• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Christian Missionary Role In India - 6
WHole thing started by greedy CBN. He started inviting Paul for missionary funding for his own kitty.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Can we have more info about this?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's been discussed in some of the posts in temple thread:
link1 , link2 , link3 , link4 , link5 , link6 , link7 , link8 , link9
Conversion bid ends in murder attempt
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Chennai, July 29:

        A police inspector, who allegedly threatened a youth to convert to Christianity, finds himself in a soup. The 32-year-old youth today alleged that the police inspector had tried to kidnap him and end his life since he refused to convert.

        According to police, the youth identified as Raj Kumar (32), was running a computer spare parts shop in Tiruchy. A few years ago, he fell in love with a lady cop Maria Lousia and married her.

        A few days back, Maria Lousia filed a complaint alleging that her husband has been missing for the last few days. Meanwhile, Raj Kumar, appeared before mediamen at Chennai Press Club today.

        He said, 'when I refused to convert to Christianity, Lousia and her family ill-treated me and even foisted cases against me. We got estranged and lived separately.' Meanwhile, Lousia's father, who is also a police inspector, hired a few men and they kidnapped me some days back. They relieved me of my ATM card, cell phone and cash. I managed to escape from them and with the help of my friends reached Chennai'.

        His denial to convert Christianity is the prime reason for a bid on his life. Rajkumar urged the police to take appropriate action against them.

<!--QuoteBegin-deepak+Jul 31 2006, 06:20 PM-->QUOTE(deepak @ Jul 31 2006, 06:20 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The problem with your argument is: you have accepted conversion as a legitimate objective to spending money.

Not necessarily. I've accepted the "DESIRE FOR REWARD" as a legitimate desire on the part of any human being. Conversion simply fits into this whole scheme, that's all.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It is legitimate as long they make their intention obvious. How many missionaries declare publicly that they are doing services to convert? Zilch. - Deception

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Of course not, this also is subjective. So there's no definitive answer. Put simply, just as you cannot force people NOT to have motives, you cannot force people to show gratitude.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Then that activity should not be called charity. Make the motivation clear and rules of game will change. People with motivation don't deserve tax excemption status, special rights or anything like that. They don't need any extra protection.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, if the objective of conversion is legitimate, then why aren't the missionaries upfriont about the motivation at the point of giving relief, that is, to the person they seek to convert?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

In business, don't we often give freebies first to attract customers, and then provide another product or service, the ones which we really intend to sell? This method is indispensable in a competitive world, or your business is doomed. You don't try to be honest and tell your customers: look, we are giving away worthless freebies, so that you'll be fooled into buying our product. We take this for granted, every business in the world does this. It is impossible to survive without it. And we never ask awkward questions such as 'why can't we be upfront about the whole matter' and so forth. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Please stop bull sh***ing. If it is a business, go by rules of business.

Why doesn't the Indian goverment give similar rights to everybody? Hindu organizations and their institutions do not enjoy similar rights as minority institutions. Missionaries have already penetrated enough into secular parties and ensures that Hindus do not get same playing field.

It is unfortunate that many people get assaulted or raped in different parts of India. But, if the victim is a christian you will see christian members from human rights or women's rights organization coming up publicly for detailed enquiries. i.e. These rights organization are built for the protection of missionaries only. Hindu tax money is just being used to protect christians.

If you want to know how a charity organization should work with other religions? I can quote what Mata Amritananda Mayi or Sri Sri Ravi Shankar tell their western desciples when they are in America. "Please continue going to church, Synagogue or mosque as you are used. You don't have to stop that because you are coming to me. I am here only to spread the message"
Bush fundamentalism is courting disaster

Karen Armstrong

Affinity with the Christian Right has led to banning stem cell research and turning a blind eye to civilian deaths in Lebanon.

FROM THE very beginning, the conflict between religion and modern science was couched in extreme, even apocalyptic rhetoric. Thomas H. Huxley, who popularised The Origin of Species, insisted that people had to choose between faith and science; there could be no compromise: "One or the other would have to succumb after a struggle of unknown duration." In response, conservative Christians launched a crusade against Darwinism. After the First World War, the Democratic politician, William Jennings Bryan, claimed that there was a direct link between evolutionary theory and German militarism: the notion that only the strong could or should survive had "laid the foundation for the bloodiest war in history. The same science that manufactured poisoned gases to suffocate soldiers is preaching that man has a brutal ancestry."

The struggle continues — nowhere more so than among the Christian Right in the United States, which still regards the evolutionary hypothesis as surrounded by a murderous nimbus of evil. In 1925, the Christian Right tried to ban the teaching of evolution in public schools and developed creation science, based on a literal reading of the first chapter of Genesis. More recently, it has tried to introduce into the school curriculum the teaching of intelligent design (ID), which claims that the irreducible complexity of micro-organisms could not have evolved naturally but must be the result of a single creative act. The issue splits the nation down the middle: fundamentalists want to win a battle for God; liberals and secularists are fighting for truth and rationality.

The same passions are likely to be aroused by President George W. Bush's decision last week to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which would have loosened the restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research. "This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Mr. Bush said. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect."

His opponents point out that while the President zealously champions the rights of the unborn, he is less concerned about the plight of existing American children. The U.S. infant mortality rate is only the 42nd best in the world; the average baby has a better chance of surviving in Havana or Beijing; infant mortality rates are unacceptably high among those who cannot afford adequate healthcare, especially in the African-American community. And, finally, at the same time as Mr. Bush decided to veto the stem cell bill, Israeli bombs were taking the lives of hundreds of innocent Lebanese civilians, many of them children, with the tacit approval of the U.S.

