Comments on: Religious Freedom and Tolerance – for public comment

By: Abhishek

Abhishek — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:07:20 +0000

Sir
Comprehensive and astute as a policy document.
Although: Clause 2(h) Temple management / shrine management should be over looked by Govt and be taxable as per corporate / Trust laws. They cannot accumulate monies in name of God and waste it.
Religion is a bad translation of DHARMA akin to blind men of Hindoostan describing an elephant.
What I understood on this critic of modern india is that Dharma is to be brought back. It is not religion but the philosophy evolved through eons.
The gaiety and fervour I have seen with celebrations of festivals in our country is across all groups and we should strive to preserve it.

By: Sanjeev Sabhlok

Sanjeev Sabhlok — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 06:43:55 +0000

Ramesh, Thanks. I've moved your comment re: my manuscript to http://discovery.sabhlokcity.com/your-views/ since it is not directly related to FTI. I've also received your email and will respond separately.

Regards

Sanjeev

By: ramesh

ramesh — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:15:23 +0000

The further sequel to the above discussion alongwith many other things can be had at
http://idealworldkrishna.blogspot.com/

By: Sanjeev Sabhlok

Sanjeev Sabhlok — Sat, 11 Sep 2010 02:31:54 +0000

Dear Ramesh

What good is knowledge that is known only to so-called Gnanis? What I have in mind is knowledge that ANYONE can acquire by careful diligent study and critical thinking.

I am glad you are looking through my two books (the second only a draft). Happy to clarify if you find anything in these books that violates what you call Dharma (I'm assuming that YOU are a Gnani and know what Dharma is, else please ask the relevant Gnani to discuss the issue).

Btw, it won't be a bad idea (for my knowledge) if there is any succinct summary for a common man like me that clarifies what precisely Dharma is - starting with precise assumptions on human nature, etc. as you've outlined.

Regards

Sanjeev

By: ramesh

ramesh — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:27:27 +0000

Dear Sabhlok,
Excited to see you replying to me. Surely it has clarified the matter to the extent to which I have commented. I am satisfied to see that you have agreed to the fact that Dharma is quite different from the Religion and that approach of the FTI is dharmic in nature. But note that the FREEDOM AND JUSTICE are JUST A FEW ASPECTS of the greatest Dharma. Greatest wonder to me is the fact that FTI is trying to establish an ideal society by establishing the Freedom, Justice and few similar things which are only a few insufficient aspects of the Dharma.
The essence is that without understanding the Dharma- which includes the study of the human instincts, its behavior over the period of time and other scientific aspects so abundantly and indirectly dealt with throughout the Indian tradition and to some extent by other religions and that DHARMA abounds in ADHARMIC APPROACH FOR THE SAKE OF DHARMA- there is every possibility of implementing Freedom, Justice and similar things in a bit distorted way and thus bound to fail over the period of time.
Note that wikipedia or similar things don’t have the authority to define it or describe its nature. Only Jnanies are apt to say what Dharma is. Now the subject enters altogether a very basic, philosophical (nay scientific) discussion which is indispensible and without which any approach (FTI or any other) is bound to fail horribly. This subject needs to be entered into only with your kind permission.
[I am talking of Dharma so much because Freedom and Justice are quite a relative terms when isolated from the Dharma (and cause havoc when established as such) and the same become absolute when they are in consistent with the Dharma and brings in ideal society only as such.]
I have just begun reading your two books. After I complete the same I will be returning to comment with more understanding of yours and pinpoint few flawed points of the FTI alongwith the remedial measures for the same.
However if you understand the exact intent of mine, waiting for your reply.

By: Ashish

Ashish — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 09:51:16 +0000

Dear Ramesh,

I have just posted my reply to your comment on my Blog and being relevant to the same discussion on this thread, am reproducing it here.

Thanks for the comment. Understand your viewpoint and very briefly would like to distinguish between Dharma and Religion as follows:

Religion is derived from the Latin word Religio, meaning bind or connect together. The purpose of religion through the ages has been to help respective groups stay firmly bonded together and in part clearly distinguished in ideology & belief from other groups.

Dharma is described in Wikipedia as –

Many languages have words that can be translated as "religion", but they may use them in a very different way, and some have no word for religion at all. For example, the Sanskrit word dharma, sometimes translated as "religion", also means law.

(Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion#Etymology).

