Sunday, October 19, 2008
ಮತಾಂತರ ಅಷ್ಟು ಹಗುರವಾದ ವಿಷಯವಲ್ಲ !!!
ನವಂಬರ್ ೧೯ ರಂದು ರವಿ ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರ (ಭೈರಪ್ಪನವರ ಮತಾಂತರ ವಿಷಯದ ಲೇಖನಕ್ಕೆ) ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆಯನ್ನು ಓದಿದೆ. ಓದಿದ ಒಡನೆ ಒಂದು ವಿಷಯವು ಬಹಳ ಸ್ಪಷ್ಟವಾಗಿ ತೋರುತ್ತದೆ. ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ಮತಾಂತರವನ್ನು ಬಹಳ ಹಗುರವಾಗಿ ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಕೆಲವು ವಿಷಯಗಳನ್ನು ನಾನು ಇಲ್ಲಿ ಪ್ರಸ್ತುತ ಪಡಿಸಲು ಬಯಸುತ್ತೇನೆ.
ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದನೆ ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳೋಣ: ನಮಗೆ ಬೇರೆ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ನಡೆಯುವ ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದನೆಯನ್ನು ತಡೆಯುವ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲದೇ ಇರಬಹುದು, ಆದರೆ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದ ನಾಗರೀಕರನ್ನು ರಕ್ಷಿಸುವ ಕರ್ತವ್ಯ ನಮ್ಮದಲ್ಲವೇ? ಇಂಗ್ಲೆಂಡ್ ನಲ್ಲಿ ಕಳೆದ ಬಾರಿ ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದನೆ ನಡೆದದ್ದು ನಿಜ, ಆದರೆ ಅದರ ನಂತರ ಎಷ್ಟು ಅಂತಹ ಘಟನೆಗಳು ನಡೆದವು? ಇದೇ ಸಮಯದಲ್ಲಿ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ಎಷ್ಟು ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದಕ ಕೃತ್ಯಗಳು ನಡೆದವು? ಅದೂ ಅಲ್ಲದೆ ನಾವು ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯನ್ನು ಸುಧರಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕೆ ಅಥವಾ ಆಫ್ಘಾನಿಸ್ಥನದಂತಹ ದೇಶದ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯನ್ನ್ನು ನೋಡಿ ಸಮಾಧಾನ ತಂದುಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕೆ?
ಹಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ನಮ್ಮ ಆರ್ಥಿಕ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಏಕೆ ಅಷ್ಟು ತಲೆಕೆಡಿಸಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ? ಜಿಮ್ಬಬ್ವೆಯಲ್ಲಿನ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯನ್ನು ನೋಡಿ ಸಮಾಧಾನ ತಂದುಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದಲ್ಲವೇ? ಇಂದು ಬಿದ್ದು ನಾಳೆ ಏಳುವ ರಿಯಲ್ ಎಸ್ಟೇಟ್ , ಷೇರು ಮಾರುಕಟ್ಟೆಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಗಮನ ಹರಿಸಬೇಕೆ ಅಥವಾ ದಿನ ದಿನಕ್ಕೂ ಕ್ಷೀಣಿಸುತ್ತಿರುವ ಶೇಕಡಾವಾರು ಹಿಂದೂಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಗಮನ ಹರಿಸಬೇಕೆ?
ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ಓದುಗರನ್ನು "ಶಂಕರಾಚಾರ್ಯರೂ ಸಹ ಅಗ್ರೆಸ್ಸಿವ್ ಪ್ರಚಾರ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರು" ಎಂದು ದಾರಿ ತಪ್ಪಿಸುವ ಪ್ರಯತ್ನ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಆದರೆ ಶಂಕರಾಚಾರ್ಯರು ಹಿಂದೂ ಧರ್ಮದ ಪ್ರಚಾರದಲ್ಲಿ ಯಾರನ್ನಾದರೂ ಹಿಂಸೆ ಅಥವಾ ಆಮಿಷದಿಂದ ಮತಂತರಗೊಳಿಸಿದರೆ?
