Are Hindus becoming minorities in India?

Infact i would not specify ne community which is getting powered or getting minor ,,, it is the public,, we all who r getting minor,,, as these lubber politician ,, are sucking our blood ,and without any qualification and struggle they are owning bunglows cars,, travelling abroad ,, and all the ammenities ,,,whereas they r keeping u me engaged in fighting tat who is in power and who is minor.....

v are so much comunised day by day,, for eg. there is already hindu, muslim christian, sikh,, then it comes minority,, individual minority people have got hindu muslim sikh isai,,

then we fight for regional languages,,, then etc etc ,,, so if v sit for two min and think over the present scenario,, v'll cum to knw tat our society is now so much grouped and categorized, tat some time a person is confused whether he is fighting for his mumbai against north people and after some time he joins the rally against all his regional people as he is follower of a minority group,,,

i thnk our society is nw in a saturated state,, nw ne more salt in this will cause destruction in the solution

No! hindus can never be minorities on their own land at least. Hinduism is the oldest religion and way of living on the planet. they were the first one to relinquish the tribal way of living and developing themselves as the most sophisticated culture. Look at the vedas you can realize that even today they have significant value. Even after 5000 years. 

All we have to do is just do believe in our own selves. Our history is not confined to gandhi, moghuls or guptas. we date a lot back for even more than 5000 years back when vedas were written. When purity of heart, compassion, brave but kind heartedness were our prime virtues. Hindus never attacked someone for greed.

But it's time to be a bit strident now. We need a civil unicode. not so much of law personal boards(like hindu, muslim, sikh etc.).

Dear Amit,

I agree with you, on why Buddism got eliminated, but the discussion is why Hinduism got marginalised in the past or how it is getting marginalised now.

If at all if we have to blame anybody, for the exodus of the so-called lower strata of Hindu Religion (as is being projected by some people, here), lets first set our own home in order, rather than blaming others for our own lapses & inherent infirmities.

It is not just the so-called upper castes looking down upon the so-called lower castes, but even O.B.C.s look down upon the S.C.s and who in turn look down upon the S.T.s as inferiors and so far and so forth.

I believe what Lord Krishna said in "Bhagavatgita", 'Chatur Varnyam Maya Shristam Guna Karma Vibhagshah', meaning all four castes are created by me only, but they are based on the Character & Deeds of Individuals, rather than by their birth.

The above looking down upon business, someone based on birth or even looking up upon someone based on the same birth, is against the wisdo, of Lord Krishna, whom we all Hindus hold in high esteem.

As for your contention that all religions are matter of faith, I agree but I should like to take the inner meaning of what is said and try to follow it in letter & spirit, rather than trying to blame others for my own lacunae & personal weanesses.

Mr. Shenoy,

Who are you to tell me what religion I should practice?

My question is why all those who are converting from Hinduism (if at all) into other religions could not be prevented by Hindus?

That is because the Safron Brigade calling themselves the protectors of Hinduism, in fact, rampantly practice discrimination in the name of caste, colour, and a host of illogical, irrational & unholy practices and still expect them not to go out of your slavery.  If they are going out of Hinduism, who are responsible for this?  It is the thoughtless Sanathana Dharma practiioners who are solely responsible, for the exodus (if at all it is true).

Your  so called Italian connection only started a few decades ago, but Hindus got converted into Christianity over many Hundreds of years ago.

Buddism took birth as a protest of this kind of inequity and soon, at one point of history, spread across Asia and almost eliminated Hinduism.  If Hinduism again recovered its stand in India that was definitely not on account of Hindu practitioners of Superstition and unfair practices.

Now, tell me, here, who needs to be better informed of and go into depth of the subject?

Are they not wealthy Hindus who would fund Hindu Religious Activities?  There are millions of Hindu devotees who donate to their Gods whenever they visit temples and to many other Hindu religious bodies.

If getting relief from poverty is not the motivation, why poor Hindus are inclined to convert (if at all, as you people want us to believe) to other religions and why the poor from other religions are not converting into Hinduism?

If Hindu Religion allows neglecting the poor, heartlessly, and if some other religions rescue them from poverty, I don't see why the help from them should be stopped.

And, as to what we (Hindus) should do is to bring in some humanity into our own religion that neglects it’s poor, shamelessly, and keeps them under constant suppression and start creating equal opportunities to eliminate an occasion for other religions to encroach upon our territory, because we are sleeping and not tending to our poor and the under-privileged in our Religion.

