Why we are reluctant to use word 'Hindu'?

http://www.jahajeedesi.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4633

Anish Shah analyses the psychology behind the widespread tendency of many Hindu-inspired spiritual or yoga groups to vehemently deny any connections with Hinduism:

When I was asked to write this article for Hindu Voice, I struggled to think of how I could start it off. So I'll start with a conversation I had a couple of years ago while on holiday in California. While there, I went to a charity cultural show type thing organized by the local Hindu community and after the main event there was a dinner and a collection of stalls for various organizations to showcase their work, raise funds and get new members. There was one which caught my attention because it had a group of three people dressed up in white gowns and tilaks on their heads which gave them the look of holy people who might have just walked out of a mandir on the banks of the Ganga. More surprising to me was that two of the people were actually white Americans and so to me looked even more out of place at this gathering. The third was an American-born Indian guy and it was with him that I started talking. He explained to me that his organization was a worldwide organization, which had worked for many years to teach yoga and mediation to help people lead a stress-free and peaceful life. What's more, they teach for free and to anyone who wants to learn. The conversation moved on and I asked what other parts of Hinduism interested him and were taught by his group but even before I had finished he looked at me as if I had insulted his mother. "We do not teach Hinduism, we are universal," he said to me, "we do not restrict ourselves to Hinduism." Now I'm not an argumentative person but I couldn't resist pointing out that he was at an event organized by the Hindu community, that virtually everyone approaching his stall was either a Hindu or interested in Hinduism, that he was dressed in traditional Hindu dress, with tradition al Hindu sacred markings on his skin, that his group had a Hindu sounding name and that what he was offering to teach was an ancient Hindu practice and art whose ultimate aim is help the individual on the path to union with everything (or "God" some people might prefer). But this just made him angrier (so much for the anger control that his universal spiritual practice should have given him) and he insisted that all I was doing was restricting yoga by "labeling" it Hindu. Since then I have met other members of the "Brahma Kumari" group here in the UK and heard similar things as soon as you ask if they are teaching parts of Hinduism.

But it turns out that this way of thinking is more widespread than just one group. Most "gurus" who come here to the West also tell their students that they are not teaching them anything which is "Hinduism." Try asking your local Yoga teacher and see what the response is. It goes for gurus teaching more than Yoga - even more "spiritua l" teachers will say that they are not teaching "Hinduism" but something else. Another famous example of this is Swami Prabhupada, the founder of ISKCON or the Hare Krishnas, who said many times that he was not teaching "Hinduism." This has led to a lot of confusion for many people who become Hare Krishnas because they are not always quite sure if they are Hindus or not. Don't take my word for it - next time you meet a Brahma Kumari or ISKCON member try asking yourself about the "Hindu"-ness of their teachings.

Another place where the "H"-word is avoided is in the commercial publishing world. Again most Yoga books won't mention any Hindu connection. A famous example of this is the writer Dipak Chopra who has made millions of dollars selling Hindu spirituality in America without mentioning the roots of where his teachings come from. He is also an adviser to Virgin Comics who have recently marketed a series of Hindu-based comics without actually mentioning the "H"-word. What these people do sometimes (but not always) concede is that they are i nspired by "traditional Indian" or "ancient Indian" stories, teachings and history.

Actually, I have met lots of ordinary Hindus who always tell their non-Hindu friends that they are "Indians" when asked about their background or when asked more specifically about religion will say something like "my parents are Hindus" or "I am spiritual, not really 'religious'." Now I'm not saying any of this is lying or false but it does contrast with my Muslim and Sikh friends who always answer with their religion when asked about their identity.

So the question really is: why is the "H"-word so bad? Most people who fall into the groups I have described so far sometimes tend to argue as follows: "Hindu" is a foreign word so doesn't really describe us. That's true - the actual word "Hindu" is non-Hindu in origin, but then so is the word "Indian" and is derived from the word "Hindu" anyway, so is that really any better?

Digging deeper, you find that another reason that a lot of Hindus or Hindu-influenced people do not acknowledge Hinduism is because the word "Hindu" itself has become a dirty word. "Hindu" has become associated with anything which (other) people see as negative - for example: polytheism, idol worship, caste, poverty, extremism, weakness, conservatism - but that anything positive - for example: art, yoga, conservation, tolerance, pluralism, music, dance, spirituality - is seen as separate from "Hinduism." This article isn't about the various negative things associated with Hinduism which need discussion elsewhere but obviously it is unfair to only look at one side of the story.