Is there a connection between a religiously motivated mistrust of science, glaring social injustice, and a war in the Middle East? Mr. Bush and his administration espouse many of the ideals of the Christian Right and rely on its support. American fundamentalists are convinced that the second coming of Christ is at hand; they have developed an end-time scenario of genocidal battles based on a literal reading of Revelation that is absolutely central to their theology. Christ cannot return, however, unless, in fulfilment of biblical prophecy, the Jews are in possession of the Holy Land. Before the End, the faithful will be "raptured" or snatched up into the air in order to avoid the Tribulation. Antichrist will massacre Jews who are not baptised; but Christ will defeat the mysterious "enemy from the north," and establish a millennium of peace.

This grim eschatology, developed in the late 19th century, was in part a reaction to the "social gospel" of the more liberal Christians, who believed that human beings were naturally evolving towards perfection and could build the New Jerusalem here on earth by fighting social injustice. The fundamentalists, however, believed that God was so angry with the faithless world that he could save it only by initiating a devastating catastrophe; they would see the terrible battles of the First World War, which showed that science could be used to lethal effect in the new military technology, as the beginning of the End.

Apocalyptic vision

The fundamentalists' rejection of science is deeply linked to their apocalyptic vision. Even the relatively sober ID theorists segue easily into Rapture-speak. "Great shakings and darkness are descending on Planet Earth," says the ID philosopher Paul Nelson, "but they will be overshadowed by even more amazing displays of God's power and light. Ever the long-term strategist, YHVH is raising up a mighty army of cutting-edge Jewish End-time warriors." They all condemn the attempt to reform social ills. When applied socially, evolutionary theory "leads straight to all the woes of modern life," says the leading ID ideologue Philip Johnson: homosexuality, state-backed healthcare, divorce, single-parenthood, socialism, and abortion. All this, of course, is highly agreeable to the Bush administration, which is itself selectively leery of science. It has, for example, persistently ignored scientists' warnings about global warming. Why bother to implement the Kyoto treaty if the world is about to end? Indeed, some fundamentalists see environmental damage as a positive development, because it will hasten the apocalypse.<b>

This nihilistic religiosity is based on a perversion of the texts. The first chapter of Genesis was never intended as a literal account of the origins of life; it is a myth, a timeless story about the sanctity of the world and everything in it. Revelation was not a detailed programme for the End time; it is written in an apocalyptic genre that has quite a different dynamic.</b> When they described the Jews' return to their homeland, the Hebrew prophets were predicting the end of the Babylonian exile in the sixth century BC — not the second coming of Christ. The prophets did preach a stern message of social justice, however, and like all the major world faiths, Christianity sees charity and loving-kindness as the cardinal virtues. Fundamentalism nearly always distorts the tradition it is trying to defend.

Whatever Mr. Bush's personal beliefs, the ideology of the Christian Right is both familiar and congenial to him. This strange amalgam of ideas can perhaps throw light on the behaviour of a President, who, it is said, believes that God chose him to lead the world to Rapture, who has little interest in social reform, and whose selective concern for life issues has now inspired him to veto important scientific research. It explains his unconditional and uncritical support for Israel, his willingness to use "Jewish End-time warriors" to fulfil a vision of his own — arguably against Israel's best interests — and to see Syria and Iran (who seem to be replacing Saddam Hussein as the "enemy of the north") as entirely responsible for the unfolding tragedy.

Fundamentalists do not want a humanly constructed peace; many, indeed, regard the United Nations as the abode of Antichrist. The willingness of the U.S. to turn a blind eye to the suffering of innocent people in Lebanon will certainly fuel the rage of the extremists and lead to further acts of terror. We can only hope that it does not take us all the way to Armageddon. —

© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006

(Karen Armstrong is the author of The Battle for God: A History of Fundamentalism.)

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If you want to know how a charity organization should work with other religions? I can quote what Mata Amritananda Mayi or Sri Sri Ravi Shankar tell their western desciples when they are in America. "Please continue going to church, Synagogue or mosque as you are used. You don't have to stop that because you are coming to me. I am here only to spread the message"

I consider both these swamis as moron-swamis
Mata Amritananda mayi comes from a less educated background and I can forgive her

But Sri Sri is a marketing artist
I discovered the formula
Add jesus to the mix and get some rich white devotees
Then foolish hindus who see that he has white followers, think if white people follow him, then he must be great and join him in large numbers

Sri Sri avoids the term HINDU
he uses vedic etc

He gets into foolish dialogs with hard core mullahs like Zakir
wherein he gets humiliated

It is certain that a hard core xtian will never come to a hindu guru
Only those xtians who have serious doubts about xtianity will come to a hindu guru
Instead of reconverting these people, Sri Sri asks them to go back to the non-existent Jeshua ben Panthera
But Sri Sri may be a good option for those weak minded ones who would otherwise convert to a Christian preacher.

This worship of the White race is beyond dumb, it's re-enforcing the already bloated ego of some of the White racialists. This same thing is true in countries like Japan, where they put White kids/ people in advertisements to make it sell. If you put them on a pedestal then they will naturally look down upon you.

<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+Aug 2 2006, 09:29 AM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ Aug 2 2006, 09:29 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
I consider both these swamis as moron-swamis
Mata Amritananda mayi comes from a less educated background and I can forgive her

But Sri Sri is a marketing artist
I discovered the formula
Add jesus to the mix and get some rich white devotees
Then foolish hindus who see that he has white followers, think if white people follow him, then he must be great and join him in large numbers

Sri Sri avoids the term HINDU
he uses vedic etc

He gets into foolish dialogs with hard core mullahs like Zakir
wherein he gets humiliated

It is certain that a hard core xtian will never come to a hindu guru
Only those xtians who have serious doubts about xtianity will come to a hindu guru
Instead of reconverting these people, Sri Sri asks them to go back to the non-existent Jeshua ben Panthera
I agree that Sri Sri and Ammachi should try to convert desciples from other religions. However, that objective will not work in a supercharged secular environment of South India. If they do, they will face the fate of Kanchi Shankaracharya. I feel that it will take few decades with BJP ruling in the center for such swamis to be effective.