It also beats any logic why & how the Religious bodies of Christianity & Islam are funding Hindu poor to overcome their poverty, while there are Crores of poor & less-fortunate in their own religions.

Most often we hear such a question being asked.

My question is : If there remains a chance that Hindus become minority (in India) what should be done (by the Hindus) ?

Mr. Salaria. All I have done hereunder is a pure cut & paste exercise. What you read below is a post by Makrand Bhave on another topic but can be relevantly used herein as well.

I have a very clear cut agenda when I am on social networking sites. It is YOU as a brand that you are projecting and that needs proper representation. You are dedfinitely not sure who you are going to meet on these sites at all. It could be long lost friends, relatives, someone who you had beaten up in your school days or even someone who had whipped you in your school days!!

As long as you stick to your relatives and long lost friends its fine. Whne it comes to the other types of people they are going to be very colourful about YOU. Thats quantity!!

I totally support the views of Mr. Narayan and Mr. Sachin on this.

Mr. Salaria,

Your outbursts betray your frustation, kindly refrain from using any further abusive language.

Mr. Syed,

Practice of Inequality of Women, Infanticides, Dowry Deaths and Caste based discrimination - all or some of them - are common for Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddists and most others in India.  They are not unique to one religion but are common to all religions in India.

Hence, as Indians we need to try to uproot them but trying to show only one religion has these practices do provoke people like Salaria to lose tempers.

Lets all please try to bring in perspective to the debate rather than trying to prove a point at any cost.

Hey All,
Are we all on this platform to read commenhts as:
there are rascals like you syed thameem in sheeps clothing. say something do something. why dont you directly chat with me , i will show the truth an d pigs like you a lesson.
By Kanwar NPS Salaria, CEO/MD/Director, TrueOsis Services
Had posted two comments ealier, am not a serious follower but have been reading the alerts. I did say in my second post that this debate is taking a different shape, that of HINDU-MUSLIM. I remember Makrand initiating a debate on the values, capabilities and usage of TooStep and also if it's been moderated enough (may be not in those many words but meaning almost same). Can I request all concerned to take appropriate step to put an end to such debate. If TooStep is reading and listening, NO, the debates is not been moderated enough and necessary care is not being taken. Please join me in supporting the very cause of closing this debate as it is getting more unpleasent each passing day.

Dear Mr. Salaria ,

A debate is supposed to expose / exploit the weakness in the other person's argument , not in the other person.

Your language is exposing your inner self. I can only suggest you moderate your language ; otherwise your arguments become irrelevant to the debate.

Do you seriously think that any one is going to waste his / her time trying to engage in a debate with you ?

I was amazed by postings done by both sides. How we are timid?  India is a secular country, we minorities we respect it and still we love as our home country. We have wasted our valuable time by aruguing this stupid argument.

If hindu religion is 5000 years older means, today the whole world should have filled with Hindus? Youngest religion is Islam it has grown by leaps and bounds. If we assue in India there's no Islam, all are converts, are they ready to come back to Hinduism? No.

I am not offending any body, there's no eqaulity for women, female infants are killed, dowry system, caste discrimination, i can put ford the list. For us, we see as only Islam. That's the basic difference.

Let us focus on some thing developing our country where common ppl are dying without water, food, shelter.

Instead of criticizing, let us think scinetifically.

Freethinking has always been the backbone of human progress - whether in East or West.

Or else we - as a humanity - still would have been groping in the dark, practicing superstitions over truth-seeking.

Dear Mr. Narayan ,

You are very persuasive , and it would be nice if we could debate this point viz. does religion make a man or does Man make religion ?

If we accept that religion is a creation of man , then it would follow that Hinduism sprang out of free-thinking and independent individuals rather than the other way round.

Secondly , it is a fact that the West has also produced a great number of free-thinking and independent individuals , who were still staunchly religious ; after all , even Einstein , though he was an atheist , believed in God as a superpower ; hence his statement "God does not play dice".

Taking an established nihilist Nietzche as an authority on religion is like asking a serial killler about morality.

One should never think of a religion as establishing boundaries ; after all when you are going down a road , you are following a path which makes life easy , you do not think of a road as a restriction !

Religion prescribes guidelines for living life well , following those guidelines makes for a happier , easier life. Rituals do not make a religion. It is rituals which enslave us , not the religion itself.

