Reply to siddharth vedarajan's article in The Hindu

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article805124.ece

Unlike author I will not pretend to be unbiased. There are basically few points raised by the author regarding faith, judgment and ASI.
First is about the basis of faith as the judgment.
Faith was the basis of the pre-existing structure. Faith was the basis for its destruction. Faith was the basis for the construction of mosque. The faith was basis for the British to allow worship at Ram chabutara. Faith was basis for closure of the doors during 1949. Faith was the basis of opening of the door 1986. Faith was the basis for destruction of mosque. Suddenly faith becomes irrelevant? What does author wants to convey by using words- legitimizing the “faith” and “belief”. Author is using very hard words -unverified and unsubstantiated- for soft faith. Which faith or belief waits for verification? There are many glorified intellectuals who wants verification of historicity of Ram. But that was the basic premise of the court’s judgment. Would author go a step ahead and question the basic premise of the court. It is to be pointed out that court has used words like Bhagwan and divine for Ram. There are many who don’t even believe in existence of God. Respecting such people does not mean that other should stop praying. To rake up the question of who is Hindu will prove very tough for author to digest. It will be very tough for author to even digest definition of much recently coined word, Hidutva, as given by Supreme Court”
Collectives in India have faith in all sorts of things- It can be hoped that this sentence was not meant to demean. Bharat is proud to have a system where it is free to have faith in all sorts of things rather than one and the only one.
Then there is question about the need of solving this matter.
Does author prescribe that with time, wrong should be forgotten? When mosque was built there was no way to redress the problem by court so people waited. British did not want to solve it, so people waited. Now that we are independent, if we are not able to solve it, then when can we. Author prescribes forgetful as remedy to the wrong. Next he may prescribe the same to all the cases which are pending in the court for long time. That would be nice suggestion to clear the back log. It is to be understood that individual crimes are gone with the individual, social crime is can be rectified even after generation and historical crime are to be rectified by history. We will be history for tomorrow. It was a sweeping remark which has been made about substitution of one religious structure for others. I hope author will collect evidence to support his claim.
Legal relevance of the Babri masjid was there because the matter was there in front of court. Previously, when few people sat upon settling the issue, it was cried out that it should be solved by court. Now that the court is trying to solve the issue it is being cried that it does not have legal relevance. Who is the authority to certify the relevance?
There is no mincing of word for the use of evidences. According to him History cannot be reason, faith cannot be basis, and Archeological facts cannot be evidence. He does not even feels hesitation is adding words to the judgment. The word supposed was cleverly inserted by the author. It was clearly stated that mosque was against tenets of Islam. If it still remains “supposed historical wrong”then author should clarify what will be supposed in history.
Lastly few words about ASI.
To find fault with ASI has become a fashion among few. To say that something is right or wrong one does need to have support of majority. Once scientific factor is taken in consideration then facts become important and not personal opinions. While questioning the archeologists of ASI, authors should also peep into the loyalties and associations of the archeologists and historians, he is referring. The reason for dispute will be made clearer. It would be wise to point objectively at the facts rather than becoming subjective in discussion.
At one point ASI is painted as tainted and in the very next sentence it is quoted that for not saying clearly that the builders of mosque were destroyer of temple. ASI stopped where it could not say anything with certainty. Author does not believe what ASI is telling but it believed what is not told by ASI. ASI was given a fixed task to find out if there existed a structure below the demolished mosque, as was claimed by certain group. It gave answer regarding that. To find fault with the findings, is right or wrong is open to all.
Question was raised by author regarding BJP government influencing ASI. Can he substantiate it. if such is the case then does he agree that every government has been influencing any such probe. or does he mean that other than BJP all are saints. Sense prevailed and the faiths of judges were not questioned buy the author.
Judgment has clearly stated that site is birthplace of Ram. By that logic whole of the site should have been given for that purpose. To keep waqf board and the Muslim community happy, part of the land has been partitioned. It is similar to the partition of the country to keep few people happy. Where did it lead to? Even partitioning between Hindus is not a great idea. When a fact is found it should be accepted. The place should have gone for making temple. What was wrong in the judgment was that it stated that it place of worship for Hindus. It should have been made open to all people of all religion. That would have been more inclusive judgment for betterment and harmony in society. Our history tells that by partitioning we never had peace, neither in Mahabharata nor in Bharat.

