For Hindus, the stories behind each festival play a very important role in the formation of their culture and have a very deep significance and values. Most of the Indian festivals are attached to specific characters and personalities that help the masses to understand and know the true significance of the festival. Just like all-important Indian Festivals, Bhai dooj also has a story to follow that have carved a niche with its unique presence and strength.
Through generations, the story of Bhai Dooj has been passed from generation to generation either by word of mouth or through carefully stored scriptures. The narration of the story marks the end of the Bhai dooj puja. Once the various rituals of Bhai dooj such as the sister applying the teeka on the forehead of the brother, giving him the eatables and in return receiving the gifts are over, the women and children sit around, to hear the story behind Bhai Dooj from the elders of the family.
The story goes that once there was a family living in a village that had only a sister and a brother. The sister was very elder to her brother, thus when she got married, the brother was at a very tender age. The boy did not remember any thing about his sister's marriage. After the marriage, the sister never returned to her mother's home. As the brother grew up, the image of her sister started fading with each passing years. He terribly missed his sister, especially on the Bhai Dooj day, as he used to see his friends with teeka on their forehead and plates full of sweets.
On one particular Bhai dooj, when the boy had turned up into a handsome young boy, he inquired his mother about the reason as to why his sister never visited her original home after her marriage. The mother replied that she
Why Media Is Silent Over The Demolished Mandirs?
On May 1, a dargah, reported to be 200 year-old was demolished in Vadodara inviting ‘violent protests’ from Muslims in that area. In the course of the protests four were killed in police firing. The Times of India (May 2) carried a brief report on page 1 which said that "the demolition of a mazaar that encroached on a road caused a major riot" in Vadodara, "leaving four persons dead and over 30 injured". A fuller report on page 8 began by saying that "the demolition of more than 200 year old dargah by civic authorities spared a widespread violence in which four persons were killed in clashes and police firing..." Para 4 of the inside story said that "the trouble began when a VMC squad began demolishing the dargah which authorities said was encroaching on government land". Para 13 of the report said that "the minority community had requested authorities and city Mayor Sunil Solanki not to demolish the dargah as it was more than 200 years old and its destruction could hurt the feelings of the community". No newspaper explained how a 200-years old dargah could encroach on government land. Did it take 200 years for the authorities to realise that the dargah was built on government land and was an encroachment?
The Hindu ( May 2) carried two stories on the subject. The front page report said in para 4 that Minister of State for Home, Amit Shah, made it clear that "it was not a communal violence but a clash between police and Municipal Corporation staff on one side and Muslim residents who objected to the demolition of the dargah on the other". Para 9 of the report quoted Mayor Sunil Solanki as saying that "the demolition of unauthorised structures had been going on for a fortnight to widen roads and that nearly 1, 500 illegal structure had been removed, including more than a dozen religious places of different communities and that at many places the members of different communities volunteered to remove the obstructions. The mayor further said that three meetings had been held with representatives of the Muslim residents but they had not volunteered to remove the dargah and that the road needed to be widened to accommodate increasing traffic. In para 11 the report quoted Municipal Commissioner R.K.Pathak as saying that the demolition of unauthorised structures would continue despite the disturbances. Some questions arise: Which are the "more than a dozen religious places of different communities" that were demolished? Shouldn’t they —and their importance to the communities—be mentioned?
Was the dargah—or an extension of it—really encroaching on government land? How old were the "religious places" of different communities and why were they allowed to be built on government land in the first place? No reporter of any newspaper and certainly not the news agencies seem to have done any home work leaving one to believe that an injustice has been done to ‘the minority community’. How come that Vadodara Municipality looked the other way when "nearly 1,500 illegal structures" were built on government land? Questions, questions, questions. Where is the dargah situated couldn’t any newspaper provide a sketch of the area showing where the dargah is located and why it is imperative that it should be demolished? If the dargah needed to demolished was any attempt made to convince the Muslims of its need and at what level was the issue discussed and who participated in the discussions with representatives of the Muslim community? One is afraid that the story about the demolition of the dargah has been treated too casually. In Saudi Arabhia dargahs or masjids are routinely demolished; only recently a Pakistani paper reported that the ancient residence of the Prophet in Saudi Arabia was demolished to make way for a high-rise apartment.
