Today, we can find many people who are quick to christen famous Hindu gurus as “dhongis” and “pakhandi”. Such people generally hold the view that to become a guru all one needs is to chant a few mantras and promote the supertitions. These people think that the millions who follow the advice and teachings of such gurus are “fools” and ignorant of the modern science. Moreover, they not only percieve Hinduism as a mix of cast system, dowry, sati pratha etc but also use these assumptions as a basic elements of their argument to further denigrate their own culture and the ancient knowledge. These are the set of people who have never read even the bhagvad-Gita, the works of the world famous scholar Sri Aurobindo or the testimonials of the famous scientists like Heisenberg, Nicholas Tesla, Albert Einstein etc.
On the contrary, today, if any other Hindu promotes the true aspects of hinduism and tries to clear the myths and distortions, then such people are quick to term him as ‘illiterate and unscientific’. Moreover, if a Hindu questions the aspects and practices of other religions he is termed as “communal”. A person born in a hindu family who doesn’t even know anything regarding these differentiations created by the abrahamic invaders is often termed as anti-minority if he, from his own conscience and objectivity, questions reservation based on religion and animal killing. If he questions the scams, corruption and anti-nationalism of the ministers in the Congress government which thrives on minority appeasment, then he is termed as “BJP-RSS” activist.
A patriot is one who thinks about his country first. It is the conscience of a person which makes him voice against animal killings and other atrocities. How can any person who raises “pro-India” slogans which can be anti-Congress be confused as or termed deliberately as pro-”BJP-RSS”? Reservation based on religion is a direct abuse to the secularism and animal killings are against animal rights and welfare. How can supporting these causes be called “communal”?
Recently, many pseudo secularists wrote articles against Dr.Subramanyam Swamy. Aditya Ramakrishnan wrote, “I am 17 years old. I am not a Muslim. I am not a Christian. I was born a Hindu, but I am against religious fundamentalism of any kind because it breeds distrust and tears apart the social fabric of any country.” Parsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr wrote, “Many liberals have been outraged by Swamy’s arguments. The maverick — he hates the term and objects to being described as one — politician is no closet Hindu right-winger.”
If Aditya Ramakrishnan and Venkateshwar are so concerned about what Dr.Swamy said, then perhaps they should also similarly debate on what Quran states. Killing of infidels, idolators, jews and christians are openly mentioned in Quran. It divides the society between muslims and non-muslims. The usual argument of the apologists of Quran is that the term infidel refers to one who doesn’t believe in God. God according to Islam is Allah and there is no other name except Allah and one who doesn’t believe in the abrahamic god is called as “atheist”. So should atheists be killed just because they do not believe in Allah? Quran teaches for the islamisation of the world. Obviously, those who do not want shariah to be implemented or do not want to “believe” in an abrahamic God called Allah, would oppose such an act and those who oppose Islam are to be killed according to Quran.
The verses are many. Mostly chapter 5 and 9 of Quran have been exposed in the above verses. If one reads Quran, he will find much more. If one reads Baburnama, the same intances are repeated where he kills infidels for the sake of Allah and to spread Islam (e.g 232,370,371, 373, 374, 385-388, 527 etc). The hate and violence as propogated by Quran is also repeated in the email sent by the Indian Mujahideen on Varanasi terror attacks. Even then, the typical argument of the Islam apologists is that all “religions are the same” and we should respect them. Quran itself sees Allah as the ultimate god, other religions as inferior and promotes intolerance towards other Gods. How is it then such pseudo-seculars are champions in denigrating Hinduism which doesn’t divide the society between hindus and non-hindus, and pioneers in playing an apologist in the case of Islam?
Can such pseudo-seculars ever question Quran, reservation based on religion or animal killing? Can they question Islam to promote secularism, democracy and equal rights for non-muslims?
Full texts os Indian Mujahideen on Varanasi blasts : http://www.freedombulwark.net/voices/257
Babur Nama : http://www.archive.org/download/baburnama017152mbp/baburnama017152mbp.pdf
Source : Chakra News