What needs to be done in between is to spread the message that jesus is bogus. This can put a break on speed of conversion. What I found is that many good Hindus are not willing to take up this task (not just in this forum but outside too).

A friend of mine (who happens to be a devout communist) told me sometime back. "Christianity was invented and Islam was created". i.e. Christ and Christianity never existed before and somebody invented that to influence people. Mohammed created a religion with him as the last prophet so that nobody can change what he said so as to consolidate his power.
Shankaryacharya like setup seem to up and going at Sabarimala. This news was not accessible from ndtv or telegraphindia websites. apparently, the links had been disabled after the initial posting.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Three held for 'manhandling' Sabarimala priest
Posted online: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 at 1310 hours IST

KOCHI, AUGUST 2:  <b>Three persons, including a woman, were arrested on Wednesday in connection with a complaint filed by one of the supreme priests of Sabarimala, who had alleged that he was manhandled and photographed with a woman.</b>

Police DIG K Padmakumar said that <b>Sobha John,</b> one of the witness turned accused in the case, was one among those arrested.

<b>In his complaint, the thantri, Kandararu Mohanaru, alleged that he was manhandled and photographed with a woman on July 23 in a flat at Kochi by a six-member gang.</b>

The thantri had in his complaint stated that he had gone to the flat belonging to Shobha John in search of a servant.

Soon after he reached the flat, he was allegedly manhandled and photographed, he had stated.

The two others arrested were <b>vigil</b> and <b>Anil Kumar,</b> two drivers of the woman, police sources said.

The drivers had helped in arranging and bringing into the flat the six-member gang, the sources stated.


<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Woman held in priest case
Thursday, August 03,2006

KOCHI: A woman facing charges in sex racket cases and two others were arrested in connection with the Sabarimala priest scandal.

The arrests were carried out on a complaint filed by the priest, Mohanararu Kantararu, that he was manhandled, threatened and forcibly photographed with a woman on July 23 in her flat.

Prime accused <b>Sobha John, (38), her driver Vigil (32) and helper Anil Kumar (36),</b> had “confessed” to the crime, police said.

The case took several twists and turns as the priest, who first filed a complaint that he was abducted and taken to the flat, later modified his statement, saying he had gone there on his own. But he stuck to his complaint that the accused had taken away jewels, weighing 40 sovereigns, as well as cash and demanded Rs 30 lakh.

The police, which had at first dismissed the complaint as “false”, began an investigation after he modified it.

Expressing happiness at the arrests, Mohanararu, who was removed from the post after the scandal surfaced, told reporters here that once the investigation is complete, everyone would realise that he was innocent.

The police had earlier claimed that the priest was a frequent visitor to the flat and had gone there at least 20 times of late.

Mohanararu’s lawyer K. Ramkumar said the case was moving in the right direction. “The police should investigate the conspiracy behind the attempt to malign the priest and those responsible for it,” he said. “Why the priest had gone to the flat is not important.”

The police are on the lookout for a five-member gang that is believed to have threatened the priest and taken away the valuables.

<!--QuoteBegin-rkumar+Aug 6 2006, 09:07 PM-->QUOTE(rkumar @ Aug 6 2006, 09:07 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-annamma+Jul 27 2006, 06:44 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(annamma @ Jul 27 2006, 06:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Viren+Jul 26 2006, 09:13 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Viren @ Jul 26 2006, 09:13 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->ALL: The thread topic is: <b>Christian Missionary Role In India</b> - 6

This thread is NOT for discussing whethere XYZ existed or not or which book is a better read or issues like my God is bigger than your God.

But is it possible to discuss the "christian missionary role in India" without discussing Christ?[right][snapback]54681[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is the conection betwin Jesus parable and what missionary do today ?

Ashoka made buddhism the religion of the state. This of course was the greatest blow to Brahmanism. The Brahmins lost all state patronage and were neglected to a secondary and subsidiary position in the Empire of Ashoka."

It may be said to have been suppressed for the simple reason that Ashoka prohibited all animal sacrifices which constituted a part of classical Brahminism.

The Brahmins had not only lost state patronage but they lost their occupation which mainly consisted in performing rituals
Pushyamitra raise the banner of revolt against the rule of Mauryas. Pushyamitra was of the Sunga Brahmin clan by Gotra.

The Sungas were Brahmins, who believed in animal sacrifices and soma sacrifices. The Sungas were therefore in dire straits under the prohibition on animal sacrifices throughout the Maurya Empire proclaimed in the very Rock Edict by Ashoka.

Pushyamitra, after his accession, launched a violent campaign of persecution against Buddhists and Buddhism. By this proclamation Pushyamitra set a price of 100 gold pieces on the head of every Buddhist monk & hence their slaughter.

This is the only mention of a persecution made by hindus.Do you know another?
Compare this whit ten's of persecutions made by inchizition and political christianism all over the globe.

Why catholic church dont bann by an edict bribe-conversion or force-conversion once and for all?
Why they dont bann the ethno-philetism like Nagaland for Christ movements?

