100,000 conversions and counting, meet the ex-Hindu who herds souls to the Hereafter 

~~Saba Imtiaz

Deen Mohammad converted to Islam in 1989. He said when he read the Holy Quran he realised that 360 gods were useless.

MATLI, 23 January, 2012: Such are Deen Mohammad Shaikh’s powers of persuasion that he has converted 108,000 people to Islam since 1989, the year he left his birth religion Hinduism behind.
His multi-coloured business card describes the Matli dweller as the president of the Jamia Masjid Allah Wali and Madrassa Aisha Taleem-ul Quran – an institute for conversions to Islam.
The reedy 70-year-old brandishes an embellished cane. A red-and-white keffeiyah perched on his shoulder offers people a hint to his theological leanings.
As he speaks to The Express Tribune, his arm slices an invisible arc through the air. He is gesturing to a vast expanse of nine acres of donated land where converts are invited to pitch a tent and stay. “My heartfelt wish is that the entire world becomes Muslim,” comes his response, when asked about the en masse conversions. His piety is matched only by its ambition.
But contrary to the grandiose proclamation, this preacher isn’t a repository of rehearsed sound bites. It is only after he settles down on a charpoy that he deigns to embark on the journey of a Hindu named Jhangli who became an expert in evangelism.
“I always loved Islam,” he begins. “I read the Holy Quran and realised that 360 gods were not of any use to me.”
At first he had to study the Holy Quran in secret. There was the risk of being misunderstood if a Muslim caught him with the holy book. He started fasting and in fact he would begin a day before Ramazan started.
Shaikh’s mother grew alarmed at her son’s forays into another faith. She thought that if she married him off, he would not ‘leave’. Thus, he was barely 15 when his wedding took place, followed by a quick overtaking by nature – four girls and eight boys.
But despite this, he was drawn back to his curiosity and managed to find a teacher, Sain Mohammad Jagsi, who instructed him in the Holy Quran and Hadiths or sayings of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).
Fortunately, Shaikh’s uncle was of the same mind and the two men agreed that they would give each other the strength. Shaikh held off until his daughter was married to a Hindu as planned, since he had already “given his word”. Then there was no turning back.
After his conversion, Deen Mohammad Shaikh made it his mission to woo others. He began in his own backyard, preaching to family, before venturing beyond this comfort zone. Encounters with the rich and powerful helped pave the way. Retired Pakistan Army general Sikandar Hayat, who owns a sugar mill in Matli, offered Shaikh money, which he turned down. Instead, he urged Hayat to give jobs to some of the new converts. Hayat and his daughter proved extremely helpful in providing assistance.
Now, Shaikh says, his fame has spread and people come to him from as far as Balochistan, members of all religions and sects, who would like to convert. A small mosque has sprung up in his residential compound along with a number of rooms where children – mostly girls – are taught how to say their prayers and recite the Holy Quran.
One of the teachers is 14-year-old Sakina, who is just 15 days into the job. “Only a few students are difficult to teach,” she says while commenting on their ability to recite a text in an unknown language.
Shaikh is aware of the difficulties converts face while taking on what appear to be the initially daunting rigours of a brand new system. He makes life easy for the first 40 days. “They only have to pray farz!” he says while referring to the mandatory parts. This relaxed schedule ensures that they can ‘confirm their faith’. He understands that if he demanded they start out with praying five times a day to offer even the optional and ‘bonus’ parts, “They would run away!” as he puts it with a look of mock horror on his face.
Other than this, he is reluctant to actually explain how he influences the people. All he offers is a nugget of fire and brimstone: “I tell them that I was a Hindu too and that they would burn in Hell if they are not Muslim.”
More than saving a soul:
There are other practical considerations that accompany conversions. In order to ‘save’ the converts from influential Hindus in other districts, Shaikh packs them off to Hub Chowk while the Kalima is still moist on their lips. “Their families would beat them up (for converting) otherwise,” he explains.
This trick of the ‘trade’ he learnt from personal experience. He alleges that he was kidnapped along with his daughter-in-law by influential Hindus who threatened him so that he would stop converting people. “They don’t want these poor Hindus to stand up to them when they become Muslims,” Shaikh maintains.
Despite 108,000 conversions, for which a record is kept, Shaikh still doesn’t feel his work is done. He wants everyone to be a Muslim and learn from his example. He also attends the Tablighi Jamaat’s annual congregation in Raiwind, although he doesn’t believe in sectarian divisions. “All groups are like brothers to me,” he declares.
 

