Brahmins and Others

Caste System divides the Hindu Indians.

"After a study of some forty years and more of the great religions of the world, I find none so perfect, none so scientific, none so philosophical and none so spiritual than the great religion known by the name of Hinduism."-Annie Wood Besant

"That which we call the Hindu religion is really the eternal religion because it embraces all others." - Sri Aurobindo

The Indian Caste System – The Varna and Jati Systems.
 
by anon
 
Some may say that the caste system kept some kind of strange ‘order’ and ‘peace’ among the people and it is in this caste system in which people are born, marry and die. These are ignorant people – no different from those who misinterpret the teachings of the Holy Books.

Scriptures are far too often altered and manipulated to perpetuate and justify the ignorance of these benighted interpreters.

I am in no way passing a sweeping statement but I have met many - too many - Hindu Indians who have no idea about the caste system and how it originated, yet they bask in the glory that they are 'Brahmins’ and are rather fatuously condescending.

Many of these narcissist are under the delusion that the Brahmins are the highest single breed among the Hindus - a fallacy that I urge all Hindu Indians to invalidate.

I have even spoken to Brahmins and to my amazement; they claim to be of the 'highest' caste simply because they are descendants of priests and teachers and denigrate other ‘castes’.

My grandmother mingled with the Maharani of Mysore, so that would, logically, spell my heritage as a descendant of a very high caste and noble family. But, I am, simply  –  a Hindu Indian - just like all other Hindu Indians.

The caste system is a very hierarchical organization in which every Hindu’s status is racially but clearly and indiscriminately defined.

I am a teacher so does that make me a Brahmin? Even if it does, I do not wish to be party to this draconian caste system.

By the same token, the priests in all the temples – are Brahmins by virtue of the fact that Brahmins are after all, teachers ( religious teachers or otherwise )  and priests ... and vegetarians.

This caste system had always been a prickly thorn and acts as a wedge amongst Hindus from all walks of life – even today…. in this age and in this country.

So to discuss it farther, we have the:

Brahmins - the priests and teachers.

Kshatriyas – the rulers, warriors and land owners.

Vaishyas – merchants.

Shudras – artisan and agriculturalists

… and the ones who were “outside” the caste system ….

Untouchables ( Harijans - Mahatma Gandhi called them – the Children of God ).

Mahatma Gandhi called the 'lowest' caste the Harijans or the Children of God simply because he wanted to educate the Indians who were deeply set in their warped beliefs of the Caste System.

This caste system is archaic and should be discarded as soon as possible. We are not living in The Stone Age.

Here is an interesting article that I came across.


Caste System is the biggest threat to Hinduism

by Jayaram V


In the Vedic age, the caste system was not very rigid since "there was no privileged order of priests." During this time the word vaishya denoted all the people in the region irrespective of their profession and lineage. There was a rudimentary form of caste system in which a person's caste depended not upon his birth but upon his profession as is evident from some of the hymns of the Rigveda (9.112.3).

Historians tend to quote many reasons for the emergence of caste system as a dominant social reality during the Vedic period. The social compulsions of that time must have contributed to its development. The most plausible and accepted theory is that probably caste system was found by the Vedic people as a convenient means to integrate a multiracial society into one complex system.

There is no doubt that in the later vedic age, in the name of religion, the caste system was most conveniently justified and to a brahmin father.

Secondly, thanks to the tradition of passing of the Vedic knowledge from one generation to another through oral means, there was enough scope for manipulation of the vedic mantras. As a result, some new verses were cleverly and deliberately incorporated into the early vedic scriptures to justify the system and ensure the supremacy of the higher castes.

Historians quote the purusha sukta of the Rigveda (10.90) as the earliest reference to the existence of caste system in vedic society. This verse must be definitely a latter day addition to the Rigveda, for otherwise in the scripture we do not find much obsession about caste. We have no doubt that the scripture might have been cleverly altered and manipulated so as to provide some religious justification for the perpetuation of the caste system.

This must have been equally true in case of the Bhagavad-Gita also, where we find references to the caste system peculiarly out of context. When we look at such verses in the context of the fact that Sri Vasudeva Krishna himself was neither a brahmin nor a kshatriya, but belonged to a pastoral community near the present day Mathura, we understand the truth.