ayodhya verdict

ayodhya is supposed be without warrior. but it has thrown op many warriors. the war is continuing. today is supposed be another milestone day in the time line of Ayodhya. 60 years ago fight for the ownership of the piece of land in Ayodhya started. at that time there was a mosque. an idol of Rama appeared and Hindus started worshiping. there was an ongoing case over a a platform in front of the mosque for many years. it has to be seen in historical perspective. it was known that the mosque was made by one of the commander of Babur. it is well known that Muslim invaders destroyed many temples and in many place they erected mosques. it was put forth that even the temple at the birthplace of Rama was destroyed and mosque was built on that.
this made the discussion broader. till then only the platform was in question but after this whole of the land was brought under discussion. along with revenue details, historical question were asked. archeology was brought in the debate. historian, academicians, politician and religious heads took sides. after about 40 years, came 1992 when the mosque was brought down to make a temple at that place. at present a temporary mandir is at that place.
there are overalls question being asked
was there a temple before mosque was brought down?
does that land belong to Hindu or Muslim plaintiff?

there are many people claiming the right over ownership. there are many ideas with the land. from mandir and mosque to hospital, sports complex, shopping mall orphanage and even a urinal. that shows how Bharat can think beyond horizon. there is group who has kept all the materials ready for the mandir. there are political parties who are ready to rebuild the mosque.
one more day and the ball will set rolling. everyone is having his opinion. some clear some not so. some want to player and some spectator. but everybody is interested. there has been many attempts for compromise but it has failed.
the ball wil set rolling with the words of the judge.
people are speculation about out come. will it favour Hindus or Muslims.
we know how revenue details can be forged and how historical and archeological facts can be twisted to fit the theory. anyway i am not even aware of the fact which have been presented. judge is going to deliver a judgment which has been in making for last many years. he is at very important time at the history of Bharat.
according to me it could be like this
"There was a temple previous to the mosque as shown by the archeological evidences, which is in favor of Hindus. But revenue details are in favour of Muslims."

it would be very logical since before British Muslims ruled Ayodhya and it would be logical that land might have been with some Muslim owner

this will shift the ball back in the court of people. Judge will shake off his responsibility. He will choose not to interfere with the natural justice which should have been out through the political class and the mature society by now. It seems when the Idol appeared in the mosque, Nehru, then PM of India to the magistrate of the place to remove it or block devotees from praying. he told that he would prefer to give up his job rather interfere in the process. he had a conscience and he heard that voice. like that every one is listening to their voices.
we will wait for just one more day what the man of the day had to say.

global village and self sustainability

i read an statement in the profile of vijay kannnur. it read

(Vijay Kannur) is connected to the world at my home as my village is connected to world wide web,but self sustainability of village has faded..no more

very pertinent statement! in the name of connectivity we havae become dependent. and in this process we have lost our in dependence. for every thing we look at the government agency to respond to our need. poor government look at richer countries to respond. what is happening to the self sustainability of the social unit called village. what happened to the contentment among people. everytime we want to take rest an advertisement is shown which make us believe that we are lacking something which is must, and we loose our sleep for getting that. the mage is made in such away that to get that object you have to give up something which you cherish very much and become dependent on the provider.

Gayatri and Veena

i was going through some information about Rudra Veena ( one of the vanishing musical instruments). i came to know that there are 24 frets in the Veena. does it have any connection with the selection of 24 letter in Gayatri mantra.
why 24? it has puzzled me for long.

My world

The Story of Ganesha and Karthekeya iswell known among Bhaarateeya. i was told of this story while i went for Balvikas class. it was told for inculcating reverence for parents. but it is still very much relevant and with greater dimension for me.

Ganesha and Kaarthekeya agreed for race to go round the world. it appeared that Kartheekeya was more able with his slim body and fast vehicle, peacock. when He came back he still saw Ganesha sitting at the same place but the judges pronounced Ganesha as the victorious. Why?

While kartheekeya believed on his vehicle to conquer the world. Ganesha redefined the world. He refused to take the definition of kartheekeya. so in the eyes of karthekeya Ganesha was looser because he did not run around the world but even if we judge both by their own standards Ganesha won because criteria was to go round the world in shortest time.

so when the problem comes think about the definitions. sometimes they have flaw. dont take anything for granted as long as it is made by man. nothing is worth calling holy cow.
touch and transform for better. if you can then you are parasamani. feel the touch and if you are transformed for something better then accept the parasmani. respect it.