Communist historians, politicians and intellectuals in India are also quite prominent in claiming that they are not Hindus and that Hinduism hasn't really contributed much to India. In fact, they go a step further and have championed the notion that Hinduism doesn't even originate in India but from somewhere else. However, this is one group that we shouldn't be too surprised about as they have also at the forefront of telling the one-sided negative story of "Hinduism." Sometimes non-Indians just love India too much to be taken in by all this negativity fed to them by these Indian born people with Hindu-sounding names but that's usually the best time to tell them that everything they love is not "Hindu" but "Indian."

One group which has at least recognized the Hindu origin of Yoga has been the Catholic Church which has long discouraged all of it's followers from taking up what they perceive as an evil and Pagan practice. Many extremist Christians in America have also condemned Yoga because they see it as Hindu. Other Christian groups have recognized that yoga is too popular and the yoga-banners too mad for that argument to work. So instead they have come up with "Christian-Yoga" which believers can now practice without having to incur the sin of taking up Paganism.

So everywhere you look, you'll see that the people who teach and make a living from Hindu teachings are ashamed of the Hindu roots. Even individuals seem to be ashamed of their Hindu roots. And ironically, the only people who are willing to accept the Hindu origin of teachings and practices such as Yoga are the ones who do not like those practices anyway. So the formula is simple - pick something you hate and call it "Hindu," pick something you like and call it "better than Hinduism." And eventually you get the ridiculous situation where you can have "Christian Yoga" but you can't find "Hindu Yoga" anywhere or even just "Yoga" where the Hindu origin is acknowledged.

Ultimately I guess every Hindu reading this needs to ask how they themselves see "Hinduism" and the word "Hindu." To me it represents not just the heritage of my parents and all my ancestors but represents the oldest living tradition in the world today. It represents an unequalled richness in literature, art, architecture and history. It represents a culture of scholars and ascetics who would not even put their own names to their teachings, a culture of warriors who fought bravely in the face of all sorts of enemies and brutalities to ensure the survival of Hinduism when her sister civilizations died one after another. It represents a constantly evolving society which has always moved and renewed itself and has always been an open, tolerant and pluralist society. It represents a wisdom which belongs to everyone, which has benefited the world in the past, benefits the world today and will continue to benefit the world in future long after we are all dead. It represents this and a whole lot more and to me all of these are positive things and therefore to be called "Hindu" should be a matter of pride and honor for anyone, not the swearword some people see it as.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Culture without religion is tourism. Anonymous

Hindu religion, Hindu way of life, Hindu dharma, Hindu nation

On the eve when nation is celebrating 60 years of freedom from British rule, we are still debating whether it is a birthday or independence? Western oriented intelligentsia is still confused and making masses further confuse over the existence of identity called 'Bharat' or 'Hindustan' or 'India' during pre-christian and pre-islamic period. We have to live with the generations those are educated under british education system and the process is still on. People of India are now paying high price for this ideological confusion and we do not see any way out in near future.

Over 80% population of India is 'Hindu' by government records and still they have to justify anything and everything they want to practice in a free country in the name of 'secularism'. The word has its origin in early 20th century european politics when chruch had overwhelming power to interfere in state policies and to keep them under control the government has to proclaim that it is secular means 'of this world' and church should not interfere in worldly matters.

We in India never had such problem of religious bodies interfering in political matters because spirituality has altogether different meaning for us which can only be understood by term 'dharma' whereas organised religions always worked through political system. When we say India is secular, a common man understands that government has no religion of itself and is suppose to treat all the citizens at par irrespective of their background. But when a so called minority claims that their sentiments are hurt due to majority customs and should not be encouraged or endorsed by government in the name of secularism (eg reciting vande mataram, sarasawati vandana etc) then we need to think the the usage of this term and very foundations of our national ethos.

In the landmark judgment on Dec 11, 1995 supreme court of India made it clear that the word 'Hindu' doesn't synonymous to hindu religion and it is essentially a way of life. So how this way of life is different from other existed ways of life on the earth? And can a non-hindu in India follow this way of life without hurting his/her religious sentiments. And if not then is it justifiable to for him/her to claim to be a part of mainstream of nation?