The emergence of Manu smriti, sealed whatever chance there was for the caste system to remain plastic. One of the greatest books of social and religious laws ever written in the ancient history of man, this scripture elaborately dwelt upon each and every aspect of human conduct and religious life and through its unflinching emphasis on dharma and varna system firmly established the supremacy of the priestly class and their unquestionable right to perform all religious rites. Thus declares Manu smriti, "The very birth of a brahman is the eternal incarnation of dharma. For he is born for the sake of dharma and tends towards becoming one with Brahman..."

It is difficult to state how the caste system as it is known to us today took shape on the Indian soil, for today's caste system does not contain just the original four divisions but hundreds and thousands of castes and sub castes. The many foreign invasions and contact with new races and new tribes must have prompted the priestly class to change the laws here and there and admit new people into the system in various guises. The bactrian greeks, the barbarious huns, the sakas, the kushanas, and many others who came to India either as traders or as rulers, were somehow integrated into the system so smoothly that today we do not know into which castes these races merged finally.

Whatever be the truth, while the caste system helped the society to stabilize itself in the early stages, it considerably weakened the society by undermining its unity. Since the system was so unfair to the vast majority of the lower castes who had no privileges but only duties, it alienated them deeply from the rest of the society and made them apathetic and indifferent to the events of their times.

With no scope for their social advancement or economic independence, ever under bondage, and suffering from various kinds of social disabilities, they became the third or the fourth class citizens of hindu society, without any dignity of their own and with a status comparable to that of animals, as they were the 'once born' in contrast to the 'twice born'.

Therefore, for these unfortunate souls, it mattered little who came and who went, who won and who lost, who ruled them and who did not.

As long as they were obedient to the state laws and paid their taxes or did their duties sincerely, it mattered little who sat on the throne and what virtues or vices, or for that matter what religion, the king practiced or advocated. The kings were hardly benevolent or tolerant. Failure to pay taxes, when the state demanded, perhaps with a few exceptions here and there, meant instant death.

Reduced to penury and the lowest social status, oppressed by the political system in which they had no chance of participation, condemned by the religion which eluded them, they worshipped whatever their limited wisdom suggested, from the rivers to the trees, from the earth to the sky, from various spirits, ghosts and demons to the various village deities.

It is difficult to believe that Buddhism gave them any relief, since it was not a religion for the weak minded. It demanded inner purity and observation of the eightfold path which was difficult to practice even by the privileged sections.

The rulers in turn paid little attention to them. Perhaps in matters of state priorities they did not matter at all. Their welfare must have never bothered the rulers. In theory these people were already condemned by the inexorable laws of karma to lead miserable lives and suffer from the consequences of their previous bad actions.

Then how could and even why should a mortal king try to improve their lot? Preoccupied with their own problems of governance and survival, and perhaps palace intrigues and court politics, the rulers seldom ventured out into the rural areas to interact with these less privileged groups.

Though theoretically, the king was supposed to be concerned with the welfare of his subjects, with a few exceptions here and there, it is hard to believe that the kings of ancient India would have ever bothered to consider the lower castes of his kingdom as his important subjects.

What is strange is that many ancient rulers of India were neither Brahmins nor kshatriyas but came from lower castes. So was the case with many seers and saints. For example most of the rulers of the Magadh came from lower castes. But unfortunately none of them seemed to have worked for the upliftment of the lower castes. Having became converted to Buddhism, the Mauryan emperor Asoka, must have encouraged many to follow him. But we do not have any evidence to suggest that he was especially sympathetic to the cause of the lower castes or that he worked for their specific welfare.

Instances of oppression and cruelty against the downtrodden was also not entirely unknown. In times of war, the villages through which the army passed had to provide food, cattle and provisions to the marching army. This must have put considerable strain on their meager resources. The villagers were never trained in the art of warfare nor in the art of self-defense. So if the army lost the battle the masses had no option but to surrender meekly to the new ruler and pay their taxes.

It is true that it is difficult to generalize Hindu society on any particular issue since it consisted of diverse groups and communities even in ancient times. But we can confidently consider the caste system as the bane of Hindu society from the earliest times. It divided and weakened the society, alienated the people and exposed them to foreign invasions on a scale unprecedented in the history of the world.

In south India the position was slightly different. Here the caste system did not divide the society as sharply as it did in north India, which is one reason why the south remained relatively free from foreign invasions as well as invasions from the native rulers of the north. King Asoka barely managed south. Samudra Gupta led a successful expedition to the south and defeated some local rulers there, but did not achieve much beyond that. Harshavardhana was defeated and stopped by Pulakesin II on the banks of river Narmada.