Hindus unitedly will remain a majority. But the reality today is Hindus are divided deeply on caste lines due to political parties. And these castes have no presence all over India and they are concentrated in very small pockets of India and like old princely states these groups linked to chota parties will be the dangers India will face in the coming years.

Dear Kanwar ,

Thanks for steering the debate in a new direction !

Actually , pigs are very clean animals. If you don't believe this , check it out on the Internet.

Yes, Mr. Narayan,

In fact Swamy Vivekananda started his pursuit of truth with questioning Swamy Ramakrishna Paramahamsa.

Dear Mr. Bhattacharya ,

I appreciate and admire your views on Hinduism.

I would only request you to pause for a while and ask yourself one question : What is it that binds all human beings ?

Is it our caste , language , nationality , religion , colour ,.... ?

Or is it our values and principles ?

If it is the latter , then you would not request all Hindus to come together ; our first and foremost loyalty should be to TRUTH.

Please do not pass judgements on anyone you do not know about. Do not , I request you , say that I have no right to challenge Swami Vivekananda.

Every thinking human being has the right , nay the responsibility , to question facts and arrive at the truth. If you do not do this , you are not being true to the same Swami Vivekananda about whom you are speaking.

I have given some facts about Hindu and Muslim population growth , which is pertinent to this debate. Do you have anything to say about this ? Instead you have introduced a new dimension , about Hindu unity / disunity , which was never the point of this debate , as far as I know.

So, do I, Mr. Pandey,

At the time of Partition (1947), the total population of India was 350 Millions, including all religions.  Assuming that Pakistan & Bangladesh together had a combined population of another 250 Million this could give us a grand population of Undivided India as 600 Million.

Then, where is the question of 600 Million population duirng the life time of Muhammad Qasim Hindu Shah Firista, Gulsan-i-Ibrahimi, commonly known as Tarikh-i-Firishta, who lived during 1865?

Unless someone can come out with a plausible theory that the population has been stagnant between 1865 and 1947, for nearly 80+ years!.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

I see that you are still reluctant to work it out for yourself.

The "minority" that you conjecturing is not by way of thousands or millions of Hindus ; at that point of time , the Hindu population in India may be over 3 billion !

But you are right Mr. Pandey , I am not interested in this debate.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

I am sorry you feel like this about the debate.

You were the one who posted the fact of 600 million Hindus ; unfortunately you did it without chewing the cud , as you call it. Chewing the cud is another name for analysis , which alone can lead to understanding. Just posting facts without analysing their source or their truth is the bane of this debate. When the falsity of the fact is pointed out , you retreat and bring in another fact. This has been going on and on !

I will again repeat what I posted in my first submission to this debate. Please go through this and refute it , if you can.

The population of Hindus in India is 850 million , as an approximation. The population of Muslims in India is 150 million as an approximation.

The growth rate of the Hindu population in India , over the last 50 years , has been above 20 % , but let us take it as 20 %.

The growth rate of the Muslim population in India , over the last 50 years , has been below 40 % , but let us take it as 40 %.

Start from these figures , assuming you do not dispute them , and work out for yourself , when the Hindu population in India will become less than the Muslim population in India. My calculation is around 100 years.

100 years from now , none of us debating this issue so furiously will be alive !

Please see whether it is still worthwhile to continue this debate.

To everyone who has participated in this debate :

I found this link this morning , and was amazed by the concept. Probably we can all try it out in our country !

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/05/zero-rupee-note-that.html

This has nothing to do with this debate , but , frankly speaking I am tired since the debate seems to be meandering and not many facts are surfacing. Only verbiage. So this may make for a refreshing change.

Secondly this debate has attracted a lot of toostepites , so this is a good way of reaching out to everyone.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

There is no deviation from any issue in what I posted.

You quoted Swami Vivekananda as saying that there were 600 million Hindus when the Mughals came to India.

I am giving you figures to say that Vivekananda was wrong. Do you understand ?

If the data given in the document whose link I have given is correct , then the population of India in 1601 , was just 145 million. Hence Swami Vivekananda's figure of 600 million Hindus cannot be correct.

Let me know if I have deviated from any issue.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

If you are interested in researching the population of India during the Mughal empire , please go through the following link :

http://www.egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/26777/1/Unit-26.pdf

According to this document , the population of India ( not Hindus alone ) , was as follows :

1601            -   145 million

1871            -   225 million

If you still believe in the figure of 600 million Hindus in the pre-Mughal era , all I can say is "Happy Thinking".