- Coexistence: All paths pertaining to materialist world or spiritual world are true and we all can live together not only tolerating each other but accepting them as equal.

- Society & individual: Society is above individual. Human is a social animal and he/she cannot exist in isolation. Individual is temporary where as society is eternal. We have to give up lower identity for the sake of higher identity. (individual-family-relatives-cast-language-religion-society-nation). Human being is much more than a body. Individual has body-mind-intellect-soul and society should provide conducive atmosphere for all round development of individual. In return individual should nourish needs of society and develop flexible systems for future generations.

- Family: Between individual and society there should be a buffering system called family. Balanced individual development is possible in the home with strong family bonds. Family is the place where a person starts realizing his/her role and duty in the society by following the elders.

- Character: Morality in thoughts and deeds are not only a social requirement but also should be at personal level which leads to realization of ultimate truth or reason of one's very existence.

- Relation with others: Everyone has the same soul and hence the capability to attain the highest possible goal in materialistic as well as spiritual world with their own paths. Not only human but each and every living as well as non-living entity has a particular place in the universe and without this interdependence, the web of life will be incomplete. Human is not at the center of the universe but a part of it.

- Utilization of natural resources: Nature has enough for every ones need but not for individual's greed. Most of the environmental problems faced by modern civilization are due to exploitation of nature. When the balance is disturbed, nature has its own ways to rectify it and ultimately we are at the receiving end. We are answerable to future generations.

- Whole universe is a single family: Change is life, Diversity is natural. Nothing living is static and identical. Only dead is static. Universe will always have diverse groups of people with distinct cultural identities. Single cap cannot and shouldnot be fit to tom, dick and harry. We all are part of single family with our individual identity on this planet for a particular time and for particular purpose. This universe was existed before our arrival and will exist after our departure as well. We are just custodian, nothing more than that.

Even though 'humanity' is the highest identity, we need all lower identities at the same time, which should not be contradictory and as mentioned earlier we have to give up lower one for the sake of higher one.

This to my knowledge is a hindu way of life and i do not see how it can be contradictory to the constitutional right of non-hindus as well. We should have effective education system which will inculcate these values in all citizens as a way of life. Each one who follow these ideals staying around the globe is hindu irrespective of his/her religious belief. Bharat will be their source of inspiration. Minorities of Bharat should not see this basic principles as threat to their separate identity. Even someone does not accept these values, then also he is welcome to stay in Bharat as we did always in past but in that case he should be aware that it is his personal choice to remain aloof from mainstream. But otherwise hindu way of life is capable of assimilating everyone while keeping their identity intact.

This will be essentially a Hindu nation, where every individual will be same under law and allowed to practise religion of his choice, but the way of life or values of each individual should be based on hindu ethos then only we can prosper as a cohesive unit in the modern world.

Hindu religion is set of customs which were never in past and definitely will not be in future mandatory even for hindus forget about non-hindus. That is the whole reason why we see innumerable sects only under hindu religion.

Hindu dharma should not be confused with hindu religion. Dharma is much more broad term which has no translation in english. Religion is a subset of dharma. Dharma is nothing but set of duties for individual which were evolved and are still evolving as per the needs of society. Organized religions cannot be compared with dharma because they have only one holy book which is revealed to only one prophet and cannot be changed at any cost at any point of time in human civilization. Dharma does not have such a book but which is a continuous process of human evolution and that is the reason for the original name of hindu dharma, a sanatan dharma means eternal or ever changing set of duties.

Hindus of todays Bharat need to be assertive about hindu way of life not only by words but by deeds as well. People of the world should see the positive effect of hindu way of life in practise then only we can claim that this is the valid alternative for western way (christian) of life or islamic way of life for human civilization in long run if human race want to survive on this planet. Hindu philosophy is well recognized and indisputable for its richness all over the world. Now it is time for hindu way of life to be recognized as an alternative for modern competitive world and which can be done only by people of Bharat following hindu way of life.

Lets do what India needs from us!

Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam

Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognize our own strengths, our achievements? We are such a great nation. We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse to acknowledge them. Why?
We are the first in milk production.
We are number one in Remote sensing satellites.
We are the second largest producer of wheat.
We are the second largest producer of rice.
Look at Dr. Sudarshan , he has transferred the tribal village into a self-sustaining, self-driving unit. There are millions of such achievements but our media is only obsessed in the bad news and failures and disasters. I was in Tel Aviv once and I was reading the Israeli newspaper. It was the day after a lot of attacks and bombardments and deaths had taken place. TheHamas had struck. But the front page of the newspaper had the picture of a Jewish gentleman who in five years had transformed his desert into an orchid and a granary. It was this inspiring picture that everyone woke up to. The gory details of killings, bombardments, deaths, were inside in the newspaper, buried among other news.
In India we only read about death, sickness, terrorism, crime. Why are we so NEGATIVE? Another question: Why are we, as a nation so obsessed with foreign things? We want foreign T. Vs, we want foreign shirts. We want foreign technology.

Why this obsession with everything imported. Do we not realize that self-respect comes with self-reliance? I was in Hyderabad giving this lecture, when a 14 year old girl asked me for my autograph. I asked her what her goal in life is. She replied: I want to live in a developed India . For her, you and I will have to build this developed India . You must proclaim. India is not an under-developed nation; it is a highly developed nation.

YOU say that our government is inefficient.
YOU say that our laws are too old.
YOU say that the municipality does not pick up the garbage.
YOU say that the phones don't work, the railways are a joke,

The airline is the worst in the world, mails never reach their destination. YOU say that our country has been fed to the dogs and is the absolute pits.

YOU say, say and say. What do YOU do about it?

Take a person on his way to Singapore . Give him a name - YOURS. Give him a face - YOURS. YOU walk out of the airport and you are at your International best. In Singapore you don't throw cigarette butts on the roads or eat in the stores. YOU are as proud of their Underground links as they are. You pay $5 (approx. Rs. 60) to drive through Orchard Road (equivalent of Mahim Causeway or Pedder Road) between 5 PM and 8 PM. YOU come back to the parking lot to punch your parking ticket if you have over stayed in a restaurant or a shopping mall irrespective of your status identity... In Singapore you don't say anything, DO YOU? YOU wouldn't dare to eat in public during Ramadan, in Dubai . YOU would not dare to go out without your head covered in Jedd-ah. YOU would not dare to buy an employee of the telephone exchange in London at 10 pounds ( Rs.650) a month to, 'see to it that my STD and ISD calls are billed to someone else.'YOU would not dare to speed beyond 55 mph (88 km/h) in Washington and then tell the traffic cop,'Jaanta hai main kaun hoon (Do you know who I am?). I am so and so's son. Take your two bucks and get lost.' YOU wouldn't chuck an empty coconut shell anywhere other than the garbage pail on the beaches in Australia and New Zealand . Why don't YOU spit Paan on the streets of Tokyo ? Why don't YOU use examination jockeys or buy fake certificates in Boston ??? We are still talking of the same YOU. YOU who can respect and conform to a foreign system in other countries but cannot in your own. You who will throw papers and cigarettes on the road the moment you touch Indian ground. If you can be an involved and appreciative citizen in an alien country, why cannot you be the same here in India ?

Once in an interview, the famous Ex-municipal commissioner of Mumbai , Mr. Tinaikar , had a point to make. 'Rich people's dogs are walked on the streets to leave their affluent droppings all over the place,' he said. 'And then the same people turn around to criticize and blame the authorities for inefficiency and dirty pavements. What do they expect the officers to do? Go down with a broom every time their dog feels the pressure in his bowels? In America every dog owner has to clean up after his pet has done the job. Same in Japan . Will the Indian citizen do that here?' He's right. We go to the polls to choose a government and after that forfeit all responsibility.

We sit back wanting to be pampered and expect the government to do everything for us whilst our contribution is totally negative. We expect the government to clean up but we are not going to stop chucking garbage all over the place nor are we going to stop to pick a up a stray piece of paper and throw it in the bin. We expect the railways to provide clean bathrooms but we are not going to learn the proper use of bathrooms. We want Indian Airlines and Air India to provide the best of food and toiletries but we are not going to stop pilfering at the least opportunity. This applies even to the staff who is known not to pass on the service to the public. When it comes to burning social issues like those related to women, dowry, girl child! and others, we make loud drawing room protestations and continue to do the reverse at home. Our excuse? 'It's the whole system which has to change, how will it matter if I alone fore go my sons' rights to a dowry.' So who's going to change the system?