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Pushyamitra, after his accession, launched a violent campaign of persecution against Buddhists and Buddhism. By this proclamation Pushyamitra set a price of 100 gold pieces on the head of every Buddhist monk & hence their slaughter.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why Pushyamitra was more "secular" than Ashoka

Koenraad Elst

Let us elaborate one example of pro-Buddhist bias in modern indologist scholarship. It has to do with a story of alleged Hindu persecution of Buddhism by Pushyamitra, a general in the service of the declining Maurya dynasty, who founded the Shunga dynasty after a coup d'état. This story serves as the standard secularist refutation of the "myth" that Hinduism has always been tolerant.

Thus, the Marxist historian Gargi Chakravartty writes: "Another myth has been meticulously promoted with regard to the tolerance of the Hindu rulers. Let us go back to the end of second century BC. Divyavadana, in a text of about the second-third century AD, depicts Pushyamitra Shunga as a great persecutor of Buddhists. In a crusading march with a huge army he destroyed stupas, burnt monasteries and killed monks. This stretched up to Shakala, i.e. modern Sialkot, where he announced a reward of 100 gold coins to the person who would bring the head of a Buddhist monk. Even if this is an exaggeration, the acute hostility and tensions between Pushyamitra and the monks cannot be denied." (Gargi Chakravartty: "BJP-RSS and Distortion of History", in Pratul Lahiri, ed.: Selected Writings on Communalism, People's Publishing House, Delhi 1994, p.166-167)

We need not comment on Chakravartty's misreading of Divyavadana as a person's name rather than a book title. Before considering the context, remark the unobtrusive bias in the assumption that the supposedly "undeniable" conflict between the king and the monks proves the king's intolerance. The question of responsibility is evaded: what had been the monks' own contribution to the conflict? When Shivaji had a conflict with the Brahmins (see Jadunath Sarkar: Shivaji, Orient Longman, Delhi 1992/1952, p.161, 165-167), all secularists and most Hindus blame the "wily, greedy" Brahmins; but the Buddhist monks, by contrast, are assumed to be blameless.

The story is given in two near-contemporaneous (2nd century AD) Buddhist histories, the Ashokavadana and the Divyavadana; the two narratives are almost verbatim the same and very obviously have a common origin (Avadana, "narrative", is the Buddhist equivalent of Purana; Divyavadana = "divine narrative"). This non-contemporary story (which surfaces more than three centuries after the alleged facts) about Pushyamitra's offering money for the heads of monks is rendered improbable by the well-attested historical fact that he allowed and patronized the construction of monasteries and Buddhist universities in his domains. After Ashoka's lavish sponsorship of Buddhism, it is perfectly possible that Buddhist institutions fell on slightly harder times under the Shungas, but persecution is quite another matter. The famous historian of Buddhism Etienne Lamotte has observed: "To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof." (History of Indian Buddhism, Institut Orientaliste, Louvain-la-Neuve 1988/1958, p.109).

In consulting the source texts I noticed a significant literary fact which I have not seen mentioned in the scholarly literature (e.g. Lamotte, just quoted), and which I want to put on record. First of all, a look at the critical edition of the Ashokavadana ("Illustrious Acts of Ashoka") tells a story of its own concerning the idealization of Buddhism in modern India. This is how Sujitkumar Mukhopadhyaya, the editor of the Ashokavadana, relates this work's testimony about Ashoka doing with a rival sect that very thing of which Pushyamitra is accused later on:

"At that time, an incident occurred which greatly enraged the king. A follower of the Nirgrantha (Mahavira) painted a picture, showing Buddha prostrating himself at the feet of the Nirgrantha. Ashoka ordered all the Ajivikas of Pundravardhana (North Bengal) to be killed. In one day, eighteen thousand Ajivikas lost their lives. A similar kind of incident took place in the town of Pataliputra. A man who painted such a picture was burnt alive with his family. It was announced that whoever would bring the king the head of a Nirgrantha would be rewarded with a dinara (a gold coin). As a result of this, thousands of Nirgranthas lost their lives." (S. Mukhopadhyaya: The Ashokavadana, Sahitya Akademi, Delhi 1963, p.xxxvii; in footnote, Mukhopadhyaya correctly notes that the author "seems to have confused the Nirgranthas with the Ajivikas", a similar ascetic sect; Nirgrantha, "freed from fetters", meaning Jain) Only when Vitashoka, Ashoka's favourite Arhat (an enlightened monk, a Theravada-Buddhist saint), was mistaken for a Nirgran- tha and killed by a man desirous of the reward, did Ashoka revoke the order.

Typically, Mukhopadhyaya refuses to believe his eyes at this demythologization of the "secular" emperor Ashoka: "This is one of the best chapters of the text. The subject, the style, the composition, everything here is remarkable. In every shloka there is a poetic touch.(...) But the great defect is also to be noticed. Here too Ashoka is described as dreadfully cruel. If the central figure of this story were not a historic personage as great and well-known as Ashoka, we would have nothing to say. To say that Ashoka, whose devotion to all religious sects is unique in the history of humanity (as is well-known through his edicts) persecuted the Jains or the Ajivikas is simply absurd. And why speak of Ashoka alone? There was no Buddhist king anywhere in India who persecuted the Jains or the Ajivikas or any other sect." (The Ashokavadana, p.xxxviii)

This just goes to show how far the idealization of Buddhism and Ashoka has gotten out of hand in Nehruvian India. When the modern myth of Ashoka as the great secular-Buddhist ruler is contradicted by an ancient source (one outspokenly favourable to Buddhism and Ashoka) which shows him persecuting rival schools of thought, the modern scholar (a Hindu Brahmin) still insists on upholding the myth, and dismisses the actual information in the ancient source as a "great defect". Moreover, the non-persecution of other religions, claimed here for Ashoka against the very evidence under discussion, was not unique at all: it was the rule among Hindu kings throughout history, and the Buddha himself had been one of its beneficiaries.