Courtesy: The Express Tribune, January 23rd,  2012.

Politics in Bangladesh: Turbulent House
The army claims to have thwarted a coup

Jan 28th 2012: Delhi: from the print edition: IT WAS, says Gowher Rizvi, a close adviser to Bangladesh’s prime minister, “very quickly nipped in the bud”. He was talking of a coup plot foiled by the army. The schemers—16 were involved, and some are on the run—included disgruntled mid-ranking officers, retired officers, and others abroad. He claims investigators found a list of prominent people to be assassinated, and another list of generals expected to be “potential partners”.
Bangladesh has faced dozens of coups, failed or not, in its 40 years. But for an army spokesman to give details of one, on January 19th, was unusual. He named the plotters and blamed them for inducing others to revolt (by passing on provocative e-mails and posting on Facebook). The conspirators, he said, shared extreme religious beliefs.
The official view is that dogged opponents of Sheikh Hasina Wajed’s elected regime must now be rooted out, especially from the army. These include Islamists—many supposedly recruited to the army in the early 2000s—and those who oppose ongoing war-crimes trials (over killings during the secession war of 1971).
Mr Rizvi says the government’s legitimacy is assured and reports “absolute calm” in Dhaka, the capital. The army’s discipline looks admirable, he says, encouraged by a popular desire (in contrast to a few years ago) for men in uniform not to meddle in politics.
The equanimity is not shared by all. Many normally garrulous Bangladeshi commentators this week shunned requests to talk. A wide presumption exists that phones are bugged. Speak to one of the men accused of leading the plot, who is in hiding abroad, and a murky picture emerges. Ishraq Ahmed concedes that the arrested men are his friends, but denies religious extremism (indeed, he complains that the authorities have eyed up his painstakingly collected cellar of wines, Armagnacs and malt whiskies). He says the government “can show no troop movements, no guns, anything” to prove the plot.
Mr Ahmed is a former high-ranking officer from a liberal family. He says he fought “with great responsibility” for Bangladesh’s independence. Now he and other nationalists are merely trying to oppose what they see as a coup-by-stealth by Sheikh Hasina, who is letting Bangladesh be “turned into a Bantustan” run by India.
He makes many claims. Among the more plausible and specific is that spies from India’s Research Analysis Wing (RAW) operate in the country. He claims, too, that for two years RAW has had an office within the headquarters of Bangladeshi Intelligence in Dhaka and a “direct submarine cable for communications” back to India. He claims that Indians conduct electronic surveillance in the country and kidnap suspects from Bangladeshi cities. Indian prodding, he adds, encourages the government to crack down on “anyone with beards. Any practising Muslim is vilified and portrayed as Taliban.”
Mr Rizvi denies all this, saying he is “totally unaware of any Indian presence in Bangladesh”. Yet he accepts that many are uneasy about Bangladesh’s rapprochement with India under Sheikh Hasina. Bangladesh has also met Indian demands to root out Islamists’ training camps, and he concedes that some individuals—though not Bangladeshis—are taken over the border for prosecution in India.
Fractiousness will grow ahead of a general election in 2013. Returned to power three years ago, Sheikh Hasina has seen her popularity slump from 81% to 39%, according to an opinion poll published by the Daily Star on January 8th. More telling, 74% say they oppose her constitutional meddling last year, which changed how elections are organised. That may bode ill for stability. Mughal kings struggled to rule the territory over four centuries ago, lamenting that Bengal was “a house of turbulence”. Little has changed.
Correction: This article originally stated that the contents of Ishraq Ahmed's cellar had been confiscated. The bottles are still there, for the moment. Cheers.