What does a system consist of ? Very conveniently for us it consists of our neighbours, other households, other cities, other communities and the government. But definitely not me and YOU. When it comes to us actually making a positive contribution to the system we lock ourselves along with our families into a safe cocoon and look into the distance at countries far away and wait for a Mr.Clean to come along & work miracles for us with a majestic sweep of his hand or we leave the country and run away. Like lazy cowards hounded by our fears we run to America to bask in their glory and praise their system. When New York becomes insecure we run to England . When England experiences unemployment, we take the next flight out to the Gulf. When the Gulf is war struck, we demand to be rescued and brought home by the Indian government. Everybody is out to abuse and rape the country. Nobody thinks of feeding the system. Our conscience is mortgaged to money.

Lets do what India needs from us.

What comes first? Religion or Country

The conflict between civilization is on rise and modern man has to live under constant threat of global terrorism. There are many theories to explain/justify the act of terrorism but none of the reasoning could give solution to the problem because the diagnosis itself is superficial.

Let's list the extant major cultures across the world:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Worldwide_percentage_of_Adherents_by_Religion.png

Every religion is originated at particular point of time in the history, at specific place and most of the time initiated by someone. As the customs attached to the religion is mostly dependent on the prevailing situation at that time and place of origin, the land becomes holy for the followers of the religion. Jerusalem for christians, mecca for muslims, India for hindus and so on. Until we practise our faith at the original place, there is no conflict as everything is conducive for the religious rituals. The problem arises only when a particular sect travelled to unknown territory and start practising the customs on their own and/or forcing/converting the locals.

It is pretty clear from the chart above that most the religions are growing or stabilized as per the natural laws. Newer religions like sikh (16th century AD) and bahai are (19th century AD) are also adding up to the list indicating the evolutionary mechanism of origin of religions. Also the hinduism and Confucianism from old world are still in practise. Even though many people are turning atheist or non-religious we have to live with majority of adherent population in the time to come. The striking and artificial thing in the above chart is growth of christianity and islam in last 2000 years of human civilization. The growth is by no means can be termed as natural and the root lies in the semitic traditions of these Abrahmic religions. Conversion by force or otherwise could not be a part of any spiritual path. But these traditions has grown on these very teachings and they have incorporated it into their philosophy. The following map will make it more clear the impact of this two organised religions on the history and geography of the world and thanks to them for wiping out many old world cultures from the surface of this earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Christ_Islam.png

The country always comes first only when we are at the origin with respect to our adherence and religion always comes first when we are in foreign land due to obvious conflict with local traditions. Everyone has to respect the rule of land which is a natural reflection of the belief of majority community. Two organized religions always tried to impose their own beliefs on the locals and in turn we have 54 muslim and 120 christian countries today with no clue of original cultures on those lands just before 2000 years of human history.

Today also their expansive mentality is not diminished and they have modern weapons to fulfil their desires in the form of global terrorism. If we wish to preserve remaining diversity across the globe then the third largest ethnic group have to take initiative who has no history of converting or wiping of other civilizations.

If we consider today's geographical and religious situation of this planet as base line then we can decide few directives for peaceful coexistence.

- Each extant religion has a original holy land where they have emotional attachment and most of their beliefs are evolved around that land. If a person living and following certain religion at the original place then there would not be a conflict between rule of land and religious beliefs. But when he/she choose to live and practise at other land which is holy for other religion then he may be a legitimate citizen of that land but cannot claim special treatment if there is conflict between the belief and rule of land.

- This is by no means giving a secondary citizenship to religious minority but only the effort to preserve original cultural identity. As the person him/herself choose to live to that land or even he is living there from birth if he has conflicting beliefs then he should try to relocate him/herself to original land of his belief.

- Newer religions originating should be given space and freedom and the place of their origin would be their holy land (eg Sikh,Baha'i). It is very unlikely that they have contradictory way of life (eg. jainism, buddhism, sikhism are similar to hinduism, bahaism is similar to middle east religions)

- There should be internal debate as well as inter-religious dialogs for banning mass conversion programs by any means anywhere in the world which is root cause of all intolerance in the modern world.

