Lesson Learned from a Hindu Brahman Guru!
Posted on 04. Jul, 2012 by Dr Haider Mehdi in Opinion
NOTES FROM A SOCIAL SCIENTIST
By Dr. Haider Mehdi
In an age when physical distances have shrunk, global and interstate communication has expanded, human contacts have increased across continents, multi-cultural communities have developed all over the world, and humanity’s interests have become common, the need for global peace is far more important now than ever before in human history. The universality of human civilization’s “common interests” in the context of material-socio-cultural-
And yet, as we know, India and Pakistan, two close neighbors who have a shared history, who gave birth to marvelous architectural splendor and were partners in the genius era of poetry, literature, and arts and crafts development unmatched in the annuals of human history, and who fought long and difficult battles for independence together, remain today, in the post-independence era, at logger-heads, confined indefinitely in military and diplomatic conflicts.
The obvious question is: why is it so? The simple answer is: it is the flawed foreign-policy management approach, on both sides of the divide, that has generated hostilely, repeated wars, threats of war, diplomatic rows and a long drawn-out mutually distrusting environment for over six decades. At its best, both countries have worked on the foreign-policy doctrine of “conflict-avoidance” rather than developing a sustainable and lasting convergence of interest in the promotion of peace: the political discourse for an engagement together in defining mutual interests of the populace in both countries and working towards that goal exclusively. Promoting peace and defining a common strategy of a “social-welfare state” in both countries is the need of the hour. Indo-Pak conflicts on a state-level and institutional positions on strategic management between the two countries are rooted in the backward precepts of “status quo” politics in inter-state relations and do not help in breaking out of the “box” approach to foreign policy administration. New ground needs to be broken and fresh diplomatic initiatives, practical and visionary, are required to break the decades-old impasse between the two neighboring countries.
In the conflict-management strategy in inter-state relations, a pre-requisite is to recognize the psychological fears, emotional dramas, legitimate threats, historical experiences and common public perceptions (whether accurate or not) of the adversary. Comprehending the origins and causes of a conflict, in fact, helps in finding its solution. The institutional establishments in both India and Pakistan, locked in the traditional “balance-of-power” approach to inter-state relations, have completely neglected to appreciate the need to understand public perceptions and realize their fundamental importance in developing paradigms of peace. Instead, rhetoric on both sides has reinforced the commonality of hidden “hatreds” – still further dividing the two-nations without an attempt for a constructive engagement at base levels of respective societies.
Let us look at some basic facts: the majority of Pakistanis are hostile to India and so is Hindu India hostile to the creation and existence of Pakistan. Let us accept it as a fact and work toward an analysis and understanding of the causes of the problem: historical experiences, psychological fears, national rivalries (common to nations with a combined historical past), religious-socio-cultural self-perceptions and antagonisms, national world-view and so on and so forth.
Let me inject my personal experience, as an example, to illustrate the point that is being made: Personally, I had never met a Hindu Indian national until my student days in London. At the International Students House in London, my first encounter was a disaster: A young Hindu student, an ardent believer in “Akand Bharat” (a combined India under Hindu religious domination) refused to admit even the existence of Pakistan as a legitimate state and predicted an “Akhand Bharat” in the near future as a consequence of natural historical forces.
Two decades later, I met Guru Ji and his wife in the Gulf States. The extremely kind and hospitable middle-aged couple were born much earlier than the1947 partition. They had seen the combined Hindu-Muslim India. They offered to take care of our young children voluntarily and without any compensation. One day, at a lunch invitation at their house, I dashed into the kitchen for some bread. I felt dark shades coming on the faces of my host and hostess. An hour later when I went back to pick up my kids, they were washing the kitchen and told me not to step in their kitchen again. On my inquiry as to why, Guru Ji told me that it was a Brahman’s religious duty to wash their kitchen if a “Parishth” (Urdu meaning “na-pak”-unclean, dirty, polluted) person entered their place of cooking and worship (and since I was “Parishth” the kitchen had to be washed).
I have no problem with Hindu faithfuls washing their dwellings if a Muslim enters (after all, Muslims believe in the concept of “kafirs”). But my point is altogether different: the aforementioned personal experiences made me understand the idea and ideology of the Two-Nation theory – and I adherently subscribed to it and will continue to do so. This is because it is obvious that Hindus and Muslims are two different kinds of entities: our cultures are different, our views on life and faith are different, we build our worship places differently, we construct our houses in different ways, our values are quite contrary to each other and we have marked differences in culinary habits and preferences (what we eat and how we prepare it). What else could justify a Two-Nation theory?
Living in a multi-cultural environment now, I have several close Hindu Indian friends. They are fine, remarkable people. I have a collection of slim Indian watches – a marvel in time-instrument technology. I have purchased Indian silk, eaten at South Indian vegetarian restaurants, and I may do anything possible to promote goodwill and trade between the two nations. But majority Hindu India will have to come to terms with the existence of Pakistan as a historical necessity and an existential reality. That is the crux of conflict resolution and the way forward to peaceful relations.