Courtesy: The Economist

The Great Nastik Revolt

~~ by Prabhakar Kamath 

Intellectual Ferment: By 600 B.C.E. a great intellectual ferment was brewing across the Indo-Gangetic plain the likes of which India has not seen since. Countless different Kshatriya-inspired philosophies sprang up from the agitated intellect of the Indo-Gangetic Civilization. During this period (900-500 B.C.E), thousands of wandering sophists, known as Parivrajaka, crisscrossed the country questioning anything and everything, including the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma, the Vedas, Vedic sacrificial rites, animal sacrifices, Varna Dharma, and supremacy of Brahmins. They engaged each other in robust public debates on every topic on earth. They challenged their adversaries to either win them over in debate or to follow them. These ‘argumentative Indians‘ came to be known as ‘ ‘Hair splitters’ or ‘Eel wigglers.’ The public halls all over Aryavarta were packed with curious people eager to learn and experiment with new ideas to cope with life’s vicissitudes. New Age Philosophies thrived everywhere. They were all sick and tired of Brahmanism’s remedy for every problem in the world: Perform sacrifices!

The Rise Of Heterodox Dharmas:

This was the period in India’s history when massive winds of change were blowing through the land resulting in the overthrow of the decaying old social, political, and religious orders. Disgusted and disenchanted by Brahmanism, the opposition gradually coalesced into a number of reactionary groups over the centuries following the Vedic period. These reactionaries could be broadly classified into two groups: The Upanishadic sages, who attempted to reform Brahmanism from within (as we studied in the previous article), and Nastiks, nonbelievers, who rejected the essential elements of Brahmanic Dharma, and abandoned it altogether. Those days the epithet Nastik did not mean Atheism since the concept of God was still very nebulous. The Upanishadic entity Brahman, being free from any positive attributes, did not qualify to be a true God. Kshatriya nobles led the heterodox groups just as they did the Upanishadic effort to reform Brahmanism.

Two Nastik Groups:

Within the Nastik movement itself there were two distinct groups: Sramanas (monks) who renounced worldly pleasures, and Lokayatas (worldly) who embraced them. A detailed discussion of the principles of these groups is beyond the scope of this article. The main purpose of this article is to show how they arose in reaction to the decadence of Brahmanism and what their legacies are and what lessons we could learn from them.

1. Sramanas: This group resorted to Sanyasa- literally, “throwing down”- and renounced not only all material comforts but also all socially obligated duties (Karma). Within this group, four distinct sub-sects emerged:

Shri Nakoda Jain Temple

A. Jainism: The first subgroup, following the philosophy of Mahaveera, later on formed Jainism. The hallmark of this religion was absolute nonviolence toward all living things. This religion was clearly reacting to the horrors of animal sacrifices emblematic of Brahmanism. Some of these monks walked around naked as an expression of their complete renunciation of material things and accidental violence against living creatures. Jainism gained many adherents, mostly in the business class. It got a huge boost when Chandragupta Maurya abandoned his throne and joined it in 298 B.C.E. He retired to a Jain hermitage at Shravana (Sramana) Belagola in what is today Karnataka State, and starved himself to death in the manner of Jain saints.

B. Ajivika: The second of these Nastik groups was Ajivika, founded by Gosala, a contemporary of both Mahaveera and the Buddha. This sect believed that everything in this world was predetermined (Niyati). Destiny, not man’s actions, determined the outcome of one’s soul. Their philosophy can be summed in one line: Go with the flow. Chandragupta’s son Bindusara (ruled 298-272 B. C. E), who boasted the title of Amitraghatha, meaning Slayer of Foes, abandoned Brāhmanism and embraced Ajivika sect. He detested Brahmanism and yet he did not care for Buddhism and Jainism as they were too nonviolent to suite his title or temperament. He believed in his destiny as the emperor of the largest empire ever in India. In fact, his empire was larger than present day India, Pakistan and Bangladesh combined!