Let religion be a way of evolving human soul and future generations will breath in terror free world.

How to include meditation in daily routine

http://www.meditationiseasy.com/index.htm

This is a problem faced by most of us. We read a book, meet some one and get excited. For some days, we make a routine, set aside time and meditate regularly. However, after a few days the enthusiasm fades away and we get back to an older routine of our life. The complexities of life in 21st century has made it really difficult for most of us to spend a little time of with ourselves !. We can spend hours in restaurant, watching movies /daily soap, shopping and gossiping. However, when it comes to spend some quite moments with ourselves we find excuses : My busy routine, work pressure, exams, study of children and what not ?

So what to do ? First of all understand this problem in some detail. It is not that we don't have time - all of us can find at least 10 minutes from our busy life. It's not that we don't want to meditate - then why you'd be reading this ? It's not that we can't meditate -we all can meditate as it's really easy.

The real reason is that we all are victims of our own circumstances. Past habits of procrastination, dilly-dallying, wrong food, irregular sleep pattern is taking it's toll on us. If your whole life is in mess, how can you be expected to be disciplined enough to incorporate a new habit instantly ? You need to proceed slowly on this - one step at a time.

First of all you need to set your priorities once again. It is really important to ponder over what matters most to you. Is it money, fame, love, recognition, peace of mind or a combination of all ? Are you taking any of your worldly needs too seriously? Except a true peace of mind all your desires are transitory in nature and short lived. None of them is going to last forever. Be a little contemplative about your life. Understand that you are playing a tiny role in this stage called life. This role has a limited life. Many actors have played their role before you and many will played it after you. The role is significant and may appear very important to you. But at the end of the day, it's just a role.

An honest look over your entire life and a deep pondering over what you exactly want out of it is necessary to understand the true role of meditation in your life

Let me give you a suggestion. If you can't include meditation in your life daily, try to do it at least once in a week. On weekend you can do it easily. Even if that seems a task for you, just make a visit to your nearest Chapel, Temple, Mosque or any peaceful place once a week. Go alone at a time when there is least crowd there. Afternoon will be an ideal time. Sit there in a comfortable place and spend some time with yourself. Just think about how life is going on. How much you have achieved, how much you have lost and does it really matter ? Think about the ephemeral character of life. How the world is changing everyday, how life is becoming more & more complex everyday and how despite all this, some fundamental principles of life still prevails over everything: Like we all take birth and die, spend our life filled with various emotions of love, lust, hate, care, compassion, anger, joy, sorrow etc. We all know that this world is not a permanent place to live in, yet we behave as if we are going to live here forever. There are many such realities of life over which you can think during your weekly visit. I am sure once you start spending some quality time with your self (even if only once in a week ), you will be inspired to adopt meditation in your daily routine. Meditation will become a part of your life on it's own. I wish you good luck.

Majority communalism

We often confuse or use the three terms synonymously viz Country, State, and Nation. As per Wikipedia definition all three have distinct meaning.

A country is a political division of a geographical entity, a sovereign territory.

A state is an independent territory with a government, a population, and sovereignty over these. The entire landmass of the Earth (excluding Antarctica), along with coastal seas is considered to be divided among such countries. There are currently 193 states recognized by the United Nations — its 192 members and the Vatican City

A nation is a 'set of people with a common identity who have formed a nation-state or usually aspire to do so'

(Viotti and Kauppi, 2001). In this sense of country, the reference is more likely to be to a group that supposedly shares a common ethnic origin, language, religion, or history (real or illusory).

The reason to mention this in the beginning is to emphasize that nation is just not a group of people forced to live together. Over the human evolution, cultures are evolved and people with common ancestors forms a Nation. Many such existed in past and became extint giving rise to new order. The mainstream people of nation forms the natural majority and the nation is governed by belief and traditions of majority community. At any given point, any nation will comprise of majority and minority community. As per the wikipedia again, term "minority" typically refers to a socially subordination ethnic group (understood in terms of language, nationality, religion and/or culture). This phenomenon will be more common in the modern world due to efficient communication means.

