Ombale rushed to secure him when the terrorist started pumping away with the AK-47. Call it guts or instinct but Tukaram Gopal Ombale refused to let go of his assailant. I am told that something like 30 bullets were recovered from his body. His colleagues took advantage of Ombale’s last act as they rushed at the terrorist with their lathis. The plainclothesmen were later identified as a ‘mob’ in grainy footage shot by someone on a mobile phone!

he..he ..

Looks like at least they have one admirable quality.

The word for you is “us”, ponniyin, “us”.

>secularism in India is a struggle within the Hindu community on how to carry its tradition forward Similarly, Communism in India is a Hindu reformist movement, not that different from the Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s Brahmo Samaj, but with parliamentary ambitions. The Communists have not addressed the social problems (such as polygamy, gender equality, dowry, casteism etc.) in any other community, they only want Hindus to be accepting, inclusive and secular. The land reforms in Kerala also focused entirely on the Hindus. The Communist national leadership is also dominated by Hindus, particularly Brahmins. The late EMS (former CPM General Secretary, Prakash Karat was his personal assistant), who was both cunning and insightful, pointed out that Kerala’s politics today is India’s politics tomorrow. And that has come true, right from coalition politics to the politics of caste and religion. So watch that pretty space in the southwest. Now, back to lurking, seriously.

There is some warrant to conclude so. TVR Shenoy the most perspicacious commentator on Kerala since OV Vijayan wrote as much recently when the CPI(M) decided to out-appease the Congress in N.Kerala and capture the jihadophilic vote. There was that shameful episode when the Kerala Assembly passed a unanimous resolution demanding the release of an indicted but acquitted for want of evidence Islamicist radical and then hosted him at State expense. The “land reforms” have also left the plantations in S.Kerala untouched and have obviously never done anything about the trading monopolies of N.Kerala. But that’s all for another day.

secularism in India is a struggle within the Hindu community on how to carry its tradition forward

Similarly, Communism in India is a Hindu reformist movement, not that different from the Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s Brahmo Samaj, but with parliamentary ambitions. The Communists have not addressed the social problems (such as polygamy, gender equality, dowry, casteism etc.) in any other community, they only want Hindus to be accepting, inclusive and secular. The land reforms in Kerala also focused entirely on the Hindus. The Communist national leadership is also dominated by Hindus, particularly Brahmins.

The late EMS (former CPM General Secretary, Prakash Karat was his personal assistant), who was both cunning and insightful, pointed out that Kerala’s politics today is India’s politics tomorrow. And that has come true, right from coalition politics to the politics of caste and religion. So watch that pretty space in the southwest.

Now, back to lurking, seriously.

That was a readable, and insightful post. Thanks.

Looks like at least they have one admirable quality.

Hindutva ideology is that Bharat (not India or Hindustan)has been from the ancient times, a predominantly Sanaatan Dharmic society (Sanaatan Dharma was later christened as Hinduism by invaders and traders, and the country got its name India/Hindustan by external sources). Dharma is the bed rock of Bharatiya society.And this Dharma makes the people tolerant to other faiths. So, all those who live in this country have to abide by this Dharma, which means all religions must be treated equally, with the country coming first (which again is Dharma).

Hindutva as articulated by Veer Savarkar follows from the Garibaldi-Mazzini nationalism line (details beyond the scope of this post) whom he greatly admired. Savarkar was not a religious person in most senses of the term, and formulated Hindutva as a a binding principle for the entire land or what could be had of it then. Although the man was well read there is nothing substantial in his writings or speeches (isolated quotes won’t do) that suggests that he spent any amount of time trying to sketch the outlines of a Hindu state. Difficult as this task may be (because there is no tradition of such philosophising in the Hindu traditon) Savarkar’s national ideal overlapped with the aggressive self-explanatory nationalism of Ambedkar (yes, read his Thoughts on Pakistan for that) and Patel, the economic liberalism of Rajaji, and to some extent the individual liberty centered structure envisioned by Ambedkar. Savarkar was a social reformer around the same time Ambedkar moved away from reform and the two remained life-long friends. Savarkar is criticised by some know nothing idiots for having hatched the 2-nation idea before Rahmat Ali and Jinnah, a totally bogus and disingenuous charge made by those who imagine that their readers and listeners lack the ability to study up on their own. Savarar advocated a Hindu nation because at that time when the freedom struggle was fluid and the Congress seemed ready for anything – multiple-linguistic states, confederacy of priniciplities, religious enclaves etc., Savarkar tried ot draw a line in the sand and demand a Hindu state as a minimum. Remember that in those days national entities were recent innovations, while the idea of a religious entity inspired Caliphatism (and the Khilafat movement) was still fresh, and the Muslim League had already been formed (in 1906) to work towards creating a successor to the mythical “Mughal/Muslim India”. The RSS then way behind on the thinking curve, saw Golwalkar produce his by now infamous tract “We or Our Nationhood Defined” which in its foreword itself (from a more knowledgable critic) bears heavy criticism of the bizarre consequences of Golwalkar’s ideas! Even today if you were to ask an RSS apparatchik what his definition of Hindu Rashtra is and then to ask a Jihadi apparatchik what his idea of an Islamic nation is, you will be struck by the remarkable clarity of the latter and confusion of the former. There are a few lost in the past folks in India who still entertain notions of an Akhand Bharat (Godse and his collaborator’s descendants) but political parties have long since accepted that the Partition happened and is a done deal >50 years ago. What no Indian political party will accept is further partition of India on any grounds – because all such reasons are bound to be cultural, broadly, and that runs against the idea of India. So it doesn’t matter if a small part of Jammu & Kashmir (the 10,000 sq.km. Valley) consists of a majority of Muslims, Hindus, Martians, or Klingons; it shall not be partitioned on those grounds. FIN. And so too with Junagadh and the Nizam State. India is not a creation of the colonial powers, it is a modern form of an ancient nation (Ambedkar again). The Partition of Bengal and west Punjab and beyond is all India is willing to accept and the line in the sand. The rest is undivided India. So runs the argument, and that I agree to.

Secularism (keeping aside the crystal clear analysis if this much abused term by the Baalu/Ghent Group) in India is a different kind of struggle. The late Girilal Jain proposed that secularism in India is a struggle within the Hindu community on how to carry its tradition forward. Building upon that I would say that Indian Secularism is a struggle within the larger mass of people who call themselves Hindus and also have been touched by it (which is everyone until they turn themselves against it) either for good or bad. And in this I will include also the Southern Pakistani Muslim who utters “satyanash”, the Bangladeshi Muslims with their penchant for Sanskritic daak naam, and the many Indians of every faith who have chosen to view their own 1st preference tradition through what they see around them. Sorry if I left anyone out. There was a time when in some parts of India a chance meeting between strangers would begin with Ram, Ram and end with a khuda haafiz. I had one such encounter with a very old Sikh at a gas station in Full Service New Jersey a few years ago. As he filled my tank and took my signed charge slip I folded my hands (as my parents taught me) and said “Sat Sri Akal” to which uncle responded with a wave of his hand as if to bless me and my family “Jai Shri Krishna”.

And can we please stop picking on the “Muslim psyche/angst/etc.” in India? There are >150 million Muslims in India and they have nice things and bad things to say about the Goverment, Modi, and everything else like everyone else. It is preposterously obscene to even hint that their discontent fuels terrorism in India. The much lasciviously looked forward to “retaliation” this time failed to turn up post-Mumbai-26/11 as many times before. And to all my Muslim Indian brothers and sisters please do not wear a black armband on Id this year. Let us not mix our symbols please. You may wish to tone down your observances and that is your prerogative.