Apparently in Saudi Arabia no particular significance is attached to masjids. Here in India one has to be careful in such matters. Already the National Commission for Minorities has reportedly urged the Gujarat State Government to conduct a judicial enquiry into the matter to ascertain when the classification of the dargah as an "encroachment" was correctly done. The Vadodara Municipality would have been wise to issue a Press Note long before the demolition of illegal structures was undertaken stating what the situation was. We get into communal trouble needlessly when a little thoughtfulness would have gone a long way in promoting understanding of the issues involved.
Was the dargah really an encroachment or did it just happen that it was standing in the way of the planners? It may be pointed that in Mumbai, under almost similar circumstances, a Muslim place of worship at Dhobi Dalao was left to stand even if it did not help in the smooth flow or vehicular traffic? At times it may be necessary to make some small concessions to any community in the larger interests of peace. The demolition of the dargah in Vadodara cannot be treated lightly considering that it might have national repercussions.
Our secularists would be the first to attack the Gujarat Government on "communal" grounds. One has also to blame poor—or thoughtless—reporting. If, for example, it was reported that violence erupted when "a dargah, along with one dozen religious places of different communities" was demolished, then at least the impression would have been given that a dargah alone was not singled out for demolition. The fact of religious places of different communities being demolished was not mentioned by many reports and The Hindu reported it in para 9. If a dargah has stood on its site for 200 years, obviously it could not possibly have been an encroachment. It can’t be given the same ranking as other religious places of different communities. Illegal ‘Hindu’ shrines are frequently built in cities on pavements which the authorities turn a blind eye to. Is it too much to ask our municipal authorities to be sensitive to religious issues. Gujarat is not Saudi Arabia; the latter may not think too highly of mere buildings under any name. But Muslims in India are sensitive and up to a point their sensitivity needs to be respected. The problem of widening roads is a perennial one and most cities in India face it.
According to one report, the mazaar of Chishti Rashid-ud-din was 300—not 200—years old, but demolishing it has cost four lives. The point to note is the very inadequate reporting in our dailies. Whether in this instance it is deliberate—to create an impression that the Gujarat Government is anti-Muslim, we can’t tell. But it seems likely. With secular dailies one never knows.
Our secular media is mum over the demolished almost 250 Hindu temples constructed over the government land creating traffic problems and so on in Madurai.
Last but not the least,on the banks of river Yamuna—adjoining to the Red Fort wall—so many graves have come up in the last 8/10 years? Whose graves are they? And when the Hon’ble Courts will order to remove all these unauthorised graves these psuedo-secularists/media will start to beat their chests.
Pak Rulers' Trump Card : HATE INDIA
PAK RULER’S TRUMP CARD : ‘HATE INDIA’
THE political developments, which have been snowbaling inside Pakistan right from its birth, convince one beyond doubt that unless a fully democratically elected governemtn takes over the administration no peace with India is possible. That so long as the government there remains militarily supported and manned by opportunist politicians interested in feathering their own nest any peace process with India would turn utopian is a fact well known with the changing political scenerio in Pakistan and the many developments in its relatable with India.One wonders, whether Pakistan ruled by selfish politicians and petty bureaucrats wuld have even survivied to these days had there not been an India ofr the unruly Palistani leaders to raise the sulphur-hot and reckless slogans against.
All Pakistani rulers were in one way or the other, the victims of their own political blunders. Having fallen in the ditches they themselves dug, they had no other alternative than to resort to nimble antics and gyrations and cheap tacktics to continue in power. To be in power became in all cases a necessity to escape assassination attempts, fact born out by that most of the Pakistani leaders were either killed or expelled by the tyrants in waiting. And they had to find out a safe way to escape from the popular discontent. And the "Hate India" campaign became the judicious answer. No wonder, all Pakistani leaders whipped up this propaganda whether they were politically and academically educated or not.