Sometimes ignorance IS bliss.

To have a final word on the core issue of this debate, we have to wait till 2011 Census are out.

Still 80% of Hindus in year 2001 becoming a minority within 20 years is something very difficult to believe even by the Minorities, all included having less than 20% strenght in the same year.

This is also one reason why I do not wish to be lead by ‘Saffronistas’ – they are either too unbelivieably convinced of their ground or too sure of their beliefs that they go all out creating a typhoon out of a tea cup.

Mr. Korde,

Till you came along there was no mudslingling and whatever has been happening between me and Mr. Pandey, me and Mr. Nair and Mr. Narayan & Mr. Nair, Mr. Narayan & Mr. Pandey and everyone Vs. everyone else has been without malice.

You still haven't proved anything, despite long-winding speach, especially that Hindus are becoming minorities in India.

while we welcome you into the debate, it better be without mudslinging.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

You are right that Swami Vivekananda was talking about the various sects within Hinduism.

My point in quoting the remark was that Swami Vivekananda was for free will. You cannot have free will only up to a certain point. It is either free will or not. Having a small quantum of free will is akin to Henry Ford's classic statement that customers could have a car of any colour as long as it was black !

Freedom of expression is to be accepted as long as it does not infringe upon another's rights. Please note that the critical word here is "rights" , not taste or principles.

I , as a Hindu , will not do cow slaughter , but that does not mean that I can prevent others , whether Hindus or not , from indulging in cow slaughter. Yes , it is offensive to my taste , but certainly not offensive to my rights , unless the cow happens to be mine !

Religion is a purely personal matter ; I can state with absolute certainty and confidence that I will never convert from Hinduism to any other religion , but that does not mean that I am saddened or threatened by others who may choose to convert , whether because they are enticed by offers of money or other gifts , or out of their conviction.

If the conversion is by use of force , the law is there as a recourse. The remedy for forced conversion , from Hinduism to any other religion , is not vandalising churches / mosques or killing bishops / imams.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

Thank you for the link.

Having gone through it , I can only repeat that it substantiates what I have posted earlier. Vivekananda says "Can you ask that?" he said. "They will choose for themselves. For unless a man chooses for himself, the very spirit of Hinduism is destroyed. The essence of our Faith consists simply in this freedom of the Ishta."

The essence of Hinduism is the freedom of one's will. This is what gives the religion its spirit of tolerance.

I have never debated whether Muslims or Christians or people of other religions should be converted to Hinduism. Over the centuries , many people from all over the world , of different religions , have converted to Hinduism , on their own , without any enticements or use of force. That is the beauty of Hinduism.

And that is why I am against Hindu extremist groups. By their violent words and actions , they are going against the spirit of Hinduism.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

My opinion , for what it is worth , is that I will not bad mouth anyone or anything when I do not have full information or knowledge of that person , group or object. Even a person like Hitler should be shunned for his ideas of eliminating Jews , but there is no denying the good he did to raise the German psyche after World War I.

Secondly , I am not going to confuse Christianity as a religion defined by Christ and his life , with Christianity as practised by people like you and me.

I would suggest you read about one of the great Indian saints Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa , and understand what he had to say about religions , Hinduism and others.

Like protestant sect of Christianity was born in protest against the excesses of Roman Catholism, Budhism & Jainism were born in protest against the excesses of the 'Brahmana Religion'.

While I appose Conversions by Crusades of Christians & Muslims, I also am amused to hear that these religions are inferior to Hinduism, from the mouths of those who vociferously preach the re-conversions, by forces of all former Hindus back into Hinduism.

Dear Mr. Pandey ,

You seem to be an authority on all the religions.

Can you please tell me where in the Bible it says that a Christian should try and convert a person of another religion , to Christianity , by using the sword ?

Yes, it is degenerating,

Religious bigotry on both the sides has entered into this otherwise healthy debate.

Dear Ms. Mukherji ,

I think you are confusing two issues here. Please do not decry Islam with irrelevant statements like "Islam was conjured up by one man (Whose credibility is dubious)". Islam is , whether you accept it or not , whether you like it or not , one of the great religions of the world.

Secondly , do not decry any religion on the basis of its age ; Buddhism is comparatively new when placed along side Hinduism ; does it mean Buddhism is a lesser religion ?