In contrast to the rulers of the north who never tried to cross the frontiers and conquer the far away lands, the south Indian rulers were able to navigate across the oceans with the help of fishermen and sea farers, and establish new kingdoms in far away lands like Cambodia and Thailand.

The trend continued even during the Muslim or the Mughal rule. The south remained largely free from the Muslim rule. The Muslims did invade the southern provinces, except in a very limited way. Most of the famous temples of south India we know today escaped destruction in their hands. In strange contrast, some new temples were even built during their rule like the Sri Ram temple on the banks of river Godavari at Bhadrachalam in Andhrapradesh.

Must not Hindus learn something out of this experience of their past? If Hinduism has to survive as a major world religion and if Hindus want to stand out as exemplary beings on the global scene, the caste system must go. It must vanish in its present abominal form, with all its monstrous roots and manifestations.

The caste system is an evil, that has no divine sanction whatsoever. It is full of demonic vitality and diabolic intent and it is there only to create discard and destruction. The bane of Indian society for so long, it will continue to remain so unless it is uprooted and thrown out, with the strength of Bhima, without any apology, without rationalizing its justification in the past, and without exploiting it for ones political or economic gains.

The caste system must yield place to a new society that is based upon the principles of equality and fraternity, where the status of an individual is determined not on the basis of his caste, but on the basis of his achievements and his character. The Hindus must learn to treat each individual with dignity and self respect and learn from their Christian and Muslim friends a few things about charity and brotherhood.

It is not a curse to be born in poor circumstances or come from a not so distinguished family. Hinduism teaches that before a soul begins its new birth, it willingly and carefully selects the family and the environment in which it wants to take its new birth. If we accept this as true and if we understand the significance of why a soul wants to be born in a poor family, we will never look down upon any one as a low or inferior person. We will realize that hidden in that person is a soul that is trying to break free by creating the necessary circumstances that would enable it to achieve it.

If Hindus do not shed the caste system in its present form, they cannot blame others for the disunity and disharmony of their society and for the increasing popularity of other faiths among the less privileged castes. They cannot blame foreign hands, charitable institutions and Christian missionaries, for the alienation of these people. Every Hindu ought to remember that if there is one force that can destroy Hindu society either in part or in full or reduce them to a simple minority in their own country, it is neither nuclear weapons nor the foreign hands, but the stench of casteism.

Mr Prime Minister

To the Honourable Prime Minister of 1Malaysia.


Sir,

First, allow me to thank you for your well-wishes.

I don't know if I speak for the others, but there are a few things I would like you to explain - since it was you who created this 1Malaysia.

Sir, explain what 1Malaysia means - before a lot of us misconstrue your meaning and give our interpretation to others.

Interpretations of the Koran is as diverse as our cultures and traditions so let us have just one interpretation of 1Malaysia.

I really do not know and am in the lurch as to what exactly 1Malaysia stands for.

To state feelgood words like Perseverance, Culture, Excellence, Loyalty, Humility, Meritocracy, Integrity, Education and Acceptance is pleasant to read but they are merely words. When they give meaning in the context of a peaceful Malaysia then they are words of wisdom.

I could add many more words - two very important ones being Respect and Compassion, for your mother, father, for the country and for all.

To look at it from a positive perspective - it means - all races, Malays, Indians, Chinese, Kadazans, Ibans - and all the different races - are now Malaysians. Am I right?

One big step was the abolition of the quota system. Then I read and heared it on TV - for all Malaysians to see - that word ... 'bumiputra'. And later I read that it was a different quota system that was discussed. How naive of me.

1Malaysia has no place for 'bumiputra'. That goes against the very essence of 1Malaysia - as I perceive it to be.

Who are these 'bumiputras'?

Can you please go on the air - on TV preferably, and clear the confusion?

I give credit where it is due. I see you as a good leader but I also see a possibilty of a good leader just shouting slogans of 'we are all one' but not doing much about it.

We need mutual respect and mutual respect can only surface with ALL races being equal.

No 'ketuanan' attached to any race, eradication of corruption, no terrorists or harbouring any of them, wiping out poverty, and above all, no race and religion stated in our Identity Cards. All that should be stated is ... Malaysian.