Peaceful co-existence between the two nations ought to be the accepted foreign-policy doctrine for the 21st century. India and Pakistan should enter into a “No War” agreement. Both countries should reduce their defense budgets. They should withdraw their military forces from borders and disputed areas. India should demilitarize occupied Kashmir and prepare for a plebiscite there. Water disputes should be settled by arbitration in the International Court of Justice. Bilateral trade agreements for equal mutual interests should be made. Barter trade should be encouraged and commercial transactions should be done in local currency, and so on and so forth.
India’s new love-affair with the US, its capitalism and its corporate culture, will surely draw it into a socio-economic-political disequilibrium domestically. And India’s attempt as a regional hegemonic power is most likely to fail in view of new global political realities unleashed by the recent American-West European adventurism for a New World Order being carried out by military interventions all over the world. As a consequence, a multi-polar global political system is emerging with an increasingly expanding role being played by China and Russia.
India would be much better off with helping to create a regional power-house of nations, including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Burma and other nations, and defining its national interests with neighboring nations rather than opting for a controversial and difficult role in this US-driven containment-of-China policy.
After all, visions are born in dreams. India too can have a dream! A dream of regional prosperity, a powerful regional leadership, and peaceful co-existence with its immediate neighbors.
And why not?
a WordPress rating system
4 Responses to “Lesson Learned from a Hindu Brahman Guru!”
Leave a Reply
Join Us
 |
| Subscribe to Opinion Maker |
| Email: |
Author Profile
Dr Haider Mehdi
Afriq
04. Jul, 2012
"The obvious question is: why is it so? The simple answer is: it is the flawed foreign-policy management approach, on both sides of the divide, that has generated hostilely, repeated wars, threats of war, diplomatic rows and a long drawn-out mutually distrusting environment for over six decades"
I read, re-read it but there is an important point that you have missed -
divide et impera her majesty's nefracious mentality now taken over by the nutcases US+naTo
from the western mythology's wanabee brahmin
SikhSpectrum_com Monthly_ Reverend Dr_ Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi -font.htm
According to Seervai, in a meeting with Viceroy Lord Wavell on August 27 1946, Gandhi thumped the table and said, "If India wants bloodbath, she shall have it and that if bloodbath was necessary, it would come about in spite of nonviolence." Wavell was dumbfounded at these words coming from the mouth of "apostle" of nonviolence.
Gandhi was a very cunning man. He was not satisfied with the title of "apostle of peace", he also wanted to project himself as a holy man, which for a Hindu required the practice of celibacy. He was a married man and proclaimed to be celibate at a relatively young age under forty. However, he used to test his celibacy by asking young girls to lie over him to find out whether he was in full control of his sexual feelings. I leave up to psychologists and psychiatrists to analyze what was in Gandhi’s mind and what happened to the emotions of those poor girls! He was always surrounded by women.
So what is Gandhi’s legacy to mankind?
The obvious one is the partition of subcontinent into "Hindu India" and "Muslim Pakistan and Bangladesh". These three nations are a "living hell" for minorities. For example, India which claims with pride to be the biggest democracy in the world has killed more Indians in the last fifty years than the British colonists killed in 300 years. More than 95% of those killed by Hindu governments are Christians, Muslims, Sikhs and Dalits (Untouchables). While the populations of these countries are groaning under the weight of poverty, hunger, illiteracy, ignorance and disease, India and Pakistan have built nuclear weapons. The next nuclear war will most probably be fought over the disputed territory of Kashmir in spite of the fact that neither India nor Pakistan has ever asked the Kashmiris what they want.
That Hindus are peace loving people and coexist peacefully with non-Hindus is also not true.
———————————————————————
totally agree regarding the lack of vision, wisdom, intelligence,……………
egoism and destruction is the chosen path
Pakistan has the opportunity to build "GOOD RELATION" with the Indians those vast majority who care about harmony but has done nothing to develope it – NO VISION
Amit-Atlanta-USA
04. Jul, 2012
The greatest divide between Pakistanis and Indians or Muslims & Hindus or for that matter between Muslims and ALL NON-MUSLIMS, is religion.
Islam’s monoethiestic stance makes them hate anyone & everyone who’s NOT a Muslim.
Also, the concept of Muslim Ummah limits Muslim allegiance ONLY to their religion and NOT to their country’s of birth/adoption, as Indian Muslims such as CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Jawed Naqvi, Shah Rukh Khan, MAK Pataudi, Dilip Kumar, and several others who all have expressed support to Pakistan on key issues and have stated that Muslims are treated as second class citizens in India & the US..
Even Pakistan’s own leading journalist put it aptly in his book “FATAL Fault Lines – Islam, Pakistan and the West”.
Here’s what he said:
“Billions of dollars in aid has gone to Muslim countries, yet Muslims worldwide have an extremely unfavorable image of America and the West.”
He suggests that today’s chasm between Muslims and the West is a modern-day continuation of a clash between faiths going on since at least the time of the Crusades, if not before. ”
Even a recent PEW poll on plummeting Muslim support to Obama (who’s probably the most MUSLIM friendly US President ever) shows that Muslim can NEVER be won over…..come what may.
Afriq
05. Jul, 2012
what a load of crap!