It is at the end of the Ashokavadana that we find the oft-quoted story that Pushyamitra offered one dinara for every shramanashirah, "head of a Buddhist monk". (Mukhopadhyaya: The Ashokavadana, p.134) Not that he got many monks killed, for, according to the account given, one powerful Arhat created monks' heads by magic and gave these to the people to bring to the court, so that they could collect the award without cutting off any real monk's head.

At any rate, the striking fact, so far not mentioned in the Pushyamitra controversy, is that the main line of the narrative making the allegation against Pushyamitra is a carbon copy of the just-quoted account of Ashoka's own offer to pay for every head of a monk from a rivalling sect. Hagiographies are notorious for competitive copying (e.g. appropriating the miracle of a rival saint, multiplied by two or more, for one's own hero); in this case, it may have taken the form of attributing a negative feat of the hero onto the rival.

But there are two differences. Firstly, in the account concerning Pushyamitra, a miracle episode forms a crucial element, and this does not add to the credibility of the whole. And secondly, Ashoka belongs to the writer's own Buddhist camp, whereas Pushyamitra is described as an enemy of Buddhism. When something negative is said about an enemy (i.c. Pushyamitra), it is wise to reserve one's acceptance of the allegation until independent confirmation is forthcoming; by contrast, when a writer alleges that his own hero has committed a crime, there is much more reason to presume the correctness of the allegation. In the absence of external evidence, the best thing we can do for now is to draw the logical conclusion from the internal evidence: the allegation against Pushyamitra is much less credible than the allegation against Ashoka.

Mukhopadhyaya can only save Ashoka's secular reputation by accusing the Ashokavadana author of a lie, viz. of the false allegation that Ashoka had persecuted Nirgranthas. Unfortunately, a lie would not enhance the author's credibility as a witness against Pushyamitra, nor as a witness for the laudable acts of Ashoka which make up a large part of the text. So, Mukhopadhyaya tries to present this lie (which only he himself alleges) as a hagiographically acceptable type of lie: "In order to show the greatness of Buddhism, the orthodox author degraded it by painting the greatest Buddhist of the world as a dreadful religious fanatic." (The Ashokavadana, p.xxxviii).

However, contrary to Mukhopadhyaya's explanation, there is no hint in the text that the author meant to "show the greatness of Buddhism" by "painting the greatest Buddhist as a religious fanatic". By this explanation, Mukhopadhyaya means that the writer first made Ashoka commit a great crime (the persecution of the Nirgranthas) to illustrate the greatness of Buddhism by sheer contrast, viz. as the factor which made Ashoka give up this type of criminal behaviour. There is a famous analogy for this: the cruelty of Ashoka's conquest of Kalinga was exaggerated by scribes in order to highlight the violence-renouncing effect of Ashoka's subsequent conversion to Buddhism. But in this passage, Buddhism plays no role in Ashoka's change of heart: it is only the sight of his own friend Vitashoka, killed by mistake, which makes him revoke the order. And it was his commitment to Buddhism which prompted Ashoka to persecute the irreverent Nirgranthas in the first place.

Buddhism does not gain from this account, and if a Buddhist propagandist related it nonetheless, it may well be that it was a historical fact too well-known at the time to be omitted. By contrast, until proof of the contrary is forthcoming, the carbon-copy allegation against Pushyamitra may very reasonably be dismissed as sectarian propaganda. Yet, we have seen how a 20th-century Hindu-born scholar will twist and turn the literary data in order to uphold a sectarian and miracle-based calumny against the Hindu ruler Pushyamitra, and to explain away a sobring testimony about the fanaticism of Ashoka, that great secularist avant la lettre. Such is the quality of the "scholarship" deployed to undermine the solid consensus that among the world religions, Hinduism has always been the most tolerant by far.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Harassement and Torture by TTD Vigilance and Officials</b>
[ The following is a report of Sr Om Prakash Agarwal, Southern Coordinator of Sudharshan TV, sent to the authorities of the Sudharshan TV, regarding the harassement and torture by TTD Vigilance and Officials meted out to him and a Hindu social worker who went to Tirupati-Tirumalai to investigate about the Christian conversion and propaganda activities in the areas belonging to the most ancient Hindu temple where preaching and practice of any other religion is banned by law. The Christian employees in the service of Tirupati Tirumala Devasthanam, emboldened by the clandestine support of the Andhra Government headed by a Christian Chief Minister, had the guts to lay their hands on a Hindu media person and subject him to inhuman torture. The video cassttes seized from him have not been returned to him though he was let off. The Udupi Pejawar Mutt Peedaatheeswar, Sri Vishwesa Teertha, had appointed a fact finding committee consisting of a retired High Court Judge, a retired Director General of Police of Andhra and a retired Vice-Chancellor had come out earlier with startling revelations of Christian activities in Tirumala Tirupath and sadhus and sants headed by the Udupi Peedaatheeswar had also demonstrated in front of the TTD Office and held a massive conference in Tirupathi to protest against the Christian activities. The media persons went there to find for themselves the true story and the man-handling of the media persons amounts to violation of press rights as well as human rights. The awakened Hindus, Hindu leaders and religous heads must strongly condemn this high-handedness, demand an enquiry and punishment of the guilty.The video discs seized from the reporter should also be returned to him. We appeal to Hindu leaders and religious heads to take up this matter with all seriousness.--Sadhu Prof. V. Rangarajan]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Respected Sir,

                  I would like to bring to your kind notice that, I, Omprakash Agarwal, working as a Reporter and South India Co-ordinator in your Esteemed Channel was Harassed and Tortured by TTD officials on 30th July to 1st August 2006.