ಯಾವುದೇ ಸೇವೆಯ ಹಿಂದೆ ಅದರ ಉದ್ದೇಶ ಬಹಳ ಮುಖ್ಯ. ಇದು ನಮ್ಮ ಧರ್ಮದ ಒಂದು ಮುಖ್ಯವಾದ ನಂಬಿಕೆ. ಯಾವುದೊ ದುರುದ್ದೇಶವನ್ನಿಟ್ಟುಕೊಂಡು ಸಹಾಯ ಅಥವಾ ಸೇವೆ ಮಾಡುವುದು ಸರಿಯೇ? ಇದರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಉದಾಹರಣೆ ನೀಡಲು ನಾನು ಬಯಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಓದುಗರೇ ಇದನ್ನು ಊಹಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದು. ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರೇ ಹೇಳುವಂತೆ ಥೆರೆಸಾರ ವ್ಯಾಪ್ತಿ ಮತ್ತು ಉದ್ದೇಶ ವಿಭಿನ್ನವಾದದ್ದು. ಉದ್ದೇಶ: ಮತಾಂತರ ; ವ್ಯಾಪ್ತಿ: ಮಿಷಿನರಿಗಳು ಕಳುಹಿಸಿದ ಹಣದ ಮೇಲೆ ಆಧಾರಿತ. ರವಿ ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ನಿಷ್ಕಾಮ ಕರ್ಮ ಅಥವಾ ನಿಸ್ವಾರ್ಥ ಸೇವೆ ಅನ್ನುವುದನ್ನೂ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಅರ್ಥೈಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕು. ಅದು ನಮ್ಮ ಧರ್ಮದ ಬುನದಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ಎನ್ನುವುದು ನನ್ನ ಭಾವನೆ.
ಒಟ್ಟಾರೆ ಹೇಳುವುದಾದರೆ ಮತಾಂತರ ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ನೋಡುವುದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಗಂಭೀರವಾಗಿ ಪರಿಗಣಿಸುವ ಅಗತ್ಯ ನಮ್ಮೆಲ್ಲದಾಗಿದೆ. ನಮ್ಮ ಧರ್ಮವನ್ನು ಬಿಟ್ಟುಕೊಡಲು ಇದು ಉಗಾಂಡವೂ ಅಲ್ಲ , ಕೀನ್ಯ ತಾನಝೇನಿಯಾವೋ ಅಲ್ಲ ..
ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದನೆ ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಳ್ಳೋಣ: ನಮಗೆ ಬೇರೆ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ನಡೆಯುವ ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದನೆಯನ್ನು ತಡೆಯುವ ಅಗತ್ಯವಿಲ್ಲದೇ ಇರಬಹುದು, ಆದರೆ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದ ನಾಗರೀಕರನ್ನು ರಕ್ಷಿಸುವ ಕರ್ತವ್ಯ ನಮ್ಮದಲ್ಲವೇ? ಇಂಗ್ಲೆಂಡ್ ನಲ್ಲಿ ಕಳೆದ ಬಾರಿ ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದನೆ ನಡೆದದ್ದು ನಿಜ, ಆದರೆ ಅದರ ನಂತರ ಎಷ್ಟು ಅಂತಹ ಘಟನೆಗಳು ನಡೆದವು? ಇದೇ ಸಮಯದಲ್ಲಿ ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದಲ್ಲಿ ಎಷ್ಟು ಭಯೋತ್ಪಾದಕ ಕೃತ್ಯಗಳು ನಡೆದವು? ಅದೂ ಅಲ್ಲದೆ ನಾವು ನಮ್ಮ ದೇಶದ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯನ್ನು ಸುಧರಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕೆ ಅಥವಾ ಆಫ್ಘಾನಿಸ್ಥನದಂತಹ ದೇಶದ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯನ್ನ್ನು ನೋಡಿ ಸಮಾಧಾನ ತಂದುಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕೆ?
ಹಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ನಮ್ಮ ಆರ್ಥಿಕ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಏಕೆ ಅಷ್ಟು ತಲೆಕೆಡಿಸಿಕೊಂಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ? ಜಿಮ್ಬಬ್ವೆಯಲ್ಲಿನ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಯನ್ನು ನೋಡಿ ಸಮಾಧಾನ ತಂದುಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದಲ್ಲವೇ? ಇಂದು ಬಿದ್ದು ನಾಳೆ ಏಳುವ ರಿಯಲ್ ಎಸ್ಟೇಟ್ , ಷೇರು ಮಾರುಕಟ್ಟೆಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಗಮನ ಹರಿಸಬೇಕೆ ಅಥವಾ ದಿನ ದಿನಕ್ಕೂ ಕ್ಷೀಣಿಸುತ್ತಿರುವ ಶೇಕಡಾವಾರು ಹಿಂದೂಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಗಮನ ಹರಿಸಬೇಕೆ?
ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ಓದುಗರನ್ನು "ಶಂಕರಾಚಾರ್ಯರೂ ಸಹ ಅಗ್ರೆಸ್ಸಿವ್ ಪ್ರಚಾರ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದರು" ಎಂದು ದಾರಿ ತಪ್ಪಿಸುವ ಪ್ರಯತ್ನ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಆದರೆ ಶಂಕರಾಚಾರ್ಯರು ಹಿಂದೂ ಧರ್ಮದ ಪ್ರಚಾರದಲ್ಲಿ ಯಾರನ್ನಾದರೂ ಹಿಂಸೆ ಅಥವಾ ಆಮಿಷದಿಂದ ಮತಂತರಗೊಳಿಸಿದರೆ?
ಯಾವುದೇ ಸೇವೆಯ ಹಿಂದೆ ಅದರ ಉದ್ದೇಶ ಬಹಳ ಮುಖ್ಯ. ಇದು ನಮ್ಮ ಧರ್ಮದ ಒಂದು ಮುಖ್ಯವಾದ ನಂಬಿಕೆ. ಯಾವುದೊ ದುರುದ್ದೇಶವನ್ನಿಟ್ಟುಕೊಂಡು ಸಹಾಯ ಅಥವಾ ಸೇವೆ ಮಾಡುವುದು ಸರಿಯೇ? ಇದರ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಉದಾಹರಣೆ ನೀಡಲು ನಾನು ಬಯಸುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಓದುಗರೇ ಇದನ್ನು ಊಹಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬಹುದು. ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರೇ ಹೇಳುವಂತೆ ಥೆರೆಸಾರ ವ್ಯಾಪ್ತಿ ಮತ್ತು ಉದ್ದೇಶ ವಿಭಿನ್ನವಾದದ್ದು. ಉದ್ದೇಶ: ಮತಾಂತರ ; ವ್ಯಾಪ್ತಿ: ಮಿಷಿನರಿಗಳು ಕಳುಹಿಸಿದ ಹಣದ ಮೇಲೆ ಆಧಾರಿತ. ರವಿ ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ನಿಷ್ಕಾಮ ಕರ್ಮ ಅಥವಾ ನಿಸ್ವಾರ್ಥ ಸೇವೆ ಅನ್ನುವುದನ್ನೂ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಅರ್ಥೈಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಬೇಕು. ಅದು ನಮ್ಮ ಧರ್ಮದ ಬುನದಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ಎನ್ನುವುದು ನನ್ನ ಭಾವನೆ.
ಒಟ್ಟಾರೆ ಹೇಳುವುದಾದರೆ ಮತಾಂತರ ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ಬೆಳಗೆರೆ ಅವರು ನೋಡುವುದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಗಂಭೀರವಾಗಿ ಪರಿಗಣಿಸುವ ಅಗತ್ಯ ನಮ್ಮೆಲ್ಲದಾಗಿದೆ. ನಮ್ಮ ಧರ್ಮವನ್ನು ಬಿಟ್ಟುಕೊಡಲು ಇದು ಉಗಾಂಡವೂ ಅಲ್ಲ , ಕೀನ್ಯ ತಾನಝೇನಿಯಾವೋ ಅಲ್ಲ ..
