Terrorism- Hindu? Or Muslim? Or Sikh? Oe even Christian?

REading today's Main Editorial in HT, Delhi edition, I wondered what could be making a Sharma- a pandit write so harshly about Hinduism?

Disillusionment with his religion? Disappointments with politics of the day? Or could it be that he just wanted to brew a storm- attract attention- being the professor of political science.

Nothing can make the present association of Hinduism with terrorism acceptable. History, however, is replete with stories of mass murder and persecution of Hindus starting in the remote prehistoric past.

Protected by the Great Himalayas, we never ventured beyond our geographical boundaries. We considered not only every human being a god but also accorded divine status to animals and birds. To us, Sun was as divine as was the monkey or the elephant or even the owl that carried the Goddess Laxmi. Our texts talk of 33 crore gods.

This made us a race that was self satisfied, and happy to work untiringly... resultant prosperity of the country won us the epithet of the Golden Sparrow. This was fine... till attracted by the wealth on this side, came invaders crossing the formidable barrier that had hither to hidden this great race from the world. Whether it was Taimur the Lame, or Babur or even earlier, Aryans, the indigenous people only lost. They lost their wealth, their lives and their culture.

Some of the times, these amalgamations were peaceful, perhaps as the mingling of Aryans with the locals giving us the rich heritage we are proud of to this day. At other times, the mixing was violent, brutal and ridden with plunder, rape and death. Taimur was cruel, ruthless and greedy. He killed to conquer and plundered without remorse. To him Himalayas to the present day Afganistan were Hindu Khush... the grave yard of the people called Hindu.

Babur decided to settle in this land that had an easy climate, fertile land and wealth that the people had built over millinea. Moreover, these people were of easy natures; they were trusting and nonviolent. It could not have been better!

Aurangzeb refused to eat a meal till he had proof of extermination of Hindus worth 40 tonnes of Jenyu ( the holy thread) whether by killing or by conversion, it is said. His mission in life was to promote Islam- at any cost. The cost that the Sikhs bore to counter this obsession was very heavy and a historically verifiable fact. For the Muslims, it has been "either My God or no God" mentality. Every non Muslim is a kafir- doomed to hell for eternity. As it is for the Christians, too. Either my God or no God! If you do not believe in Christ as your saviour, your soul is doomed to burn in the fires of eternal hell.

Somewhere, having tolerated this holocast the Hindus can have a justifiable axe to grind. The inherent unrest, irritation and resistance can atleast be understood, if not accepted.

India is the only country in the world where a terrorist is not a terrorist! He is first a Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian or a Sikh.

What is terrorism?

What is terrorism for you and me may be patriotism for the "terrorist".

Who is to decide what is right? And righteous? Who is to sit in judgement?

The only weight that can tilt the balance is the loss of innocent lives. People who have no political agenda or aspirations, who are innocent bystanders caught in the cross-fire of politicised religion.
These perpetrators of mindless violence are not Hindus, Muslims, or any other religion.

I see nothing wrong in what Swami Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo or even Veer Sawarkar encouraged. How long can anyone expect any community to be killed because they accept all faiths as equal?

Hinduism is singular in not having any conversion rituals. In the Gita, Lord Krishna says that the Divine may be called by any name, It remains the same entity. The Gita further expounds the equality of religions by clearly directing that anyone who follows his dharma faithfully can realise God.

Where then is the need to berate any religion assuming that it promotes terrorism?

When will we as a nation learn to treat this problem as it is- one of mindless violence. And fail to help it grow by behaving irresponsibly either as journalists or as people?

Where will the sensationalisation end? And when will sensitisation begin?