I think this debate is degenerating !

For as long as India is a Democracy, India belongs to all Indians, irrespective of their religious beliefs.  If one studies Indian History carefully, India has always been tolerant to the practice of all forms of religions.

It was India that sheltered Pharsis, when they were persecuted in Persia, Jews, when they where persecuted in Middle East & Elsewhere, Buddist-followers of Dalai Lama, when they were persecuted in Chinese occupied Tibet - on account of their religious faiths, only to quote a few instances.

Neo Saffronists (Sangh Parivar), who are a minority themselves in the Majority Hindu (Maha Parivar), cannot re-write the history or change the present & future course of India, which always belonged to Indians.

On issue on which I agree with them is that India being a Secular State should not patronize any one religion for it being a minority and fund their religious pilgrimages, etc. be it to Mekkah, Rome or Jerusalem.

The vote-bank politicians are giving a bad name to a true secularity of our Indian State.  All public funds should go into the development, health & education of the people of India and not for erecting statues of gods or humans like, Mayavati.

This kind of practices do not happen in the older Secular states like, France, U.K., USA, et al.

Dear Mr. Aras,

Firstly, let me congratulate you on your elevation.  Speakers do speak less and allow a decent debate and deliberations to aid, legislative process.

My original argument that the article, in reference, has been based on amplified exaggerations and not based on verifiable facts still holds.

When Mr. Syed's right to express his desire for peace was denied, simply because he carries a Muslim name, I had to defend his right to freedom of expression (for as long as it is within limits, unlike that of MFH's)

As Ahmed's contention that many Hindus are converting into Islam after thorough study of Islam too being based on un-verifiable facts, I had to oppose him - it doesn't matter which side I am, I wish to be fair.

Finally, I am a Hindu who practices Hindu way-of-life but do not subscribe to the radical Hinduism like saffronism of Akhand Hindustan and that this land belongs to only Hindus, et al.

I also do not believe that we should reconvert all former Hindus, forcefully, back to Hinduism.  If any such initiative takes place, it should be through the force of faith, rather than force of any other kind.

I think many hindus are studying teachings of islam,, praising it  and converting to Muslims....

Mr. Nair,

It was not just the Court but the BJP Govt. there has confirmed that there was no evidence to 'Love-Zihad'.  On this non-existant thing, however, a 'Hate-Dharmayudha (So-called) ' is being perpetrated by some, for reasons not fathomable to many of us.

Dear Mr. Shenoy ,

I am unable to react to your post because I am unable to understand most of it. Sorry.

However , I could understand your last question. So to react to it , I can say that the India of the future , 50 years from now , will be much better than the India of today.

Nair,

Isn't it amplified exaggeration while we harp on the so called 'love-zihad', which existance, the governmental agencies, concerned, have already denied?

Dear Ms. Mukherji ,

I do not know to whom you are referring when you say "One article by a non-entity".

I believe it is the characteristic of open-mindedness and maturity , that one looks at the message rather than who is saying it. It is also a characteristic of maturity and wisdom that one is able to analyse anyone objectively , without being swayed by the reputation of the person concerned. A critic can be more knowledgeable , intelligent and mature than an author ! To say that Tavleen Singh is a Sikh and married to a Muslim , does not necessarily mean that every word of hers is the gospel truth.

I , speaking for myself , found Shauvik Ghosh's article interesting and illuminating.

I found Tavleen Singh's article more form than substance ! She spends two paragraphs on a topic , just to sow the right seeds in our mind , and then wriggles out of the mess she has created for herself , by writing "This is not about Communalism Combat or the fight between Zaheera and Teesta."

Yes, 

A healthy debate is possible only when we tolerate view-points of others, even if they are entirely contrary to our own beliefs.  

While I strongly oppose the views of anyone who believes that my religion is becoming minority in my own Motherland, I strongly defend the right of these opponants to hold such views (read Voltaire).

Regret I too was forced to deviate from the main topic.

SYED , NITIN & RAO SAHIBS :: DON'T FIGHT ::UNDERSTAND & NOT JUDGE\( AS GILBERT PREUR SAYS )

TIME OUT :: HAVE SOOTTAA AND CHAI ...REFLECT ON THE PROCEEDINGS TODAY AND GEAR UP FOR KURUKSHETRA TOMORROW...

SWEET DREAMS ...