Comments:
<< Home
super article guru!
although It took a long time for me to read it since it was all written in kannada!
-I
Post a Comment
although It took a long time for me to read it since it was all written in kannada!
-I
<< Home
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
When Indian politico fall in love with LTTE
(Ledt to Right - Innocent Kid suffering from LTTE's bomb attack; Priyanka, Rajiv Gandhi & Nalini (in the insight); Sri lankan armed forces attacked by LTTE, Velupillai Prirapakaran)
Seeing beyond the usual vote bank politics, the Congress’s decision to support DMK on the issue of LTTE has far fetched implications. I would even say, It is the peak of hypocrisy by the Congress. Tomorrow if US or
On the other side of the story,
And who is the beneficiary of this? Direct beneficiary is of course DMK in terms of votes; next one is Congess (I) as is the leader of UPA & DMK is its part. There are other two beneficiaries too: LTTE & the extremists of J & K. UPA has been too short sighted in terms of security of the nation (or may be too long sighted in terms of elections) & is putting the whole nation to shame by supporting LTTE indirectly.
Comments:
<< Home
DMK is known for pro LTTE stance. They are under the influence of ill conceived dravidian concepts. They are insisting destruction of Ramsetu against the interest of Hindus. UPA may be under pressure by such an ally.
It doesn't look like the government has taken this up. It might comment that it is concerned, just as it is at the freedom with which terrorists operate in our country. Do you think that means anything at all?
Secondly, has Priyanka Gandhi actually said anything that says that she has a soft stand on LTTE?
Secondly, has Priyanka Gandhi actually said anything that says that she has a soft stand on LTTE?
"Tomorrow if US or Israel argue that there is human rights violation in Jammu & Kashmir what would UPA say? How would I support our armed forces in J & K in front of writers like Arundhati Roy?
I think there are two things here:
1. it is not right to compare the situation in j&k with srilanka... what happened in srilanka was due to the genuine grouse of the tamils against the buddhist sinhalese (its another matter that it got hijacked by the christian church), whereas kashmir has been a site of hindu oppression since time immemorial (or at least since the days of sikandar butshikhan).
2. i don't know why you are so concerned about arundhati roy. by you talking about her, you are giving her the credibility she probably is very hungry for and doesn't deserve. how will you justify the claim for rAma janma bhUmi "in front of writers like Arundhati Roy?"
I think there are two things here:
1. it is not right to compare the situation in j&k with srilanka... what happened in srilanka was due to the genuine grouse of the tamils against the buddhist sinhalese (its another matter that it got hijacked by the christian church), whereas kashmir has been a site of hindu oppression since time immemorial (or at least since the days of sikandar butshikhan).
2. i don't know why you are so concerned about arundhati roy. by you talking about her, you are giving her the credibility she probably is very hungry for and doesn't deserve. how will you justify the claim for rAma janma bhUmi "in front of writers like Arundhati Roy?"
I am seeing the momentum building agaisnst Sri Lanka .. I hope others see it too.
I am comparing the magnanimity of Priyanka & Congress.
I am comparing the magnanimity of Priyanka & Congress.
Vathsa,
What are you trying to say here? A buddhist's life any less valuable than Hindu's? Or Its ok if the oppression is recent, but not ok if it is time immemorial? I dont really get it...
I thought I was criticizing. If you think it is increasing her credibility, then please stop reacting to the articles on THE HINDU..
What are you trying to say here? A buddhist's life any less valuable than Hindu's? Or Its ok if the oppression is recent, but not ok if it is time immemorial? I dont really get it...
I thought I was criticizing. If you think it is increasing her credibility, then please stop reacting to the articles on THE HINDU..
"What are you trying to say here? A buddhist's life any less valuable than Hindu's? Or Its ok if the oppression is recent, but not ok if it is time immemorial? I dont really get it..."
buddhist's life? i thought we were talking of tamil people's life against hindu people's life. i had said clearly that what started in shriilanka was due to the genuine grouse of tamils (of discrimination by the sinhalese majority). whereas in india it wasn't the case (the muslims weren't discriminated against in kAshmiira). the "time immemorial" thing was written because i wanted to tell you that kAshmIra has been a site of islamic jihad, meaning that from time immemorial, the muslims have been the oppressors.
