was then the heart of the UK's Sikh community ; The East End of London. That same East End was at that time a Jewish ghetto that housed even more Jews than New York's lower east side. Those same Jews, lived and wanted to live seperate from the mainstream……they wanted their children to receive a Jewish education away from non-jews so established Jewish schools…….their children were known as street savvy so were famous for being boxers and criminals……and as they moved slightly north to the neighbouring London borough they eastablished an understanding with the local police, local authorities and courts to establish a form of their own Jewish Law to settle disputes within the community. A practice still in place in that Stamford Hill area.
***I wish I knew how some people manage to post such long messages here. I'm constantly told to split my messages in two. Which obviously leaves both messages making not much sense and disjointed. Anyway……heres the bit that was supposed to fit at the end of the message above***
So you see…….if we learn one thing from history it is the fact that we learn nothing from history. History is repeating itself. Right under our very eyes we are sitting idly by whilst a minority community is vilified and discriminated against. (the muslims). If we let it happen, we are fools if we think we won't be next.
Why has this forum in the last few weeks become a Sikh Vs Hindu Ranh?
SIkhism relates to Punjab…and there is no tradtion in old punjab for muslim women to wear the extreme forms of the burqa..the less extreme forms were worn by Sikh and Hindu women even as recently as the sixties ( I have seen pictures)..the hijab is a wahabi arab outfit, and it is sad the post 9/11 generation have run towards it…as far as France goes…there is a danger they will ban the Dastaar next
@ Sher: I showed you the proof and link from Nobel Laureate, Indian and Hindu too, who very lucidly highlights how BJP AND RSS HAVE DISTORTED INDIAN HISTORY. SEEMS LIKE YOU IGNORE THE REAL FACTS WHICH IS AN INDICATION THAT YOU ARE HERE TO INFLUENCE AND SHOOT YOUR PROPAGANDA THAN GENUINE DISCUSSION. HERE'S YOUR ANOTHER CHANCE TO READ THIS FACT THAT INDIAN HISTORY IS HIGHLY DISTORTED. PERIOD.
http://w w w.friendsofsouthasia.o r g/textbook/AmartyaSen_On_Hindutva.html
@ Sher: I showed you the proof and link from Nobel Laureate, Indian and Hindu too, who very lucidly highlights how BJP AND RSS HAVE DISTORTED INDIAN HISTORY. SEEMS LIKE YOU IGNORE THE REAL FACTS WHICH IS AN INDICATION THAT YOU ARE HERE TO INFLUENCE AND SHOOT YOUR PROPAGANDA THAN GENUINE DISCUSSION. HERE'S YOUR ANOTHER CHANCE TO READ THIS FACT THAT INDIAN HISTORY IS HIGHLY DISTORTED. PERIOD.
http://w w w.friendsofsouthasia.o r g/textbook/AmartyaSen_On_Hindutva.html