A tacticle move rather than a religious or national imperative as Jinnah the founder father of Pakistan later confessed and much against the wishes of a good number of Muslims like the then Punjab Premier Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan, the birth of Pakistan was ‘the greatest shock of Jinnah’s life’ as Shri Prakasha, India’s first High Commissioner to Pakistan later recorded. Jinnah during the post-partition days made a rethinking on the policiess to be pursued in the independent Pakistan, which he liked tobe noted for its secular credentials. Jinnah was an archenemy of Islamic fundamentalism who opposed the Gandhian support to Khilafat and the strong ambassador of the Hindu-Muslim rapport. He never visited a mosque even once not read Koran and done what is restricted in Koran just to marry a Gujarati Parsi girl. In the new-born Pakistan Jinnah naturally lived as a confused man and his mind always went back to its old moorings. He called upon the pakistanis o shed the angularities about their belonging to the Majority or minority communities. Pakistan now proved something unmangeable to Jinnsy. The proverbial wedge in the monkey’s hand. And it being too late to correct his ways he sought to assuage his mental anguish bu unjustly attacking the Indian leaders.
The maligned attitude of Jinnah was carried down by the generations of Pakistani leaders. Addressing his countrymen from Lahore on 7th October 1947, Liaqat Ali Khan declared in a broadcast message: "Pakistan is not a shooting star that shines for a moment. Pakistan will not die". The euphoricc message, which bristled with anti-India innuendoes, meant nothing other than that India could not do away with Pakistan.
Pakistan administration down the decades having became a total failure, the leaders knew that they must now find out an outrlet through whichthe popplar wrath could be ventilated. "Hate India" thus became the usaul stock-in-trade to comourflage the unnumerable political and economic errors.
THE political developments, which have been snowbaling inside Pakistan right from its birth, convince one beyond doubt that unless a fully democratically elected governemtn takes over the administration no peace with India is possible. That so long as the government there remains militarily supported and manned by opportunist politicians interested in feathering their own nest any peace process with India would turn utopian is a fact well known with the changing political scenerio in Pakistan and the many developments in its relatable with India.One wonders, whether Pakistan ruled by selfish politicians and petty bureaucrats wuld have even survivied to these days had there not been an India ofr the unruly Palistani leaders to raise the sulphur-hot and reckless slogans against.
All Pakistani rulers were in one way or the other, the victims of their own political blunders. Having fallen in the ditches they themselves dug, they had no other alternative than to resort to nimble antics and gyrations and cheap tacktics to continue in power. To be in power became in all cases a necessity to escape assassination attempts, fact born out by that most of the Pakistani leaders were either killed or expelled by the tyrants in waiting. And they had to find out a safe way to escape from the popular discontent. And the "Hate India" campaign became the judicious answer. No wonder, all Pakistani leaders whipped up this propaganda whether they were politically and academically educated or not.
A tacticle move rather than a religious or national imperative as Jinnah the founder father of Pakistan later confessed and much against the wishes of a good number of Muslims like the then Punjab Premier Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan, the birth of Pakistan was ‘the greatest shock of Jinnah’s life’ as Shri Prakasha, India’s first High Commissioner to Pakistan later recorded. Jinnah during the post-partition days made a rethinking on the policiess to be pursued in the independent Pakistan, which he liked tobe noted for its secular credentials. Jinnah was an archenemy of Islamic fundamentalism who opposed the Gandhian support to Khilafat and the strong ambassador of the Hindu-Muslim rapport. He never visited a mosque even once not read Koran and done what is restricted in Koran just to marry a Gujarati Parsi girl. In the new-born Pakistan Jinnah naturally lived as a confused man and his mind always went back to its old moorings. He called upon the pakistanis o shed the angularities about their belonging to the Majority or minority communities. Pakistan now proved something unmangeable to Jinnsy. The proverbial wedge in the monkey’s hand. And it being too late to correct his ways he sought to assuage his mental anguish bu unjustly attacking the Indian leaders.
The maligned attitude of Jinnah was carried down by the generations of Pakistani leaders. Addressing his countrymen from Lahore on 7th October 1947, Liaqat Ali Khan declared in a broadcast message: "Pakistan is not a shooting star that shines for a moment. Pakistan will not die". The euphoricc message, which bristled with anti-India innuendoes, meant nothing other than that India could not do away with Pakistan.