  Sir, I went to Tirupathi after consultation with Senior Executives and your goodself to cover a program on Christian Religious Propoganda in Tirupathi-Tirumala for our Channel based on reports from various leading dailies of South India (ie. Vijay Karnataka, Samyukata Karnataka, Indian Express and many more print and electornic media). I also took tips from the Report of the "Fact Finding Committe" deputed by Pejawar Math Swami Sri Vishweshwar Thirtha Swamiji to probe into the affairs.

Sir, As you are aware I went to Tirupathi on 29th to Cover the Episode, I made some coverage in local Tirupathi area on 29th and on 30th Morning, I went to Tirumala Hills to cover the program with a local escort by name Damodaran aged 20-22 Years, who was familiar with local language and place.  Damodaran had arranged a vehicle to take me to Tirumala. We first went to the Foothills known as Alipiri around 10:45 A.M (30th July), We reached Tirumala around 12:20 P.M and I got down near Krishna-Arjun park at the entrance of Tirumala to take few shots of some shops selling Cross and other items. Based on information received, I left for Papavinasham where there were reports of conversions taking place. We searched all the place in Papavinasham but could not gather any information, later we left for a place called as Balaji Nagar on the outskirsts of Tirumala. We enquired from various sources on the route to Balaji Nagar, as it was in news for propogation and other religious activities.

At around 3 P.M, we entered Balaji Nagar searching for houses conducting Sunday prayers, Balaji Nagar is a very large Residential area which houses to about 1,000 - 2000, but almost after1 hour search we could not trace anything, We continued our search and finally around 4: 15 P.M, we came across a few houses where Cross marks were put outside the houses. We immediatley stopped our vehicle and I took video shots of 2-3 houses. After taking shots we went futher to enquire if there were any Christian families in the locality. The residents denied saying that there were no one there, When we were just talking to the ladies, two  people came to us and enquired who we were.  I said I am  a reporter and he is my escort from Tirupathi.

They did not believe us. They alleged that we only painted the cross and were shooting, They caught hold of us and within fraction of second over 60 people had gathered at the venue and harmed us physically. They took away our belongings containing our Handycam, Mini Dvs, Mike set, Channel (ID) Logo, & Bag containing clothes and cash. After a few moments The Vigilance department Officials of TTD arrived, They too harmed us and snatched away our mobile phone and took into custody all our belongings. Later they took us to the Vigilance Office led by NAGU REDDY ( V.C.O) in Tirumala and beat me and my escort Damodaran. After sometime we were taken to Joint Executive Officer Shri Dharma Reddy, there also we were beaten with sticks and were booted by this Nagu Reddy (Vigilance officer), his assistants (Murthy and others) and Dharma Reddy. Later they began to see our Video footage which we had covered. We had taken a few shots of shops in Tirumala selling Cross items. The Vigilance Officer asked me to accompany to pin point the shop where it was sold. They took me in a high secuity vehicle as a criminal to the shop. I pin pointed the shop from where Cross was sold. The shop keeper was bought to the Vigilance office and he was made to say by the Executive officer and Vigilance officer that it was I who gave him to cross to sell it. That shop keeper too was threatened to tell lies as he too was at their mercy. We were shocked seeing this behaviour of the officials who were all there to fabricate cases against us for shooting this in Tirumala.

I protested and pleaded to the executive officer to show the Tape once again so that I could explain him. I pinpointed that all the products in the shop keepers premises had same company brand packing. Rather than accepting the mistake, he immediately asked his men to delete this portion of shots from the Video Dv's. The Torture continued till late night and they were forcing us to confess that we belonged to some organisaition or have been sent by some agent to blaspheme Tirupathi-Tirumala. Vigilance Officer had gone to the extent of threathening us with a loaded PISTOL to confess, otherwise he would get us killed in an ecounter declaring us as ISI Agents, Terrorists, or Naxalites.  But by the grace of God and intervention by the Sub-ordinates, it did not work out. Before that they had invited all the Media persons both from the print and electronic media at the vigilance office and paraded us, and gave a  one sided press note to them without allowing us to speak with the media men.

At around 2:00 A.M on 31st morning, we were sent to II Town Police Station in Tirumala. The Sub Inspector interrogated us and we apprised him about all the events which took place and placed all the facts before him. After giving our statement, he provided us some place to sleep and said he will come back in the morning.  On 31st Morning at 8:00 A.M, DSP of Tirumala Shri. Satyanarayana had come to the station to interrogate us, he interrogated for around 1/2 an hour and left the place. Again around 1:30 P.M, we were shifted to DSP Office and there we were interrogated by the Superitendent of Police Shri Gopal Krishna. We put all facts before him. He was convinced by it and he openly expressed in the presence of other officials that we were INNOCENT. Later he made arrangements for Lunch for both of us.  Later in the evening the Police Officials had a meeting with the TTD officials and there they had decided to release us. At Around 9 P.M, the Police Department arranged for a VIP Darshan at the temple and they later asked us to write a statement at the Tirumala II Town Police Station.

Two Sub-Inspectors took our statements and after completing, we were requested to leave the place. The S I said it was already 12: 00 A.M and it was not safe to leave at that time. He said that we could leave in the morning.

We were forced to spend one more night in Police Station and we anxiously waited for the dawn. Next day morning the Sub Inspector arrived around 7 A.M (1st August 2006) and we asked his permission to leave. He said he would consult the Supdt of Police and only after that  we could leave the place.