Freedom of worship, no imposing the ISA on any Malaysian or the OSA, No NEP only give us what belongs to us - Freedom of speech, Freedom of a peaceful demonstration ( which will never occur if it is indeed 1Malaysia ), Freedom of thought and expression - Freedom of the Press, Seperation of Powers, Justice for all and other attributes relating to a 1Malaysia.

The ISA should be used only on criminals. The communists have gone but now we have the infiltration of unwanted racists with ethnic cleansing stamped on their foreheads and has been ingrained in their perverted minds.

I see a few positive changes - even on TV - now more of 1Malaysia is being used - salam satu Malaysia ... nice to hear it. But is that the end of 1Malaysia? Does 1Malaysia end there - just talk?

I feel one of the first things you should do is to outlaw BN's component parties - UMNO, MCA and MIC. Here lies the root cause of all problems.

Just weeks after you launched the concept of 1Malaysia came a whole lot of uncouth people - blatantly flouting the 1Malaysia concept - and these people are from the grassroots to MIC, MCA and UMNO.

Either these people do not respect your 1Malaysia or they know something I don't.

Mr Prime Minister, Let us think of our children and generations to come - that this land is for all Malaysians. I had a glimpse of it in the 50s. My friends were from different ethnic backgrounds. We never once thought of the other as Malay, Indian or Chinese.

We ate together, played together - fought amongst each other without making it a racial issue - there was never a thought of a racial issue when we quarreled or fought. There was no Malay who mentioned that he was the master and he belonged to the Master race. We did not even know what that meant. There were no derogatory racial remarks hurled at each other.

The 60s too saw racial unity - but then it was the beginning of 'Islamization' or should I say 'Arabisation', the ketuanan Melayu and claims of Malays being the 'indigenous' people and the other races being migrants - the Landlords and the Tenants.

Lately, a few days ago, I heard that word again ... the indigenous' people, referring to the Malays! There goes 1Malaysia, I thought.

Sir, surely you must know that Malays, Chinese and Indians are ALL migrants. We know who the indigenous people are - not the Malays, Chinese or the Indians.

So Mr Prime Minister, please educate me on what 1Malaysia really is - what does it actually mean.

I am trying so hard to hang on to my optimistic interpretation that I am a Malaysian first and then my race. I pray to God Almighty that I am right.

If I am, then I salute you as being the very first Prime Minister of this country who tried to unite all races - you will have made history - you will be remembered as just that and respected the world over. Will you be the one? Or perhaps we have yet to wait for that elusive leader who will represent Malaysians? 

You have a daunting task ahead of you as I believe that certain quarters ( who are even around you ) do not want this 1Malaysia concept. Being the man at the helm, please get rid of these cretinous cockroaches.

No more hegemony, discrimination, racial and religious bigotry - I believe all of us - and I dare say, even my Malay ( Malaysian ) friends - had enough of this infighting and silly racial prejudice.

I saw and heard you say, 'maaf zahir dan batin', and I believe you sincerely meant it and begin a new era of uniting the multi-ethnic race of Malaysia.

Mr Prime Minister, if it is not you, then someday, there will be a leader in this country, who will release us all from the chains of oppression and free us from the shackles of servitude.

Let us all work together and live in peace and harmony.

TDM came up with the NEP and deluded the Malays into thinking they were being 'robbed' by the other races, thus creating confusion and animosity among the races - the beginning of a social and cultural milieu.

TAAB woke up one day and came up with Islam Hadhari - which confused the Malays even more.

Then you came up with 1Malaysia - which is driving all of us into an implicit state of confusion.

Is it a some kind of a trend that all PMs should come up with some kind of a dictum to please and give hope to the Rakyat?

Here is one that I believe will be true if this country is not ruled by a dauntless PM:

Things Fall Apart, the center cannot hold. Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

Inventing catchy phrases is one thing ... enforcing it is another.

I am, no matter what anyone says, still optimistic about the country's future. I still believe that someday, this country will indeed be Malaysia Truly Asia.

I write this with absolute respect for you as the leader of this beautiful country. It could be complete with all races being ... Malaysians. You Sir, can make this happen. A dream for all Malaysians.

P.S. After more than one hour, finally it said, my message is too long. So what can I write? Dear Mr Prime Minister, Happy Deepavali? Thank you for 1Malaysia without knowing what it is? 
I need to write what I feel and what everyone wants to know.