Pakistan administration down the decades having became a total failure, the leaders knew that they must now find out an outrlet through whichthe popplar wrath could be ventilated. "Hate India" thus became the usaul stock-in-trade to comourflage the unnumerable political and economic errors.
M.F.Husain :THE HINDU HATER
MAQBOOL Fida Husain comes through as a sexually perverse person. To paint nudity is an old tradition. To portray sex play may be pornographic, but it is not unnatural and not considered perverse. However, to depict copulation between an animal and a woman is revolting to the normal person.
Think of a horse and woman, a bull and a woman, a lion and a woman, an elephant and a woman! The photographs of many of the paintings are printed in a volume entitled Husain. The book was conceived and designed by M.F.Husain himself.
An individual suffering from a mental disease is ultimately his personal concern. However, when the fall out of his perversity touches persons unknown to him, it is slanderous. When the pornography of the perversity embroils deities, it is sacrilegious.
Prime facie, Husain has insulted the Hindu ethos in general and believing Hindus in particular. Can he be forgiven for painting Durga and Saraswati naked? And Sita masturbating on the long tail of Hanuman; in another painting she is shown sitting naked on the thigh of Ravana. Imagine a bull copulating with Parvati and Shankar watching the act on Shivratri. On the other hand, Durga in union with her lion! The painting of Krishna with his flute sitting on a cow but with no feet and no hands.
How can so many instances be by inadvertence? Suppose Husain is allowed the benefit of doubt and a judgement is suspended for a while. Look at some of his other paintings, only to find that he painted Muslim women all fully dressed. His step mother Shirin. Prophet Mohammed’s daughter Fatima, Mother Teresa, also got the benefit of all her clothes, a privilege denied to Hindu deities.
On a panel painting, Husain has portrayed Einstein, Gandhi, Mao Zedong and Hitler, sitting in a row. The former three are dressed but the Nazi leader is naked. Does that not mean that he painted in the nude all those he hated? Hindu deities painted by Husain fall in the same category as Adolf Hitler, the killer of six million innocent Jews and thousands of others.
A few years back, he had dared to paint Bharat Mata nude. Can any self-respecting Hindu forgive Maqbool Fida Husain? It is matter of shame for all the Hindus, living in India or abroad should strongly protest him and should sent letters of protests to the Honb’le President of India to snatch brush from him and throw him behind the bars. Above all, he should be interrogated that at whose behest he is bent upon in doing these nefarious paintings or throw him out along with his supporters from India. If he or his supports say that unintentionally, all this happened where were his intentions for showing Fatima in full dress. Why she is not painted nude. Why Mohammed’s( peace be upon him) wives are painted nude so far? It’s clear a sign to instigate the Hindus, so that the Muslim fundamentalists may bake their share of loafs. Where have all the Muslim clergies, Imams, Maulvies, Human Right activists, Shabanas, Javed Akhtars, Dilip Kumars alias Yusuf Bhai and other pseudo-secularist leaders gone. Are they living on this earth, seeing all this nonsense?
More so, our Parliament can dare to overt and covet the courts’ decisions going against Muslims; could dare to call Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi with different names over the riots in Ahmadabad.See, one after the other is trying to cash the Gujarat riots but ignoring the root cause, e.g., burning of Ram bhakhts in Sabarmati train (our pseudo-secularist leaders say "the fire was an accident"), but why are they all become deaf, dumb and blind on Husain’s such nonsense paintings. It’s a matter of shame for every Hindu if he/she tolerates such non-sense paintings of their gods and goddesses to whom they worship, such painters should not allowed in live in this country for a moment. Any moment he could spark the riots then all will come forward beating their chests/breasts.
If Husain’s such paintings could be called an art then why the caricatures of Mohammed (Peace be upon him) by the Danish cartoonist be called objectionable? Is it not the double standard?
Over the demolition of the disputed structure at Ayodhya the world had reacted but in that reaction how many Hindu temples are broken, did any one of them asked the Muslims why they done so. If Ayodhya was a heinous act then to break and fire Hindu temples was a good deed. Did our government or any parliamentarian ask the Pakistan government to rebuild that broken Hindu temple made by Motilal Nehru.Almost every newspaper, that time had carried the photo of that broken temple?
