18 September 2006

And he was talking of logic, reasoning and religion

Hi friends, you might read the above as wonder why is this on my blog. Well simple isn't. It’s about the recent controversy on Papal Address at University of Regendsburg. A lot of demonstrations etc are being held all over the world. But I doubt how many people have actually read the Papal Address. And I must say that his remarks are remarkable going with him. I think this is what is called "Saanp ke aage been bajaana". He wanted people not to go by what the leaders are saying but what logic and reasoning says. He wanted people to apply logic. But do people know.

I really feel that whatever is the 'Fatwa'. Some people will follow. It just makes others feel that Muslims by the virtue of being one lose the sense of being a logical person. But I know that it’s not true. I have a few friends who are Muslims. But not the so called "Madarsa Idiots". How can they ask for an apology just for the sake of mention of Islam in his speech? What he said was this

In the seventh conversation (”di├ílesis” — controversy)
edited by professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the jihad (holy war). The emperor must have known that sura 2:256 reads: “There is no compulsion in religion.” It is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under [threat]. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Koran, concerning holy war.

Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the “Book” and the “infidels,” he turns to his interlocutor somewhat brusquely with the central question on the relationship between religion and violence in general, in these words: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

The emperor goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. “God is not pleased by blood, and not acting reasonably (”syn logo”) is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats…. To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death….”

The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: Not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practice idolatry.

Now how does he insult Islam? He just said what some idiots like Al-Quaida, Lashkar-e-Toiba et. al. say day in and day out. News just came in that they wanted to kill Pope. Aur yeh gaya logic khadde mein. I wish that some other Muslim clerics come up with some 'Fatwa' against these irrational and terrorist organizations. But again truth be told "Idiots remain Idiots and those in power would never try do something thing good". This thing has to come from the youth and those outside the circle. This has been seen for long and the last being with the issue of Reservation. Now I did not hear even a single political party say anything with regard to this issue which actually hurts a large number of people. But will they listen. They just need votes. Same goes for these clergy. I think it’s the role of the media to educate the people about the truth. But then media is just another tool for these bigwigs to retain their power and authority. Today all are standing to fight a non-existent monstrous statement and the Vatican too is saying sorry. Yes nobody becomes small be saying sorry (Gandhigiri), but will the truth prevail?

But this controversy has brought into forefront something like the long forgotten idiot Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus, French Islamist R. Arnaldez and professor Khoury. The fact that people in this world are still stupid enough to not understand things and make a lot of fuss about anything. Similarly came into focus those Mullas who have no better job than to issue 'Fatwas'. And one more thing that I would like to add is that whatever the Papal had in his thought was just reinforced by the sort of reaction that the world saw from the Muslim world. I think that they need to be more logical and understand what the other person is saying. Not just jump guns as in case of "Cartoon Controversy".

God/Allah/Bhagwan if you are really there then please issue a statement for these misguided people so that they can be come back to the righteous path of logic, reason and humanity. Amen

13 September 2006

Munnabhai Ne To Maccha Diya

Munnabhai ne pehle MBBS ki degree lee aur khola pol All India Munnabhai's & Company ka. But this time around he is different. And I am sure parallels with Munna this time around is not possible. Though he has this great sword of TADA hanging on him in real world but still acting is acting and he just does it all too well.

It was good to see a one time drug addict and TADA accused taking up the challenge of tackling the problems of life in a totally 'Gandhigiri' manner. The gem of creativity is that he came up with 'Gandhigiri'. Now the rather innocent and sacrosanct word 'Gandhiwad' seems like a totally defeated lot. Probably the Hindi Teachers souls are crying this day. And I don't find it impossible that some guy in some school would have had written 'Gandhigiri' instead of Gandhiwad'. But if you look at what our politicians have done with Samajwad, Gandhiwad and Lohiawad. I very well suggest that commoner like us take to Gandhigiri because it seems all too
better. Probably that same hypocrisy surrounding the -Wads don't come into picture in this word. I only wish if we could really turn the world around for these selfish petty politicians

Other great point that is highlighted in this movie probably is the fact that there still exist people like 'Batuknaath'(For those who do not know who he is then let me tell you that he is an astrologer who says that he can never go wrong with predictions). Well to start with we have so many people in the film industry who themselves are slaves of Batuknaths. The 'K' Klanists' Mr Roshan and Miss Kapoor. Then you have Kariena Kapoor, Rimmi Sen and tons of others. I guess that list of names can actually be very long. But people still believe in those. I wonder why not there are people who are changing their name to Amitabh Bachchan or Shahrukh Khan. Sachin Tendulkar is not bad either. But I suggest that you take the name Bill Gates. Adding one letter extra or removing requires a lot of time to think, but these are readymade names. And you need not pay those astrologers which may cost you a bomb. And if names actually do something better then I think you must use these tried and tested names only. Alas not many people come to my blog to read about it. (May I add that my newspaper boy is named 'Shahrukh Khan')

12 September 2006

Wah re Bande 'Vande Matram'

A lot has been written and told. Many views have emerged and finally it was over. 7th of September came and went. The Congress wants to say that 'Ok man no probs. If you wish to sing then is good else whatever who cares'. And the counter view is from BJP -- 'Sing or loose ur right to be an Indian'. Then you have all those journalists asking every person in the street -- 'Hey man do u know how to sing Vande Matram ' or ' Do you know the meaning of this word or that one'.
Just too much of bullshit has been going on here now. It makes me feel confused. I was not able to realise what is right or what is wrong. But then enlightment came from an unknown source. It was "V for Vendetta". A movie, a cartoon but I guess one great thing about this movie was that it said was enough for me to realise the truth in this mess. Those words are

"Symbol by itself has no meaning, but with enough people it can change the world"

Really this national song was nothing but a symbol. A symbol in the 1900's a sign of revolt. And I beleive it was the masterly diplomatic skills of Mahatma Gandhi that he foresaw the power symbols have. All the acts of his were nothing more than symbol. And to make it efffective he did have something called people power. No doubt he brought revolution using this very idea.

Shaheed Bhagat Singh was bombed the parliament, but it was not that he wanted kill those Firangi bastards there. Infact it was supposed to be a symbol. But alas at that time he just did not have the right combination of symbol and people power.

In todays context I would say it hardly matters if we actually understand what each and every word of our national song means. Frankly speaking I hardly know it by heart. But whats more important is that my heart knows this song. Material data like when is was compose (in 1882) et al hardly matter as it is now more than song, it is a symbol of rebellion, a symbol of the fact that I love my country and would die for it. It says more than I bow/salute to you hey Mother India. Its a symbol of expression of affectiona nd love fr our country.

Its these petty politicians and a handful of fanatic clerics who have no other means of achieving popularity other than by making these kinds of irrational and intolerant statements. These include not just the left or the right it includes all. I just hope that the real people of India understand what it means actually and what our National Song stands for.