Muslim nuclear hawk – unacceptable

Last time we told you about the satirical report on Jawaharlal Nehru University students who had stopped brushing their teeth. But now here is a report, which is real.

Independent thought in India’s better universities is alive and well. Office bearers of the Jawaharlal Nehru University students union in Delhi were requested by the university’s administration to present flowers to President Abdul Kalam at the annual convocation. They flatly refused, saying that he is a nuclear hawk and an appointee of a Hindu fundamentalist party. Moreover, as young women of dignity they could not agree to act as mere flower girls presenting bouquets to a man. [India, as Seen Today Through the Eyes of an Eminent Pakistani Scholar]

Indian President Dr. A P J Abdul Kalam was the person whom Pervez Hoodbhoy’s friend Praful Bidwai accidently left out from his list of Muslim achievers.

10 thoughts on “Muslim nuclear hawk – unacceptable

  1. Interesting article – although it is peppered with a descent amount of India bashing (well even intellectuals have to eat !!).
    The only thing I didnt like was the caustic remark (well hidden) the author tried to put on Nehru (personally I aint a fan either) as regards “worshipping science”. I guess it has to do with author’s own religious beliefs which dont allow him to question the tenets of religion. If “science is a religion” – then it is the best religion to have, since it is the one religion that warrants its followers to continously question the beliefs and principles that make the religion and yes “worshipping” would be the right word.

  2. Ullas, Buddhism too started a way of questioning things and accepting only things you experienced and not just a “holy” book. But now a days, it too has become ritualistic and “faith” based.
    Regarding science, if you read Bill Bryson’s, a short history of nearly everything ( i have a review), you will find that even scientists did not like to be questioned when their theories were challenged.

  3. >you will find that even scientists did not like >to be questioned when their theories were >challenged.
    Scientists do not like it (as people like us who don’t like out theories to be disputed), but there is a process for dissent, and due diligence will be given to an idea. And as a process, it is encouraged in the scientific community. That is exactly what is missing in every single religion out there.
    Realistically, there is no comparison between science and religion. Both are diametrically opposite on how they reach conclusions – and yes, there is no religion that I can find as an exception in this regard.

  4. Najeeb, Religions used to have this process for dissent and questioning authority qualities long time back. The debates of Adi Sankara, and questioning qualities of Nachiketas, and the ridicule that Buddha had for the Brahmins all come to mind.

  5. I must say that in science we are not challenging any individual but an idea. (Individuals – scientists or otherwise dont like to be challenged).
    In fact to become a scientist we must prove new ideas (at times disproving existing ones) while to become a Hindu, Muslim, Christian all we must do is unquestioningly follow the tenets.
    In fact questioning any religious principle is seen as being atheist — therein lies the difference between Science and Religion.

  6. I don’t think religions ever had open dissent – the very structure of religion doesn’t allow it. It was always Krishna/Mohamed/Jesus telling people what they should believe in. Also, fundamnetally, science is not driven by one’s need to salvation or heaven. As for scientology, it is rather new, and only time will tell how objective it can be.

  7. Najeeb if there was no open dissent in religions, then Buddha would have followed Krishna and remained a Hindu. Why did the jews oppose Jesus ?

  8. You are missing the point. You are not saying Budhism is not part of Hinduism right? In this context, the dissent is not about allowing one to form a new religion, but the ability to cleanse or revise an existing religion and the ability to question the fundamentals.
    But, when all religions are founded on irrational ideas, it is rather illogical for me to expect them to function any differently.

  9. najeeb, cleansing a religion does not necessarily mean that only one path should be followed and there is only one correct way. the fact that we have bhakti yoga, gyana yoga, raja yoga and karma yoga all under the franchise of hinduism says that no technique is superior. As Larry Wall, the creator of Perl says, there is more than one way to do the same thing. Thus other techniques are also accomodated.
    In some religions, dissenting voices are not expelled, but instead accomodated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.