Mauryan Empire during Ashoka's rule

C. Buddhism: The third subgroup, following the teachings of Gautama Buddha, later developed into Buddhism. This was essentially a rational Dharma that emphasized right thinking and conduct. Buddhists rejected all aspects of Brahmanism except for the doctrine of Karma. Right conduct, not birth-class, should decide one’s status on life, they said. Morality, not class system and rituals, defines a true Dharma. As we will study in our future articles, Upanishadism and Buddhism had many things in common. The Buddhist monks were known as Bhikkus as they made their living by begging. Beggars became holy and begging became fashionable in India. Buddhism’s Three Fundamental Laws, Four Noble Truths, and Eight Noble Paths arose in reaction to the decadence of Brahmanism. From the Buddhist point of view, man created God to meet deep psychological needs such as to fulfill desires and protection from evil. Buddhism gained royal patronage for nearly 1000 years. Ashoka the Great (ruled 272-232 B.C.E.) abandoned Brahmanism and embraced rationalist Buddhism, which he referred to as the true Dharma (Dhamma). He was singlehandedly responsible for making Buddhism the predominant Dharma of India till the 8^th century A.D., and into a World Religion.

D. Asceticism: The fourth subgroup of Sramanas consisted of individual Ascetics (Munis, the Silent Ones), who renounced everything and wandered in search of the Ultimate Reality. These people often practiced severe austerities (Tapas) in the form of self-denial and self-torture as the means of mastering their senses to achieve personal liberation from Samsara. Half-naked Sadhus and Sanyasis, who stick long needles into their tongue and cheeks; who hang from trees by means of hooks, and who stand on one leg for years, belong to this subgroup (BG: 17:5-6). We can find true as well as false Ascetics, Swamis and Gurus such as these all over India and abroad to this day.

Dharma of Brahmanism versus Dharma of Buddhism:

Both Brahmanas and Buddhists used the term Dharma to promote their own agendas. To Brahmins, Dharma meant people of each class (Varna) faithfully and helplessly performing their class-designated duties as per their specific Guna (Sattva, Rajas, etc.). For example, a Kshatriya’s Dharma was to invade his enemy’s territory, steal his cows, burn his buildings, kill him and acquire his wealth. This was exactly what Ashoka did when he invaded Kalinga. To emphasize this, prince Krishna often addresses Arjuna as Dhananjaya (Conqueror of Wealth, BG: 1:15) and Paranthapa (Scorcher of Foes, BG: 2:3), and Arjuna addresses Krishna as Madhusoodana (Slayer of Madhu) and Arisoodana (Slayer of Foes, BG: 2:4). If a Kshatriya refused to fight for a ‘righteous cause’, whatever that phrase meant, then he was considered as one who had abandoned his Kshatriya duty, as did Arjuna in the Original Gita, before he was brought to his senses by prince Krishna. Such a Kshatriya was described as unmanly, impotent, cowardly, dishonorable, and the like (BG: 2-3). He would suffer dishonor in the society here on earth and hell hereafter (BG: 2:33). There was no room for compassion, mercy, kindness, etc. when a Kshatriya performed his Dharma. And it did not matter who the identified enemy was -Guru, uncle, great uncle, grandfather, cousins- one must give up his Ahamkara (I, me and mine) and perform his Dharma as defined by his Varna. No guilt or sin would arise from such actions (BG: 18:17). Likewise, a Brahmin’s Dharma was to chant the Vedic hymns, perform Yajnas, kill animals and sacrifice them in the fire to please the gods. Their logic was that all Dharmas are attended with some evil like smoke enveloping fire; that is no reason to abandon them (BG: 18:48). It is better to perform one’s own Dharma imperfectly than to perform another’s perfectly because in the former case one goes to heaven and in the latter case one goes to hell (3:35). The ultimate goal of all classes was to gain perfection here on earth by performing faithfully and helplessly his class-designated Dharma (BG: 18:45). Therein lay the stability of the society -and supremacy of Brahmins in the Varna system.