n?~
Is it assumed that effective literature is merely the result
of correct philosophical theory, or that literary skill is of negligible importance
when compared with theoretical combless?
stephen cox
the journal of libertarian studies Vol 8, No 1 19-30

ideas and reality

recently i wrote in my orkut message that
ideas are like colourful clouds in magnificent shaped inspiring the poetic minds. but it is the action like the colourless shapeless raindrop which satisfie the thirst

then i found another quote similar to it

All theory, friend, is gray;
Life's golden tree is green.
-Goethe, Faust

love all

one of the scholar was talking about development in society. he asked one of the poor people about development.
"i think getting electricity is mark of development."
"Why do you need that?"
"now we eat early and sleep early. we depend on sunrise to start our day. if we have electricity we will have light and we can work late in night. we can getup early and work."
"but why do you want to work"
"when we work we will be more productive. that will mean more money. we will be developed."
so the scholar wrote in his report that we have to bring electricity to the poor people.

******
what does it mean?
we are teaching people that having money and the matter is sign of devepoment and having time to relax is sign of non development. you may have illusion but you cannot have both. choice is yours.
there are some people who have good time we are teaching them that they are wrong. they need to spend all their time in development. if they dont do it there is something wrong with them. they are made to hate their condition. in the process they hate themselves. love for everything is decreasing after that. they join the group of so called developed.

****
how to go back?
start from where you lost.
love all.

Presence in abscence

Once darkness compelled to God " O Almighty lord! Please tell The sun not to chase me. I am not able to take rest"
The sun was summoned. God told "Sun! don't disturb darkness."
Sun replied " I don't want to disturb at all. i don't even know how the darkness looks. Please tell him to come to me I will seek forgiveness"
Darkness never met the sun. The case is still pending in the court of GOD.
******

Darkness is only absence of light. it has not independent existence. absence and presence are not independent. They cannot coexist, But for their own existence they require existence of other. Death and life cannot coexist. but for their own existence they rely on other.
*****

An old father was troubled very hard by his son. he realized that it was all for his hard earned wealth. so one day he went out of his home without informing anyone. when he did not return for few days, son took the opportunity to announce that his father was dead. all the rituals for the dead was performed. papers were made for his death certificate. Son enjoyed the wealth of his father and soon felt that it was diminishing with every passing day. every day he was feeling that he was dying.
after some time it was known that his father was in another city and was taken care by a average earning man. who upon his advice took up few activities and earned very good name and fame of course wealth too.
The son told to his father to help him survive. his father became angry and wanted his property back. they went to the authorities. it was suggested that first the case cane be taken up to make the dead man alive. but that was going to take a bit longer and neither of the father son duo had no patience for that.
so the next case was registered in the name of the dead father and living son. father was paper dead and consciously alive and son was paper alive and consciously dead.
who had told that life and death don't co exist?

what have beed done

what
CD's have done to music,
books have done to knowledge,
power points has done to lectures,
televisions has done to entertainment,
mob?iles have done to communication,
transportation done to pilgrimage,
baby sittings have done to parenting,
social sites have done to friendship,
camera has done to paintings,
fashion have done to clothing,
fertilizers have done to agriculture,
.........????????


Yes there is development
but are we developing

Food distribution

food is rotting and people are going hungry. what people got was only words of hope and dreams of bright future. then came a message from supreme court that food should be distributed free. government responded that it cannot do that. then a reminder that it must do it.
i read the blog of Girish Shahane. quite appealing. it was wrong of supreme court to give such order. it was not its duty. policy is made by government. and it is responsible for it. once elected it is for government to decide the policy.they also know that wrong policy can lead them to loses in future.
there is opposition to counter the policy.if opposition opposes and people dont notice then it it is a different problem altogether. if opposition fails to oppose then it is to assume that all of them are unanimously accepting it. and if the policy is wrong then it means country does not have a worthy leader for elction. what is the use of great policy if there is no good leader.
what will the out come of such order. if there is some good outcome,quite doubtful. government will try to cash it. if it goes other way then it will tell that it was not its policy and only a directive of supreme court. what are we doing in this process. we know that our politicians are not responsible but the government as a body is supposed to be responsible to its policy. now we are creating a situation where even government will not be responsible for its policy.
Every one knows what will be sold in the PDS. rotten grain which Arab and European countries have marked unfit for human consumption. and after that the hungry will loose even right to ask fr the minimum food. in the name of the rotten food everything will be justified. price will increase further. there will not be any construction of storage facility and next when we will face the grain shortage it will be told that it was because we gave grain free. we will import to meet the need. whole lot of vicious cycle will set in.