Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!elbereth!rutgers!seismo!umcp-cs!raj
From: raj@umcp-cs.UUCP (Raj Bhatnagar)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: An Independent Sikh State
Message-ID: <3735@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Oct-86 23:50:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.3735
Posted: Tue Oct  7 23:50:49 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Oct-86 05:12:35 EDT
References: <1232@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: raj@umcp-cs.UUCP (Raj Bhatnagar)
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Sci.
Lines: 85

In article <1232@mit-trillian.MIT.EDU> martillo@trillian.UUCP (Yakim Martillo) writes:
>
>From my reading of this news group and from acquaintanceship with many
>Indians of various ethnic origins including my relatives, I have the
>impression most Hindus casually equate Indian with Hindu.

More than 80% of country's population is Hindu. Predominant part of what can
be called Indian Culture relates to Hinduism. If somebody equates Indians and
Hindus, He is as much right or wrong as if he equates Americans and Whites!!!
I think the above mistake is made more by non-Indians than Hindus!!!!

> Further the
>Government of India has at various times claimed the right to
>legislate Hindu religious law. Consequently, Sikh discontent is quite
>understandable.

If you are implying that Indian state has tried to identify itself with
Hinduism without caring for other religions, you are only 'absolutely wrong'.
For your information, most of the religion related laws have been enacted
because of demands from minority religions! Yes, it is unfortunate that state
and religion have been mixed!!!

>  I have met many Sikhs who do reject terrorism, but I
>have not met any who actually rejects carving a Sikh state out of some
>portion of India in which Hindus might live, just as Sikhs could still
>live in the rest of India.
I can introduce you to many many sikhs who think otherwise!! If there is so
much flexibility that Hindus can live in Sikh state and Sikhs in India ...
Why create a Sikh state? Who is it going to benefit? Probably, some 
individuals with personal ambitions, and Pakistan's goal of weakening India
as a power in the region!!
>
>India is an artificial creation and has really only been unified in
>the past under alien conquerers.
>
The cultural entity called India has survived longer than any other known
group of individuals on this planet!!! And geographically, it has occupied
the Indian subcontinent. What is artificial? The political entity called
India? If people with same heritage and strong cultural bonds decide to merge
into one political entity, what's artificial about it? You will get the
right perspective if you know that in ancient India, religious institutions
commanded more power than Kings, but in a changed world, if the same people
declare themselves into a single political entity, there is nothing
artificial about it!!! By your logic, every country in this world is
artificial!!! Did God demarcate any countries at the time of creation???

>The Sikhs have had their own states in the past on the Indian
>subcontinent.
>
The purpose of Sikh King was to protect Hinduism from Islam.  The purpose
of Sikh state was to throw Mugal invaders out of India. They had joined to
form the Indian state as had 500 or so other states!!

>The Muslims have already carved their own state out on the Indian
>subcontinent.
Do you know that there are more moslems in India than in Pakistan? And the
theory of nation based on religion died with the creation of Bangladesh!!
>
>Further, most Indians as far as I can tell, give knee-jerk support to
>carving a Muslim state out of the land of Israel without even the
>least show of good faith on the part of Muslims even though Muslims
>have a long history of attacking and oppressing Jews (as well as
>Hindus and other non-Muslim groups).  My knowledge of the history of
>the subcontinent may be faulty but I do not believe Hindus or any
>other ethnic group has historical reason to fear the creation of an
>independent Sikh state, and therefore no demonstration of good faith
>should really be required except for the cessation of terrorism.

Hindus and Sikhs are two different shades of same cultural heritage and they
have and they will and they will have to live together even if there happens
to be a hypothetical situation of different political entities!!! Once one
realizes this, the point of having two political entities is lost even to the
reasoning sikhs! Isn't Europe trying to gather under the umbrella of EC for 
the common gain of everyone!!!

The main problem is that, historically religion has been prime consideration
for an individual and not the state. Where as most leaders and reasoning
people saw the great advantages of having one state for all the people of
Indian heritage, some are still clinging to the notion of superiority for
religion. 

I am tired of typing and don't have much time also now!!!!!
One can talk about these things for ever.............

So, bye now.