To Buddhists, on the contrary, Dharma meant ethical principles such as nonviolence, truthfulness, generosity, kindness, tolerance, equality, goodness and mercy, which people of all classes should practice. The Dhamma (ethics) of a Brahmin should not be different from that of a Sudra. In fact, such class distinction should not exist at all. Furthermore, one must respect sanctity of life and not kill animals for the sake of sacrifice. Even burning rice kernel with chaff was not good. To them Vedic rituals were useless as compared to the practice of ethics. Ashoka says:

Rock Edict # 9: Other ceremonies (rituals of Brahmanism) are of doubtful fruit, for they may achieve their purpose, or they may not, and even if they do, it is only in this world. But the ceremony (practice) of Dhamma is timeless. Even if it does not achieve its purpose in this world, it produces great merit in the next, whereas if it does achieve its purpose in this world, one gets great merit (here on earth) and there (in heaven) through the ceremony (proper practice) of the Dhamma.

2. Lokayata: The second major Nastik reactionary group, known as the Lokayatas, also known as Charvakas or Materialists, went in the opposite direction. The most prominent Lokayata philosopher was Brihaspati who lived around 600 B. C. E. We can get glimpses of this great man’s thinking from a quote in Madhvacharya’s Sarva Darshana Samgraha (early 14^th century):

“There is no heaven, no final liberation, nor any soul in another world, nor do the actions of four castes, orders, etc. produce any real effect. The Agnihotra, the three Vedas, the ascetic’s three staves, and smearing one’s self with ashes, were made by nature as the livelihood of those destitute of knowledge and manliness. If a beast slain in the Jyotisthoma rite will itself go to heaven, why then does not the sacrificer forthwith offer his own father? If the Shraddha produces gratification to beings who are dead, then here, too, in the case of travelers when they start, it is needless to give provisions for the journey… While life remains let man live happily, let him feed on ghee even though he runs in debt; when once the body becomes ashes, how can it ever return again? If he who departs from the body goes to another world, how is it that he comes not back again, restless for love of his kindred? Hence it is only as a means of livelihood that Brahmins have established here all these ceremonies for the dead, -there is no other fruit anywhere…”

The amazing thing about the above statement is that this man, who lived 2600 years ago, appears to be so modern and rational in his thinking! If we met this man in the street today, we might have a conversation with him like we would with an enlightened man of 21^st century. As regards living on borrowed money, which I think was a rhetorical statement, I am sure there are a lot of followers of this particular aspect of Lokayata philosophy all over the world.

Legacy Of, And Lessons From, Sramana Sects:

Jainism: Jainism has lingered on as a minor religion in India to this day, patronized over the centuries by minor royal houses and rich merchant class in the western and southern India. Jainism did not have a great royal patron like Buddhism did in Ashoka the Great. Jainism did not pose a significant threat to Brahmanism and so it has survived in India to this day. Even though a minor religion, the influence of Jainism on Brahmanism and the rest of the world was as profound as Buddhism, if not more. It was Jain philosophy of Ahimsa (nonviolence), which led to Brahmanism finally giving up animal sacrifices and embracing vegetarianism. Mahatma Gandhi’s Satyagraha movement during India’s independence struggle was rooted in the Jain philosophy of nonviolence. Dr. Martin Luther King’s successful struggle to emancipate African-Americans in America was patterned after Gandhi’s nonviolent method in India.

Ajivika: Ajivika sect lingered on till 13^th century and met its Destiny in the dustbin of history thereafter. However, its theory of Destiny (Niyati), which is often interpreted as fatalism, occupies the intellect of many Indians to this day. We can frequently get glimpses of Ajivika philosophy in conversations with Indians: “No one can change one’s Destiny.” “Whatever is destined to happen, will happen.” “All this is a play of Fate!” “Whatever is written on your forehead cannot be changed!” Complete acceptance of Destiny gives one complete peace of mind as well as absolute passivity!