I wish to have a direct answer from the PM ( not from his political secretary ) - as a citizen of Malaysia, what his newly created 1Malaysia means.

If he is a PM who cares, he must answer my question which is what everyone I meet is talking about - each one having his own theory and interpretation of 1Malaysia.

Some say, 1Malaysia is for one race - the master race aka ketuanan melayu.

I therefore, being injenuous, need a proper answer - a simple question requiring a simple answer.

A Malaysian Dream or a Nightmare?

God bless Malaysia.

PAS should be told that the Islamic State is a fallacy and does not exist

"To his list, I would add “Islamic state”, because, contrary to popular Muslim opinion, there is not a shred of theological, historical or empirical evidence to support the existence of such an entity".

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

'There's nothing Islamic about a state'

Mehdi Hasan

New Statesman, 2 April 200

Mehdi Hasan explains why there could never be a true Islamic state

Like my fellow Muslims, I strenuously object to the lazy conjugation of the words Islamic and terrorism, for the rather obvious reason that there is nothing Islamic about the murder of innocent civilians. Unlike so many of them, however, I also take issue with the term “Islamic state”, and for the very same reason: there is nothing Islamic about a state. The two concepts have nothing in common.

Let’s take the word Islamic. The casual and careless application of this adjective to religious and cultural phenomena alike has blurred the all-important distinction between Islam, the divinely revealed, perfect and infallible faith, and Muslims, the rather flawed, imperfect and very human practitioners of that faith.

As the historian Marshall Hodgson pointed out: “One can speak of ‘Islamic literature’, of ‘Islamic architecture’, of ‘Islamic philosophy’, even of ‘Islamic despotism’, but in such a sequence one is speaking less and less of something that expresses Islam as a faith.”

To his list, I would add “Islamic state”, because, contrary to popular Muslim opinion, there is not a shred of theological, historical or empirical evidence to support the existence of such an entity. Its supporters tend to mumble vaguely about this or that verse from the Quran, or make vacuous references to the life example of the Prophet Muhammad.

But the Quran prescribes no particular model of government, nor does it detail a specific political programme that Muslims must adopt. In fact, the concept of the state appears nowhere in the Quran.

And why would it? In his new book, Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Sharia, the Sudanese-born academic Professor Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im points out: “You will not find any reference to an Islamic state or to state enforcement of sharia before the mid-20th century – it’s a post-colonial discourse based on a European-style state.”

Many Muslims fall back on a romanticised view of the very first community of believers in 7th-century Medina, ruled by the Prophet himself, and cite it admiringly as their precedent for an Islamic state, but this approach is flawed. First, any historical precedent that revolves around the presence of a divinely guided prophet-as-political-leader seems wholly irrelevant, in an era in which we have no divinely guided prophet to lead us.

Second, the Medina “state” should be seen as a purely political and pragmatic, rather than Islamic or religious, construct. The celebrated pact that the Prophet signed with the various tribes of Medina involved the non-Muslims of the city – chief among them the Jews, who were granted formal equality with the Muslims – recognising only his political and temporal, rather than his religious or spiritual, authority. As the historian Bernard Lewis puts it: “Muhammad became a statesman in order to accomplish his mission as a prophet, not vice versa.”

Third, Medina lacked fixed borders, a standing army, a police force, permanent civil servants, government ministries, foreign ambassadors and a public treasury. To pretend that it can serve as a practical model for the large, complex, post-industrial societies of the 21st century is fanciful.

Today it is difficult, if not impossible, to identify a Muslim-majority nation that could plausibly be identified as a modern, viable and legitimate “Islamic state”. Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran both loudly proclaim themselves to be such, but to each other they are heresies; they are also dictatorial regimes with terrible human-rights records. How about the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, blighted by military rule for much of its history? Or Sudan, accused of committing crimes against humanity among its own Muslim population in Darfur?

Not surprisingly, Professor An-Na’im concludes that “the Islamic state is a historical misconception, a logical fallacy and a practical impossibility”.

Mehdi Hasan is the New Statesman’s Senior Editor (politics) and the news and current affairs editor at Channel 4



*************************************************
The Falsity of the Concept of the Islamic State
 
by Abdassamad Clarke

There is no word in the Qur'an or in the hadith literature for 'state'. The Arabic word that is commonly used - 'dawlah' - does not occur in the Qur'an. [The word doulah does occur in the Qur'an. The best exegesis of both dawlah and doulah is in Sultaniyya by Shaykh Dr Abdalqadir as-Sufi.]