Every state has to be secular and treat every citizen equal in front of law. But a nation cannot be secular. It has its own ethos which majority have faith in and to abandon the faith for the sake of minority is not logical and not in practise anywhere in the world but in Bharat. To put it simply, people need much more than bread and butter to live which generally termed as psychological, emotional, social and spiritual needs. And an independent Nation is expected to provide conducive atmosphere to practise those for its people. Are we Bharatiya are really independent? Can we practise or follow what is supposed to be a gist of our culture?

Can we recite Vande mataram?

Can we have saffron flag?

Can we have Sanskrit as national language?

Can we have uniform civil code for everyone residing in Bharat?

Now we will see the situation in Bharat in this context. If Bharat is a nation then we have to first answer what are the commonalities of the majority of the population. If we talking of Bharatiya culture then we are talking of which culture and when we talk about invasions by outsiders then who were they? Our culture has inherent potential to assimilate and accommodate everyone from anywhere in the world. Bharat is the only country in the world where you can find all extant ethnic groups living together. This is solely due to the fact that 'hindus' are in majority. The part of bharat where hindus are in minority is either no more part of Bharat (pakistan, afganistan, brahmadesh, bhutan,srilanka) or if still in Bharat then is cut away from the main stream (Kashmir, North eastern states). Thus to avoid further disintegration of Bharat, hindus need to be in majority in all parts of the nation.

Before indulging in 'majority communalism' let's see what does it mean by term 'communalism'.

In many parts of the world, communalism is a modern term that describes a broad range of social movements and social theories which are in some way centered upon the community. Communalism is used in South Asia to denote attempts to promote primarily religious stereotypes between groups of people identified as different communities and to stimulate violence between those groups. The sense given to this word in South Asia is represented by the word sectarianism outside South Asia. (Wikipedia)

Thus majority communalism in Bharatiya context is violence associated with hindus and which is against minorities especially muslims and christians. Interestingly this term is most often used by majority hindus rather than minority leaders.

Following myths are deliberately inculcated in masses through education system:

- Bharat was never a united nation in history and it is the british rule which made it a single political nation

- Bharatiy culture is a composite culture which is a mixture of hindu, muslims, christians, sikhs, buddhists, jains, dalits, adiwasis traditions

- Hindu are nothing but a aryan race migrated from central europe who in turn imposed their own vedic culture on the aboriginals viz Dravids.

- Thus hindus cannot claim to be only legitimate nationals but due to shear number they try to impose everything of their own to other legitimate nationals who are less in number at the moment.

- This brings whole conflict of civilization and if Bharat want to prosper in its present form then we have to somehow learn to coexist by accepting minority rights at the cost of majority beliefs.

If hindus try to impose their ideas on other legitimate nationals then they have their own reasons:

- It is proven beyond doubt by science that vedic literature is at least dates back to 1500 BC (UNESCO report 2006) when actually it is still older than that.

- There is no genetic or historical proof of Aryan invasion to Bharat. People still propagating this theory only with missionary zeal for their own narrow minded interests.

- If hindus have well developed culture which dates back to prophet Muhammad and Jesus then why hindus cannot follow their own traditions when they accept other religions at par.

When anything 'hindu' value was tried to established in the society it is branded by left leaning intellectuals as majority communalism due to two reasons:

- They are by nature against any kind of religion

- By accepting hindu values they are indirectly accepting hindus as sole nationals of Bharat

Average hindu is never exclusivist. By nature he accepts radically opposite philosophy as yet another way of salvation. This mindset is exploited very intelligently by all the minorities. They never hesitate to grab all minority rights offered by constitution but at the same time never accept the same constitution above their religious beliefs and always keep distance from the main stream of national life. Unfortunately majority of our leaders supported this anti-national behavior of all the minorities for pity vote bank politics and this is the root cause of majority communalism if at all some want to call it that way.

If any individual or any organization is really committed to get rid of this curse of civilization conflict then they have to direct their efforts not towards majority community but to the minority community and help then to understand that we all can coexist without conflict and their beliefs are well protected in Bharat but the nation essentially will be build on hindu ethos which should not be seen by minorities as threat to their existance. History has ample proofs to support this fact that hindus never wiped out any of the culture when they are in majority but otherwise has always happend in the history because we have 54 muslim and around 120 christian countries at the moment in the world.