Young Monks

Buddhism: For 1000 years after the Buddha’s death, Buddhism spread in leaps and bounds under the patronage of great royal houses: Maurya, Greco-Bactrian, Kushana, Gupta, Maukhari, Pala and the like. Resurgence of Brahmanism began in the early centuries of Christian era, probably under the patronage of the Guptas. By the time of Harshavardhana of the Maukhari house (590-647 A. D.), its lobby was strong enough to attempt his assassination for patronizing Buddhism. Another development that enhanced decline of Buddhism was revival of Brahmanism led by Shankaracharya (788-820 A. D.). He singlehandedly revived Brahmanism from ts deathbed by means of his great intellect, and even greater gift of the gab, and perhaps the greatest duplicity of all the Acharyas in interpreting anti-Brahmanic literature such as the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita. In the course of our quest for truth, we will study some examples of his deliberate misinterpretations and nonsensical commentaries on the anti-Brahmanic shlokas of the Bhagavad Gita. By doing so, he converted the Bhagavad Gita, ‘The Manifesto of the Revolution to Overthrow Brahmanism’, into ‘The Standard Handbook of Brahmanism’. After the arrival and spread of Islam (10^th -12^th A. D.), Buddhism disappeared from India altogether. Brahmanism absorbed what little was left of it and half-heartedly declared the Buddha as the ninth avatara of Vishnu. A section of Brahmanism continued to vilify him as one born to mislead Nastiks to hell. Regardless, Buddhism became the World Religion, thanks to two great Chinese pilgrims to India and innumerable Bhikkus who spread the message of the Buddha all over Far East and Middle East. I will not be surprised if some day some open-minded Christian scholar will trace the origin of Jesus’ ‘show him the other cheek’ philosophy to that of the Buddha, exported to Middle East by Ashoka’s emissaries in the 3^rd century B. C. E. In fact, Jesus’ revolt against Orthodox Judaism, and subsequent birth of Christianity, followed the blueprint laid by the Buddha.

Legacy And Lessons From Sramanas:

The lesson to be learned from all the above Sramana sects is that any attempt to bring sanity into Brahmanic Dharma should be characterized by purity of purpose, speech, thought and action. The rationalist activist must be perceived by his target population as a person who is rational, reasonable, good, honest, nonviolent and free from common human weaknesses such as anger, hatred, greed, selfishness, arrogance, and deceitfulness. Nothing hurts a reform movement like the perception by the target population that the activist himself is not of exemplary behavior. In other words, all reformation movements are nothing but exercise in self-improvement. Without trust in the reformer’s bona fides, his attempts will not bear any fruits. A rationalist’s approach should be one in which he comes across as genuinely interested in helping the religionists in overcoming their irrational fears and insecurities, which are the basis of their irrational beliefs and behaviors. This reminds me of the anecdote in which a psychotic patient tells his psychiatrist that he lives on the moon. The psychiatrist empathically plays along and even accepts the patient’s invitation to visit him on the moon on a certain date. On the designated day of the visit to moon, the psychiatrist says, “All right, I am ready. Let us go.” The patient surprises the psychiatrist by asking him, “You mean you really believe that I live on moon?”

Lesson From Lokayatas:

Lokayata philosophy was largely misunderstood, ridiculed and hooted off the Indian stage of philosophy by Brahmins as it struck at their very livelihood. Most of what we know of its fundamental beliefs comes to us from its staunch Brahmanic critics, and therefore is of dubious value. Many of their tenets were deliberately or out of ignorance misinterpreted by Brahmanic commentators. Its literature was available to scholars at least till 17^th century. It disappeared entirely over the past few centuries. Either Brahmanic loyalists destroyed it, or the palm leaves rotted away or were eaten by termites. Prakriti has a way of destroying everything, especially in India!

As the reader can discern, the Lokayata philosophers did not mince words. They indulged in frontal attacks against what they considered as Brahmanic fraud. However, frontal attacks, such as those launched by the Lokayatas against essentially irrational beliefs of Brahmanism rarely, if ever, get desired results. Logic, facts, and reasoning are no match to deep-rooted beliefs of delusional proportion, which majority of Hindus have. When Mahmud of Ghazni stormed the temple of Somanatha in 1025 A. D., he found 50,000 deluded Brahmins and devotees crying with their hands wrapped around their necks and repeatedly pleading with the stone lingam (phallus) of Shiva to save them as well as their rich temple from the sword of Mahmud. Mahmud, though no less deluded by his own religion, had more faith in his own sword. He gladly obliged the Brahmins and devotees to chop their bobbing heads off. Till the last man the devotees refused to believe that the stone lingam had no power to protect them. It didn’t occur to their deluded intellect that if the Shiva lingam did not save them from Mahmud’s sword after one pleading, repeat pleadings would not make any difference. Such is the deluding effect of religion on one’s reasoning powers.