When the S I spoke to S P, he refused stating that "there is pressure from Higher officials not to let you, as we need to interrogate both of them". It was frustrating moments for us, in the meanwhile our friends from other media on hearing our news had come all the way from Bangalore to bail us out. My escort was taken to SP office in Tirupathi and there he was interrogated by the Crime Police. That went on upto 7 in the evening.  At around 9 P.M the S.I said that I could leave for Bangalore. I was bought down by a constable who escorted me upto Tirupathi.

The SI asked us to leave for Bangalore, he also sent his constable along with us to Bangalore. Next morning we reached our house and the constable accompained me till my house,  He left after he took an undertaking from my mother stating that I have reached Bangalore safely.

Sir, I did not understand why there was a conspiracy to fabricate us in false cases. Is it just because we had collected some information and video shots of some incidents in Tirumala which are already popular with other Media.

I will not be surprised, if they may cook and fabricate some more cases against me to suppress some more facts. THE CONSPIRACY HAS BEEN EXPOSED.

A) Is it not an Attack on freedom of Press?
B) Is it not human rights violation to beat brutally with sticks and kick with boots?
C) Is it not a Conpiracy to Implicate us in False Charges?
D) Is it not a violation of press rights to Seize Press Material?
E) Is it not human right violation to issue Threat to our Lives?

If it is so, then what for is the Right to Information Act ?

Thanking you
Yours Truly
Omprakash Agarwal
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Proselytisation FIR needs no sanction
Dhananjay Mahapatra
7 Aug, 2006
Times of India

NEW DELHI: This Supreme Court order is bound to have a ripple effect on
religious leaders who in one way or the other induce people to convert.

Despite the bar on courts to take cognizance of an offence relating to
proselytisation without the prosecution obtaining prior sanction either
from the Central government, state government or the district
magistrate, the police can lodge FIRs and arrest those indulging in such
activity, the court has ruled.

<b>This ruling assumes significance in the wake of serious opposition by
secular forces to efforts by some states to enact laws to prevent
proselytisation. </b>They had felt that these laws were meant to persecute those
arranging legitimate conversions.

Their views, till date, appeared well entrenched in the Criminal
Procedure Code which protected religious leaders from harassment at the hands
of police for their efforts to get more followers to their faith.

Section 191(1-A) of CrPC says that \'no court shall take cognizance\"
of an offence involving inducement for conversion unless the prosecution
has obtained previous sanction of the \"Central government or of the
state government or of the district magistrate\".

The Supreme Court on Friday drew an important line between courts
taking cognizance of the offence pertaining to proselytisation and police
lodging FIRs and arresting the erring religious figures indulging in the

A Bench comprising Justices G P Mathur and Dalveer Bhandari said police
do not require prior sanction of anybody in lodging an FIR or arresting
a religious leader, if there is a complaint of proselytisation against

On the receiving end of this ruling was a Karnataka pastor P Raju. The
apex court set aside an order of the High Court, which had quashed a
case of proselytisation lodged against him under Section 153-B of Indian
Penal Code (IPC).
The complaint accused Raju of appealing to a Sankranthi congregation on
January 14, 2005, at Ramapura asking the people to convert to
Christianity and promising many benefits and facilities not available to them in
the Hindu religion. The Karnataka government had appealed against the
HC order quashing the case against him.</b>

The court explained that absence of prior sanction, a mandatory
pre-requisite for a court to take cognizance of such offence, would not
prevent a magistrate from remanding to police or judicial custody of an
accused arrested by the police for the offence of proselytisation.

There is no bar against registration of a criminal case or
investigation by the police agency or submission of a chargesheet against the
accused in such cases, Justice Mathur, writing for the Bench, said.

Mere production of the arrested accused before the magistrate and the
latter remanding him to custodial detention does not amount to taking
cognizance of the offence, for which alone prior sanction is required,
the Bench said.

The HC clearly erred in quashing the proceedings against the pastor on
the ground that prior sanction of the Central government or of the
state government or of the district magistrate had not been obtained, it
Proselytisation - Supreme Court's order copy
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 814 of 2006

State of Karnataka & Anr

Pastor P. Raju

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/08/2006

G.P. Mathur & Dalveer Bhandari

(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5450 of 2005)

Leave granted.

2. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23.2.2005 of Karnataka High Court by  which initiation of criminal proceedings against the respondent under  Section 153-B IPC were quashed in exercise of jurisdiction under  Section 482 Cr.P.C.

3. One R.N. Lokesha son of R.S. Narayanappa resident of  Ramapura, Channapatna, lodged an FIR alleging that at about 7.30  p.m. on 14.1.2005, he along with some other persons was celebrating  Sankranthi festival when the respondent Pastor P. Raju, who is a  member of Christian community, came there and made an appeal to  them to get converted to Christian religion where they would get  many benefits and facilities which were not available to them in  Hindu religion to which they belong. It is also alleged that many  persons who were present there resented the appeal made by the  respondent and strongly opposed the plea or assertion for their  conversion from Hindu religion to Christian religion. On the basis of  the FIR, a case as Crime No.8 of 2005 was registered under Section  153-B IPC at the concerned police station. The respondent was  arrested on 15.1.2005 and was produced before a Magistrate on the  same day who remanded him to judicial custody as no application for  bail had been filed. Subsequently, a bail application was moved under  Section 436 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate which was rejected  on the ground that the offence under Section 153-B IPC being a non- bailable offence, the power under the aforesaid provision could not be  exercised as the said provision empowered the Court to grant bail in  bailable offences only. The respondent filed a petition under Section  482 Cr.P.C. on 27.1.2005 for quashing of the proceedings initiated  against him under Section 153-B IPC in case Crime No.8 of 2005.  This petition was allowed by the High Court by the order under  challenge and the entire proceedings initiated against the respondent  were quashed.