Nevertheless, later Muslims used the term, the Ottomans among others. The Ottomans were known as the Osmanli Dawlah and not the Ottoman Empire even though a word for Empire exists both in Arabic and Osmanlica. However, the Ottomans chose the term dawlah specifically in order not to use the term Empire.

The term 'state' begins to take its present day signification in the seventeenth century in Europe, some dating it from the Treaty of Westphalia. Its most essential feature in the modern world is that of a governing entity that legislates, i.e. creates laws, and most usually in our contemporary situation through some form of process of representative democracy.

For the Ottomans, dawlah encompassed the khalifah and his appointees whose job it is to bring the shari'ah into being, but not to create legislation.

The concept of the Islamic state first came about in the modern world by means of the Islamic modernists, so let us first examine the issue of Islamic modernism or modernist Islam. It has various roots, but in essence it stems from a misunderstanding of Western dominance over the lands of Islam, which itself issues from a complete misreading of western history and the nature of Western society. The modernists assume that it was the features of Western society that were unusual to it and different from Islamic modes that gave Westerners dominance over the lands of Islam, and that therefore it is sufficient merely to imitate the West in those unusual features for there to be a resurgence of political power in the lands of Islam.

This is why, we object seriously to the use of the term 'Islamic State', just as we object, if possibly even more strenuously, to terms such as 'Islamic economics' and 'Islamic banks'. All of these concepts are based on the idea that we can Islamicise things which are fundamentally alien to Islam, and Allah knows best.

The above is an extract. The full article can be read here: http://www.bogvaerker.dk/state.html

=================================================
Awfully Educated

A funny but enlightening thing happened today. Strange as it may seem, I was having what I thought will be an educated discussion with a graduate teacher.

But I was puzzled after my 'discussion' with her and thought  "what is the meaning of 'education'? "

We were talking about the Kartika case. And this teacher, a seemingly liberal thinking adult holds tightly to the fact that Kartika indeed must be caned. Her reason was simple ... to deter other Muslims from drinking beer. That was it, nothing else.

So I tried to act curious and asked if that warranted a caning ( six times ) and she said in a definitive way: "yes!"

I was rather shocked. But acted otherwise.

I asked her if that caning will indeed stop others from refraining from consuming beer. To which she replied, "well, we have to start somewhere and this is as good a time to start it (caning). As if that was not shocking enough, she went on talking about and believes in 'hudud' laws....you know, chopping off the hands, stoning, the lot. 

She was extremely fuming and condemning the Human Rights Commission for "interfering" in the Kartika's case. According to her, The Human Rights Commission has no right to interfere in the judgement already passed on Kartika by the Syariah court.

At that point, I wondered ( but did not ask her ) what if Kartika was her daughter? Would she have condoned the caning or lashed out at it? Perhaps she would have stood her ground. I will never know that.

But what I know is, these women, pass their time talking cock - about husbands and wives and the usual gossip, sometimes passing subtle sexual innuendos ... sometimes even blatantly ( Islamic? ), but when it came to Islam - as they perceive Islam to be - Kartika deserves to be caned and perhaps even canned - and don't you dare refute!

It's amazing how an educated person who mixes with other races freely, and members of the opposite sex of other races and jokes with them, passes 'mildly naughty' remarks can, under the guise of being seeming liberal, is full of bottled up anger and frustration and unleashes it with venom.

I tried hinting that it was draconian and that the Human Rights Commission was doing the right thing but she would not accept it.

Now, this is a rather sensitive issue so I did not pursue it any further. I wanted to know how an educated person thought about caning a Muslim for drinking beer and that triggered off her innermost feelings and thus surfaced the 'wahabbi' in her. She is not the only educated person who has her interpretation of Islam. Islam as they perceive it to be.

MALAYSIANS

To all Malaysians.

There comes a time, when we heed a certain call - but are we heeding that call?

Let us be united as one nation one race - Malaysian.

MALAYSIANS

Now, this is a photo of me with my Malaysian ( Malay, Chinese and Indian ) friends.

I am standing next to a Muslim - my best friend and still in touch with him. We were and still are, like brothers. Remember, this was taken in 1968 - 41 years ago and Farouk, my best friend and I still keep in touch. He is now in Penang. When he comes to KL, he comes to my place. It is always good to see him and we talk about the good times we shared. Both of us are not in any way affected by acts of recent racist and religious bigotry.