Changing Beliefs And Behaviors Is A Mighty Task:

Man is essentially a creature of well-established beliefs, habits and behavioral patterns and it is mighty hard to change these. For example, people, who are always late for parties, as is the case with the vast majority of Indians I know in America, rarely change their behavior no matter how well one reasons with them. When confronted, they give one or more totally irrational explanations for their tardiness. They might need a combination of insight into their unconscious belief system (such as “I have to keep my ‘dignity’ by showing up late”, or, “If I show up on time my host might think I am dying to eat his food”) and incentive to change (such as “Sorry, all freshly made Jelebis were gone an hour ago! You are too late!” or a note on the door, “Sorry, the party ended an hour ago. We have gone for a walk.”). It takes a lot of mental energy for people to adopt a new belief system (such as “It is a sign of utter disrespect for the host if I don’t show up on time”) and conform their behavior to their new beliefs (such as “I must show up for the party on time”).

Most People Are On Autopilot:

It takes a highly “aware” person to transcend the power of childhood indoctrination and resort to reasoning. Most Hindu religionists I know do not fall in this category. Even a confirmed Atheist might reflexively exclaim “Oh, my God!” when he witnesses a tragedy or when he has an extremely pleasurable experience. That does not make him a believer in God. It simply proves that deep-rooted behaviors are often on autopilot and are very difficult to remove. Very high level of self-awareness and reasoning power are needed for one to change one’s irrational behavior. As a psychiatrist, I can attest to the fact that majority of my highly educated patients are unable to change their well-established behavioral patterns in spite of many attempts and reminders even in the context of a trusting relationship.

Note: Dr. Prabhakar Kamath, is a psychiatrist currently practicing in the U.S. He is the author of Servants, Not Masters: A Guide for Consumer Activists in India(1987) and Is Your Balloon About Pop?: Owner’s Manual for the Stressed Mind.

Courtesy: Nirmukta

Paid News: How corruption in the Indian media undermines democracy

Sections of the media in India have willy-nilly become participants and players in practices that contribute to the growing use of money power in politics, which undermines democratic processes and norms— while hypocritically pretending to occupy a high moral ground, says the report released by Press Council of India
The Press Council of India’s once suppressed report on paid news, which indicted many publishers and broadcasters of taking money for reporting on state assembly elections in 2004 and 2009; praising one candidate while maligning others; which had a significant effect on the voting results is finally out.
The recommendation of the Press Council report were withheld from the public until an right to information (RTI) application from journalist Manu Moudgil forced to Press Council to come out with all the relevant details by 10 October 2011 after an order from the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC).
The report says, "It is widely believed that many media companies, irrespective of the volume of their businesses and their profitability, were 'selling' news space after arriving at an 'understanding' with politicians and representatives of corporate entities that were advertisers. Space in publications and airtime were occupied by advertisements that were disguised as 'news'."
After the ‘paid news' scandal surfaced, the Press Council, on 3 June 2009, under Justice GN Ray set up a subcommittee to inquire into the racket. The committee comprising Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, senior journalist, and Sreenivas Reddy, produced an explosive 71-page report which clearly mentioned the names (and details) of the personalities who were involved in this racket.