In the end,it is better to say in this context that WOH KATAL BHI KARTE HAIN TO CHARCHA NAHIN HOTI, HUM AAH BHI BHARTE HAIN TO AFSANE BAN JAATE HAIN.
Think of a horse and woman, a bull and a woman, a lion and a woman, an elephant and a woman! The photographs of many of the paintings are printed in a volume entitled Husain. The book was conceived and designed by M.F.Husain himself.
An individual suffering from a mental disease is ultimately his personal concern. However, when the fall out of his perversity touches persons unknown to him, it is slanderous. When the pornography of the perversity embroils deities, it is sacrilegious.
Prime facie, Husain has insulted the Hindu ethos in general and believing Hindus in particular. Can he be forgiven for painting Durga and Saraswati naked? And Sita masturbating on the long tail of Hanuman; in another painting she is shown sitting naked on the thigh of Ravana. Imagine a bull copulating with Parvati and Shankar watching the act on Shivratri. On the other hand, Durga in union with her lion! The painting of Krishna with his flute sitting on a cow but with no feet and no hands.
How can so many instances be by inadvertence? Suppose Husain is allowed the benefit of doubt and a judgement is suspended for a while. Look at some of his other paintings, only to find that he painted Muslim women all fully dressed. His step mother Shirin. Prophet Mohammed’s daughter Fatima, Mother Teresa, also got the benefit of all her clothes, a privilege denied to Hindu deities.
On a panel painting, Husain has portrayed Einstein, Gandhi, Mao Zedong and Hitler, sitting in a row. The former three are dressed but the Nazi leader is naked. Does that not mean that he painted in the nude all those he hated? Hindu deities painted by Husain fall in the same category as Adolf Hitler, the killer of six million innocent Jews and thousands of others.
A few years back, he had dared to paint Bharat Mata nude. Can any self-respecting Hindu forgive Maqbool Fida Husain? It is matter of shame for all the Hindus, living in India or abroad should strongly protest him and should sent letters of protests to the Honb’le President of India to snatch brush from him and throw him behind the bars. Above all, he should be interrogated that at whose behest he is bent upon in doing these nefarious paintings or throw him out along with his supporters from India. If he or his supports say that unintentionally, all this happened where were his intentions for showing Fatima in full dress. Why she is not painted nude. Why Mohammed’s( peace be upon him) wives are painted nude so far? It’s clear a sign to instigate the Hindus, so that the Muslim fundamentalists may bake their share of loafs. Where have all the Muslim clergies, Imams, Maulvies, Human Right activists, Shabanas, Javed Akhtars, Dilip Kumars alias Yusuf Bhai and other pseudo-secularist leaders gone. Are they living on this earth, seeing all this nonsense?
More so, our Parliament can dare to overt and covet the courts’ decisions going against Muslims; could dare to call Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi with different names over the riots in Ahmadabad.See, one after the other is trying to cash the Gujarat riots but ignoring the root cause, e.g., burning of Ram bhakhts in Sabarmati train (our pseudo-secularist leaders say "the fire was an accident"), but why are they all become deaf, dumb and blind on Husain’s such nonsense paintings. It’s a matter of shame for every Hindu if he/she tolerates such non-sense paintings of their gods and goddesses to whom they worship, such painters should not allowed in live in this country for a moment. Any moment he could spark the riots then all will come forward beating their chests/breasts.
If Husain’s such paintings could be called an art then why the caricatures of Mohammed (Peace be upon him) by the Danish cartoonist be called objectionable? Is it not the double standard?
Over the demolition of the disputed structure at Ayodhya the world had reacted but in that reaction how many Hindu temples are broken, did any one of them asked the Muslims why they done so. If Ayodhya was a heinous act then to break and fire Hindu temples was a good deed. Did our government or any parliamentarian ask the Pakistan government to rebuild that broken Hindu temple made by Motilal Nehru.Almost every newspaper, that time had carried the photo of that broken temple?
In the end,it is better to say in this context that WOH KATAL BHI KARTE HAIN TO CHARCHA NAHIN HOTI, HUM AAH BHI BHARTE HAIN TO AFSANE BAN JAATE HAIN.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)