His was at that time dating a Chinese girl, who is in the photo. There was no thinking of having to convert - their love overcame all racial boundaries.

Each time I read about race and religion today, I often look at this photo and take solace in the fact that there still ARE some sane people in this country who will not permit anyone or any regime to influence them and their perspective on the fact that we are ALL Malaysians.

In class, we mingled freely. Race and religion had no place - it could not creep in and divide us. We respected one another and we were FRIENDS. And like all good friends, we ate together and played together.

It seems like we have to look into the past to look towards a better future. 

Actually, we never heard of 'halal' and 'haram' which is now imprinted on the minds of a lot of people. The Muslims adhered to their religion and the others to theirs. We were still together.

A few years ago, Farouk's mother was hospitalised and I went to see her and she still remembered me and was happy to see me. 

My late mother liked Farouk a lot - her petname for him was 'king' - his name being Farouk Sultan.

That reminds me of Deepavali - all my friends came to the house - my Malaysian friends - and had a feast. We ate, drank, talked and laughed. When it was Hari Raya and Chinese New Year - we were all there together - eating, drinking, talking and laughing.

That was the true spirit of inter-mingling. A nostalgic era of a melting pot of Malaysians. 

Saira Banu- Dilip Kumar celebrate Eid

Saira Banu and Dilip Kumar are busy wishing friends and family 'Eid Mubarak' today. "It’s always great to share your special days with people who are close to you. Not just friends and family but we also have fans dropping in. Mubarak baad dene ke liye aate hain (Fans come over to wish us on the occasion of Eid) and Dilip Sahab chats with them," revealed Saira.

"I thank and pray to god. I have nothing to ask as god has already gifted me Yusuf Khan and sahab has given himself to me wholeheartedly," she added.

Talking about the celebrations, Saira revealed, "Chicken Biryani, Mutton Biryani and Sevaiyan are must-have food delicacies in our house during Eid. Our friends like Farida Jalal, Nanda and even Dharamji (Dharmendra) often come over to celebrate this festival with us."

Saira concluded, "I wish all my fans Eid Mubarak and let peace and happiness prevail on the occasion of this auspicious festival."

Salman, Govinda celebrate Ganesh immersion

MUMBAI: Bollywood actors Salman Khan and Govinda on Monday joined several Mumbaikars in biding emotional adieu to Lord Ganesh on first day of `visarjan' (immersion).

Salman Khan and his mother perform pooja during Ganesh Chaturthi at their residence. (TOI Photo)

Among the prominent personalities who visited Salman's residence at suburban Bandra for the Ganesh puja ahead of immersion were MNS chief Raj Thackeray, cricketer Yuvraj Singh and actress Katrina Kaif.

Thousands of Ganpati idols, mostly household ones, were immersed at beaches and lakes like Girgaum Chowpatty, Juhu, Marve, Gorai and Dadar admist chants of `Ganpati Bappa Morya, Pudchya Varshi Lavkar Ya' (a popular slogan hailing the elephant-headed God and urging him to come early next year).

Nearly 40,000 civic employees and 500 life guards have been deployed across mandals and beaches for smooth conduct of processions and immersion.

Nearly 44 motorboats and 12 fire brigade boats with necessary equipment have been stationed at major immersion sites across the metropolis.

The annual Ganeshotsav celebrations, that began yesterday, did not dampen the spirits of Mumbaikars as they welcomed their beloved deity despite swine flu scare and terror alerts in the metropolis.

Braving rains, devotees formed a beeline to offer prayers at the Ganesh idol set up by one of the richest and famous mandals, 'Lalbaugcha Raja' in Parel.

Dear Mr Prime Minister

To the Honourable Prime Minister of 1Malaysia.

Sir,

I don't know if I speak for the others, but there are a few things I would like you to explain - since it was you who created this 1Malaysia.

Please explain what 1Malaysia means - before a lot of us misconstrue your meaning and give our interpretation to others.

I really do not know and am in the lurch as to what exactly 1Malaysia stands for.

To think on a positive perspective - it means - all races, Malays, Indians, Chinese, Kadazans, Ibans - and all the different races - are now Malaysians. Am I right?

One big step was the abolition of the quota system. Then I read and heared it on TV - for all Malaysians to see - that word ... 'bumiputra'.