  

Courtesy: Moneylife Digital team

Osho Teachings on Celebration

Osho - That's my whole teaching, celebration; not worship but celebration. When you worship, you start making a hierarchy; the lower and the higher. When you worship you put something on top of other things. When you worship, something becomes sacred and something becomes profane. When you worship you divide, you split existence. Then something is praised but in the wake of it, something is condemned too. So worship is not religious.
The god of the worshipper is not the true god, because to exist it needs a devil. Without a devil the god will not be possible. The more you praise the god, the more you have to condemn the devil. Then the world is torn apart into two enemy forces, and when you divide the world, you are also divided in it, you become split and schizophrenic. A part of you becomes evil and a part of you becomes holy, and then there is constant conflict, repression, and all joy is lost. A worshipper is basically ill-at-ease; he is dis-eased.
Celebration is a totally different dimension. When you celebrate, you celebrate all, you don't divide. For a celebrator, prayer is as beautiful as drinking tea. The tea is not profane and prayer is not separate; all is one. The church, the temple, the mosque and the pub are all one. Making love to a woman or a man or praying to a god is the same.
Celebration does not divide. It unites, it brings things together; it creates a togetherness in the world. The duality disappears and there is unity, and with unity there is joy because there cannot be any conflict. There is no struggle, nothing has to be overcome. All is overcome in the celebration itself. The worshipper has a goal; he has to attain it. The celebrator has no goal; he has attained it already. Worship is always future-oriented; celebration is present-oriented. You celebrate this moment, you worship some other moment.
You worship Christ; now two thousand years have passed. You worship the past -- Krishna, Mohammed, Rama -- or you worship the future -- heaven, god -- which is going to happen. But the celebrator worships this moment, he lives this moment. That is his worship; he lives it totally.
It happened once: a Christian theologian went to see a Zen master who was a painter too. Celebrators are always creators; worshippers are non-creative. The master was painting. He was just going to do something, he was in that moment of waiting when something descends, when something takes possession. The Christian said, 'I would be very happy if you can paint Jesus Christ for me. ' The master said, 'Okay, I will paint Jesus Christ.' And he painted a bamboo!
When the bamboo started coming up, the Christian was a little puzzled; had he forgotten what he had said When the painting was completed it was one of the most alive bamboos ever done. The Christian asked, 'I am sorry; the painting is beautiful, but you had promised to paint christ.'
But the master said, 'This is Christ! Can't you see Christ in it? The fragileness of it is exactly the fragileness of Christ. The wind is moving it; can't you see it? It goes with the wind: thy will be done. It is exactly Christ. And it is so alive and so beautiful; it belongs to god! What more can you expect? This is Christ...this moment this is Christ; Christ has taken the shape of a bamboo. And Christ was a bamboo, a hollow bamboo. He was not there, that is his beauty. He allowed god to exist in him, he allowed god to come through him, he allowed god to have a contact with the world; he became the connection.' But the Christian could not understand. He can only understand a jesus on the cross; how can he understand a bamboo as christ?
Christians have been very much puzzled by the Zen attitude towards life, because it has no worship in it; it has celebration.
A Zen master was asked, 'What is the essential secret of Buddhism? And the master said, 'The cypress tree in the courtyard,' because in that moment that was the only reality for the master.
I have heard another story. A man came, a monk, not belonging to the Zen people. He wanted to be initiated by the master, a Zen master. He was asked, 'From where are you coming?' He said, 'I come from a monastery which is called "the monastery of spiritual light".' The master said, 'Spiritual light? Never heard about anything like that. Strange! I am ninety and I have never heard anything about spiritual light; what do you mean? In the day there is sunlight, in the night there is the lamplight. From where comes this spiritual light, what is this spiritual light?'
The man was at a loss, he couldn't answer. Then the master answered for him. He said, 'Don't be worried. In the day, sunlight; in the night, lamplight. This is what spiritual light is; there is no other spiritual light.'
This is a different vision of life -- as it is, in its suchness, and enjoying each and every moment of it. So don't just remain contented with the name celebration; become celebration!
That's what sannyas is all about: it is a celebration of god, not a worship. And celebrate in your own way, because celebration cannot have any form. Worship becomes petrified into forms; celebration remains alive. And all is divine; there is nothing profane.

Source: from Osho Book "The Sun Behind the Sun Behind the Sun".

Additional note: Osho (11 December 1931 – 19 January 1990), born Chandra Mohan Jain, and also known as Acharya Rajneesh from the 1960s onwards, as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh during the 1970s and 1980s and as Osho from 1989, was an Indian mystic, guru, and spiritual teacher who garnered an international following. [Wikipdia].