I thought I was criticizing. If you think it is increasing her credibility, then please stop reacting to the articles on THE HINDU..
you weren't criticizing. you were saying that the presence of a roy and her ilk in india will weaken your case (in case they take a stand that india has been the oppressor in kAshmiira in the context of US or israel saying that we have been the oppressors). i do react to the articles of the hindu, but i don't make it of consequence when i decide my course of action when it comes to sanAtanii issues. for e.g. i don't care what "the hindu" thinks about my stance on rAma janma bhUmi. please go back and rephrase your sentences if indeed you wanted to mean something else (your words convey such a bhaava, i now think that you might not have wanted to mean what you wrote). we can discuss this on chat if you like.
buddhist's life? i thought we were talking of tamil people's life against hindu people's life. i had said clearly that what started in shriilanka was due to the genuine grouse of tamils (of discrimination by the sinhalese majority). whereas in india it wasn't the case (the muslims weren't discriminated against in kAshmiira). the "time immemorial" thing was written because i wanted to tell you that kAshmIra has been a site of islamic jihad, meaning that from time immemorial, the muslims have been the oppressors.
I thought I was criticizing. If you think it is increasing her credibility, then please stop reacting to the articles on THE HINDU..
you weren't criticizing. you were saying that the presence of a roy and her ilk in india will weaken your case (in case they take a stand that india has been the oppressor in kAshmiira in the context of US or israel saying that we have been the oppressors). i do react to the articles of the hindu, but i don't make it of consequence when i decide my course of action when it comes to sanAtanii issues. for e.g. i don't care what "the hindu" thinks about my stance on rAma janma bhUmi. please go back and rephrase your sentences if indeed you wanted to mean something else (your words convey such a bhaava, i now think that you might not have wanted to mean what you wrote). we can discuss this on chat if you like.
I misread your comment.
When you look at it from a demographic point, your view point is right. But I am trying to put it as a case acceptable in the nation's view point.
Post a Comment
When you look at it from a demographic point, your view point is right. But I am trying to put it as a case acceptable in the nation's view point.
<< Home
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
One topic at a time- Nation's security & UPA's efforts
HI friends,
Its been an year or so since I published a post. i really wanted to publish a post during the recent serial blasts. But I thought, so many views are being aired simultaneously. Also, I did not want to end up being a knee-jerk reacting personality.
In an earlier post I had written about how different parts of the society, media, political groups, public react to the security scenario. But in the present case, I am trying to assess the efforts of the govt. to provide security to its citizens.
Even since this govt. has assumed the office, with no doubt, I would say the terrorists attacks have gone up. If we recall that POTA removal was one of the earliest decisions made by this govt. , and it was not compensated by any other stringent or even an average act to mitigate/minimize security issues, I would not hesitate to state that it was a foolish move. It merely showed that UPA wanted to backtrack what NDA had done in this front & in that mindset UPA shot itself in the foot. Very recently our home minister Shivraj Patil made a statement that we could recall POTA back if it can resolve the issue. The statement came right after his chair was considered to be in threat. So, even our home minister's reaction time determined by the time scale of retaining or losing his chair.
One of the arguments against POTA was - "Even when POTA was effected there were terror attacks in the country". By now we all know, the attacks then were not as prevelent as now. Moreover, it is a flawed argument to say POTA itself is a failure just because there were terror attacks. IPC section 302 is acted on homicide culpable to murder. Just because there are homicides in the country , is the law itself flawed then?
Moreover, If there are multiple serial blasts & the centre is almost clueless on who the culprits are, and is not able to prevent subsequest crimes, its efficiency is under question.
Apart from the terror attacks, issue of maoists, naxalites have also gone up badly in the country. Communal clashes too have not come down. Instead of getting the situation under control by working with the state govt. , center is trying to play cheap politics by threatening the state govt. as to "we would impose President's rule".
Looking at what UPA has done to counter these issues, I would never back UPA on the issue of security.
As always your comments are welcome. We could discuss one topic at a time form now on.