Mr. Aras,

Well first and foremost let me clarify secularism does not sanction any special previleges to any section, including minorities.

Secularism, as I understand, is about Liberty, equality, fraternity to all citizens, irresepective of their religion, region, rang or whatever.

Nobody is denying the learnedness or length of experience of anybody here and please don't put your words into my mouth.

To say that Syed should only speak to Muslims and that he doesn't have a right to express his views in a forum like this, because he is a Muslim and to say that I should only speak to Hindus as I am a Hindu is not acceptable to us.

Let aside all other examples of service-for-money, as for Kawadiya (who brings holy water from Ganges) during July being given water is not money making proposition and I know for sure it is free.

Anyway, I do not object to any Hindu raising any concern of their religion getting marginalised but I do object if anybody denies anyone's right to speak on secularism, on account of his carrying a Muslim name.

Dear Mr. Aras ,

I think we should agree to differ. You and all others who hold your opinion are perfectly free to have those opinions. I am not trying to convert anyone. I have given my opinions , and if you feel there is any merit in my arguments , go ahead. If you want to disagree , that is also your right.

All I am saying is :

1.  Do not confuse Muslims ( not specifically Indian Muslims , there are good Muslims everywhere ) with Islamic terrorists.

2.  Do not assume that all Hindus are wonderful , and the only terrorists in this world are Muslims.

If you feel these two opinions are right , then we are speaking in one voice.

If you feel these two opinions are wrong , please give facts to prove your point.

And do not talk of Mr. Nair's or anyone else's experience. Even if I am a chain smoker , I can still say that smoking is dangerous. Experience is not supposed to change our principles of right and wrong.

4 days, 428 referrals, 428 views, 53 posts, 22 participants. Some real hectic activity this debate (do you also think Hindus are becoming minorities in India?) has seen.

A small thought or all TooStepites. The author (Sulagna Brahma) had quoted few stats from a news article from a newspaper in Mangalore, thereby posting a question – one even she did not support. A thought that converted to a question and then a debate saw 22 participants place 53 posts. Spare a moment, give a quick read to all posts.

As the debate progressed, the very core thoughts and reasons of the debate were lost and the whole debate wore an HM (Hindu-Muslim) look. In the whole debate, no other minority than Muslim was spoken of. Are Sikhs & Christians not other minorities that could be responsible for the cause (if that be)? Lets take a call, all my co-Hindus, if any particular community is looked as a possible reason for making us a  minority in our own nation, can we ever be a reason for doing so to any other community in their country?

To me, the debate was not for the reason that we all debated for. Quoting facts, the author had possibly asked 1. If the question that appeared in the Manglorean daily was right? & 2. In view of all facts quoted, what could we be doing to stop from those incidents to happen?

Correct me if I’m wrong but before doing aforesaid, please do spare a moment and give a quick read to all posts that appeared. I’m sure you all (TooStepites who participated in the debate) shall agree that the whole theme & reasons thereof were lost somewhere in the early stage itself. That’s not what a FORUM is all about and that’s not what a DEBATE means – I’m sorry if I’ve tried to be teaching sense to somebody but could not stop myself writing / pushing this post.

You forgot to mention that those people are Muslims who give water to Kawadiya(who brings holy water from Ganges) during July.

Those who provide shelter, food, carry them on their shoulders the pilgrims of Vishnodevi are also Muslims.

Those who brand any person strictly based on religion, region, rang, etc. are those who are hopelessly blinded by baseless prejudices.

First of all who is my people? ?

The groups you are mentioning are also killing muslims alongside. They are the enemy of humanity. They are just using the relegion. You can not generalise people.

On the same note some people are strengthening Indian defence by inventing some mind blowing equipment, some are keeping our flag high admist of hundreds of countries by wining international awards. Who are they? They are muslim or Indian.

Some people(enemy of humanity) are throwing bombs(physical), some are throwing ideas(provocating) are equal to me. We need more Indian than Hindus, Muslims, ...........Atleast we can think holistically and propagate humanity amonsgt all level, all relgions. Otherwise there will be no difference between us and them.

Let me site one ground example. A village from Dasna (near Ghaziabad, U.P) distributes drinking water to Kawadiya (who brings holy water from Ganges)during July. What is your opinion regarding this? Can this be called an example of humanity!

If so let us do that. I think illiterate/less educated people knows this and does.

Kudos, well analyzed Sir.