1Malaysia has no place for 'bumiputra'. That goes against the very essence of 1Malaysia - as I perceive it to be.

Who are these 'bumiputras'?

Can you please go on the air - on TV preferably, and clear the confusion?

I give credit where it is due. I see you as a good leader but I also see a possibilty of a good leader just shouting slogans of 'we are all one' but not doing much about it.

We need mutual respect and mutual respect can only surface with ALL races being equal.

No 'ketuanan' attached to any race, eradication of corruption, no terrorists or harbouring any of them, wiping out poverty, and above all, no race and religion stated in our Identity Cards. All that should be stated is ... Malaysian.

Freedom of worship, no using the ISA on any Malaysian or the OSA, No NEP, Freedom of speech, Freedom of a peaceful demonstration ( which will never occur if it is indeed 1Malaysia ), Freedom of thought and expression - Freedom of the Press, Seperation of Powers, Justice for all and other attributes relating to a 1Malaysia.

The ISA should be used only on criminals. The communists have gone but now we have the infiltration of unwanted racists with ethnic cleansing on their perverted minds.

I see a few positive changes - even on TV - now more of 1Malaysia is being used - salam satu Malaysia ... nice to hear it. But is that the end of 1Malaysia? Does 1Malaysia end there - just talk?

I feel one of the first things you should do is to get rid of BN's component parties - UMNO, MCA and MIC. Here lies the root cause of all problems.

Just weeks after you launched the concept of 1Malaysia came a whole lot of uncouth people - blatantly flouting the 1Malaysia concept - and these people are from the grassroots to MIC, MCA and UMNO.

Either these people do not respect your 1Malaysia or they know something I don't.

Please Mr Prime Minister, Let us think of our children and generations to come - that this land is for all Malaysians. I had a glimpse of it in the 50s. My friends were from different ethnic backgrounds. We never once thought of the other as Malay, Indian or Chinese.

We ate together, played together - fought among each other without making it a racial issue - there was never a thought of a racial issue when we quarreled or fought. There was no Malay who mentioned that he was the master and he belonged to the Master race. We did not even know what that meant. There were no derogatory racial remarks hurled at each other.

The 60s too saw racial unity - but then it was the beginning of 'Islamization' or should I say 'Arabisation', the ketuanan Melayu and claims of Malays being the 'indigenous' people and the other races being migrants - the Landlords vs the Tenants.

Lately, a few days ago, I heard that word again ... the indigenous' people, meaning the Malays. There goes 1Malaysia, I thought.

Sir, surely you must know that Malays, Chinese and Indians are ALL migrants. The Orang Asli is the native of this land.

So please Mr Prime Minister, please educate me on what 1Malaysia really is - what does it really mean.

I am trying so hard to hang on to my interpretation that I am a Malaysian first and then my race. I pray to God Almighty that I am right.

If I am, then I salute you as being the very first Prime Minister of this country who tried to unite all races - you will have made history - you will be remembered as just that and respected the world over.

You have a daunting task ahead of you as I believe that certain quarters ( who are even around you ) do not want this 1Malaysia concept. Being the man at the helm, please get rid of these cretinous cockroaches.

No more hegemony, discrimination, racial and religious bigotry - I believe all of us - and I dare say, even my Malay ( Malaysian ) friends - had enough of this infighting and silly racial prejudice.

I saw and heard you say, 'maaf zahir dan batin', and I hope you sincerely meant it and begin a new era of uniting the multi-ethnic race of Malaysia.

Mr Prime Minister, if it is not you, then someday, there will be a leader in this country, who will release us all from the chains of oppression and free us from the shackles of servitude.

Let us all work together and live in peace and harmony.

P.S. TDM came up with the NEP and deluded the Malays into thinking they were being 'robbed' by the other races, thus creating confusion and animosity among the races. The beginning of a social and cultural milieu.

TAAB woke up one day and came up with Islam Hadhari - which confused the Malays even more.

Then you came up with 1Malaysia - which is driving all of us into an implicit state of confusion.

Is it a some kind of a trend that all PMs should come up with some kind of a dictum to please and give hope to the Rakyat?

Here is one that I believe will be true if this country is not ruled by a dauntless PM:

Things Fall Apart, the center never holds. Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.

Inventing catchy phrases is one thing ... enforcing it is another.

I am, no matter what anyone says, still optimistic about the country's future. I still believe that someday, this country will indeed be Malaysia Truly Asia.