Pew, CNN —- Muslim friendly, it is always Muslims fault, their religion, blah blah blah
Educate thy self if you wish to comment here
The so called AID that has to go back to the US and only 2-3% going to receiving state? Or are you yaking about the 2 billion to Egypt crusader whores to "genocide Palestinians + Muslims"
In case of Pakistan the called AID is TERRORISM from India, Afghanistan occupied funded trained by the TERROR staes US+Israhell
Ann Jones is the author of "Kabul in Winter," a memoir of Afghanistan, where she lived for several years.
They wonder where the promised aid money went and what the puppet government can do.
Much of the money is thrown away on "overpriced and ineffective technical assistance," such as those hot-shot American experts, the report said. And big chunks are tied to the donor, which means that the recipient is obliged to use the money to buy products from the donor country, even when — especially when — the same goods are available cheaper at home.
To no one's surprise, the United States easily outstrips other nations at most of these scams, making it second only to France as the world's biggest purveyor of phantom aid. Fully 47 percent of U.S. development aid is lavished on overpriced technical assistance. By comparison, only 4 percent of Sweden's aid budget goes to technical assistance, while Luxembourg and Ireland lay out only 2 percent.
As for tying aid to the purchase of donor-made products, Sweden and Norway don't do it at all. Neither do Ireland and the United Kingdom. But 70 percent of U.S. aid is contingent upon the recipient spending it on American stuff, including especially American-made armaments. The upshot is that 86 cents of every dollar of U.S. aid is phantom aid.
In Response To Panetta’s Gouging Comment, Remember Soybeans-For-F-16s, Mr. Panetta?
The only reason US defense secretary is in such a shock is because Pakistan is standing up to CIA bully.
ABID MAHMUD ANSARI | Saturday | 2 June 2012 | The News International
PakNationalists.net
The imperial mentality is so dominant throughout the West that no one is ready to perceive that a country like Pakistan can stand up and ask for its due rights. Now that Pakistan is asking for its dues, it is hard for them to agree to it. Pakistan may not have such intentions, but it has been the US habit to gouge Pakistan for its own benefits.
For example, the US gouged Pakistan to accept soybeans in place of those F-16s paid for in advance by Pakistan.
The US gouged Pakistan for a second time to pay ‘parking and storage charges’ for the same F-16s which were never delivered to Pakistan.
Islam’s monoethiestic stance makes them hate anyone & everyone who’s NOT a Muslim.- what a load of hogwash
SikhSpectrum_com Monthly_ Reverend Dr_ Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi -font.htm
That Hindus are peace loving people and coexist peacefully with non-Hindus is also not true.
When Taliban destroyed Lord Buddha’s statue in Afghanistan, there were worldwide protests against this heinous crime against humanity. The most vociferous demonstrations and protests were held in India. However, how little did the Hindu mobs realize that the first damage to the statue was done by Hindu rulers of Afghanistan during the frenzy of Hindu revival? Buddhism flourished as a major religion in India for several centuries. During the Hindu revival, Buddhists were given three choices like Jews and Muslims during the Spanish Inquisition. Either convert or leave the country. Large number of Buddhists fled to neighboring countries. Those who resisted were killed, Buddhist monasteries were destroyed, monks were murdered, and nuns were raped. Buddhist literature was burned and their religious centers were converted into Hindu centers. The famous place in Bihar State where Lord Buddha is supposed to have received his light (knowledge) is still under the control of Hindus in spite of the protests of international Bhuddist community.
The "myth makers" keep repeating that Hindus have lived peacefully with Muslims, Christians and others for hundreds of years. What they don’t tell you is that during that period Muslims or the British ruled over the Indian territory. But look at the attitude of Hindus towards non-Hindus when Hindus were the rulers? During the revival of Hinduism they eradicated Buddhism from the land of its birth. All other progressive movements, which opposed the caste system were either crushed or subverted.
Immediately after independence in 1947, the so-called secular and liberal Hindu rulers lead by Jawahar Lal Nehru adopted an Indian Constitution, declaring "Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains" as Hindus with the stroke of a pen. Sikhs have been protesting against this heinous crime ever since. No Hindu leader worth the name has ever protested against this abominable injustice to the minorities. Imagine! How would the minorities react if the US Congress were to pass a law declaring all minorities as Christians?
But than since you are from states what can one expect – dumbed down, brainwashed rah rah jerk, someone actually so stupid to watch the CNN BS! Only a &%$§ would mention a shit outlet like cnn! So lets look at what brilliant wise, educated non Muslims have to say about the western mythological Hindu pacifism
America: Drugged Up, Dumbed Down and Crazy Dangerous By Robert Bridge June 21, 2012 "Information Clearing House" — The dogs of war are barking in the …
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31672.htm
——————————————————————
the above morons elect thugs like obomba and even the voters give low ratings to him but the Muslims +their Ummah raped by Obomba beasts who who has started more wars more drone strikes , more slaughter, mass killings etc and you have the audacity to say the most Muslim friendly!
You are sick bastard!
Amit-Atlanta-USA
04. Jul, 2012
The Pakistani journalist I refered to above is Mr. Irfan Husain.