The word dharma translates as that which upholds or supports, and is generally translated into English as law. The antonym of dharma is adharma meaning unnatural or immoral.

(Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma)

I believe you have referred to Dharma in the context of Law and not Faith or Belief.

The dharma of FTI is to offer a clean and transparent government, free from all evils and bias, including religious.

I hope this clarifies!

Regards / Ashish.

By: Sanjeev Sabhlok

Sanjeev Sabhlok — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:59:56 +0000

Dear Ramesh

Thanks for your comment. I can assure you that your concern about things becoming disastrous is totally unwarranted!

The sum and essence of freedom is justice. Justice is nothing but the Golden Rule or categorical imperative. In particular, the Bhagavad Gita talks about the ideal person as ‘one who does not hate any creature, who is friendly and compassionate, free from (the notion of) “I” and “my”, even-minded in pain and pleasure, forgiving’.

When a statement is made that politics and religion should be kept separate, the goal is that the good is extracted from all sources and enforced by the state. The ideals of the Golden Rule and the Gita are 100% compatible with FTI’s vision for the laws of the state which, in essence, boil down to justice.

Once the laws of the nation are based on justice, and enforcement is precise and proportionate, then the society will flourish. Freedom and justice are the greatest dharma. Once these are assured, then the rest of the belief system (e.g. people’s belief in God or not, or which name of God) should become a private matter. Whether one wants to worship in a temple, church or mosque, should remain off-bounds for the government.

I trust this clarifies your concerns.

I assure you that FTI stands for the HIGHEST ethics, the highest dharma, the highest justice. Once the state can guarantee that, then surely it is not appropriate for religious agendas to be thrust on the state. Religion as practised has not always been Dharma-friendly. Adharmic actions by so-called religious leaders have often led to major problems across the world (and India!). Let us extract the good out of all philosophies.

As the Rig Veda says, “Let noble thoughts come to us from all sides.”

Regards
Sanjeev

By: ramesh

ramesh — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:34:27 +0000

Dear friends,
It is the ‘Dharma’ which gives the animal the form of ‘Being Human’. It was the Hindu Dharma which gave the now thinking animal a form of Being Human. Similar efforts were made by the Jain, Boudha, Christen, Islam etc Dharmas including Hindu which were turned into Religions (English term) due to Veil nature of this animal (Human Beings). It is originally the Dharma which defines the Politics, Governance, Society and so on. Religion is the term which the foreign culture has given the name to this Dharma. Due to inappropriate conceptions of the Dharma, the term Religion not necessarily implies the same thing as the Dharma does.

When Politics is separated from the Dharma, the politics become the law of the animals not of the Human beings. If problems are created with the Politics, then effort to establish the Dharma with its pristine purity should be made and that it could never be separated from the Dharma which is its seed, the father.

At FTI if it is true that the Dharma is being separated from the politics by confusing the Dharma with the English term Religion, it will be more disastrous than any past happenings in the history of the human race.

Is there anybody who can clarify the stand of FTI? Dear Sabhlok, Shantanu……..

rkumarane@gmail.com
idealworldkrishna.blogspot.com

By: Anupam

Anupam — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:01:53 +0000

I see what you are saying. I agree that state shold not succumb to the demand of religious organizations to breach the freedom of othes.

By: ashishvdeodhar@gmail.com

ashishvdeodhar@gmail.com — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:51:14 +0000

@Anupam
I think you misunderstood me on this. I have explained in my second line how I see a clear difference between individual beliefs and organized religions. There's nothing communist and definitely not dictatorial about my view because I don't propose a blanket ban on religions. I simply don't expect the state and society to be dictated by religious beliefs, that's about it.
So for example, someone saying that Sania Mirza shouldn't wear short clothes is an individual's personal opinion and s/he is entitled to hold that opinion but that person has no right to impose that opinion on others through his/her religious office by releasing fatwas.
Banning books is not violence. Demanding ban on contraception is not violence. Caste system is not violence. So I think we can't look at aggressions only in terms of violence and non-violence. Many aggressions on freedom are done in a very non-violent way but they are aggressions nonetheless. Again, anyone has freedom to believe that contraception is a sin but a state should not succumb to demands to ban contraception just because someone's religious book says so.
That's what I mean when I say "curbing religions", not an outright ban on all religions.
Hope that clarifies my position!