4. The principal submission which was made before the High  Court on behalf of the respondent was that before initiating any  proceedings under Section 153-B IPC, the police ought to have  obtained previous sanction of the Central Government or of the State  Government or of the District Magistrate as required by Section  196(1-A) Cr.P.C. and in the absence of such a sanction having been  obtained, the proceedings initiated against the respondent were illegal  and without jurisdiction. After hearing counsel for the parties, the  learned judge framed the question for consideration in the following  manner :-

"Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel  appearing for the petitioner and the learned H.C.G.P. for  the respondent/State, the point that arises for my  consideration and decision is whether initiation of  criminal proceedings against the petitioner is bad in law  and whether prior sanction to prosecute a person who  tries to instigate Hindus to convert into Christianity  requires any prior sanction to register a case and arrest  the accused under Section 153-B (1) of IPC ?"
(emphasis supplied)

5. The High Court has held that as the investigating agency had  not obtained previous sanction of the Central Government or of the  State Government or of the District Magistrate as required by Section  196(1-A) Cr.P.C., the initiation of criminal proceedings against the  respondent is bad in law and consequently it was liable to be quashed.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant State of  Karnataka, learned counsel for the respondent Pastor P. Raju and have  perused the record.

7. The heading of Chapter XIV of Code of Criminal Procedure is
"Conditions Requisite For Initiation Of Proceedings". The first  provision in this Chapter is Section 190 and it deals with the power of  the Magistrate to take cognizance of offences. There are some other  provisions in this Chapter which create an embargo on the power of  the Court to take cognizance of offences committed by persons  enumerated therein except on the complaint in writing of certain  specified persons or with the previous sanction of certain specified  authorities. Section 196(1-A) Cr.P.C. with which we are concerned  here reads as under :-

"196(1-A). No Court shall take cognizance of 

(a) any offence punishable under Section 153-B or  sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of Section 505 of  the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), or

(b) a criminal conspiracy to commit such offence. except with the previous sanction of the Central  Government or of the State Government or of the District

A plain reading of this provision will show that no Court can
take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 153-B or sub-
section (2) or sub-section (3) of Section 505 of Indian Penal Code or
a criminal conspiracy to commit such offence except with the
previous sanction of the Central Government or of the State
Government or of the District Magistrate. The opening words of the
Section are "No Court shall take cognizance" and consequently the
bar created by the provision is against taking of cognizance by the
Court. There is no bar against registration of a criminal case or
investigation by the police agency or submission of a report by the
police on completion of investigation, as contemplated by Section 173
Cr.P.C. If a criminal case is registered, investigation of the offence is
done and the police submits a report as a result of such investigation
before a Magistrate without the previous sanction of the Central
Government or of the State Government or of the District Magistrate,
there will be no violation of Section 196(1-A) Cr.P.C. and no
illegality of any kind would be committed.

8. After the FIR had been lodged and a criminal case had been
registered against the respondent under Section 153-B IPC, the police
arrested him as the offence disclosed was a cognizable offence.
Thereafter, the respondent was produced before a Magistrate and the
Magistrate remanded him to judicial custody. The High Court seems
to have taken the view that as the learned Magistrate remanded the
respondent to judicial custody when he was produced before him in
accordance with Section 167 Cr.P.C., it amounted to taking
cognizance of the offence. The question that arises is whether passing
of an order of remand would amount to taking of cognizance of the

9. Several provisions in Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal
Procedure use the word "cognizance". The very first Section in the
said Chapter, viz., Section 190 lays down how cognizance of offences
will be taken by a Magistrate. However, the word "cognizance" has
not been defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The dictionary
meaning of the word "cognizance" is - 'judicial hearing of a matter'.
The meaning of the word has been explained by judicial
pronouncements and it has acquired a definite connotation. The
earliest decision of this Court on the point is R.R. Chari v. State of
U.P. AIR 1951 SC 207, wherein it was held :-
"Taking cognizance does not involve any formal action
or indeed action of any kind but occurs as soon as a
Magistrate as such applies his mind to the suspected
commission of an offence."

In Darshan Singh Ram Kishan v. State of Maharashtra AIR
1971 SC 2372, while considering Section 190 of the Code of 1908, it
was observed that "taking cognizance does not involve any formal
action or indeed action of any kind but occurs as soon as a Magistrate
as such applies his mind to the suspected commission of an offence.
Cognizance, therefore, takes place at a point when a magistrate first
takes judicial notice of an offence. This is the position whether the
magistrate takes cognizance of an offence on a complaint, or on a
police report, or upon information of a person other than a police
officer." In Narayandas Bhagwandas Madhavdas v. The State of
West Bengal AIR 1959 SC 1118 it was held that before it can be said
that any Magistrate has taken cognizance of any offence under Section
190(1)(a) Criminal Procedure Code, he must not only have applied his
mind to the contents of the petition but must have done so for the
purpose of proceeding in a particular way as indicated in the
subsequent provisions of the Chapter  proceeding under Section 200
and thereafter sending it for inquiry and report under Section 202. It
was observed that there is no special charm or any magical formula in
the __expression "taking cognizance" which merely means judicial
application of the mind of the Magistrate to the facts mentioned in the
complaint with a view to taking further action. It was also observed
that what Section 190 contemplates is that the Magistrate takes
cognizance once he makes himself fully conscious and aware of the
allegations made in the complaint and decides to examine or test the
validity of the said allegations. The Court then referred to the three
situations enumerated in sub-section (1) of Section 190 upon which a
Magistrate could take cognizance. Similar view was expressed in
Kishun Singh & Ors. v. State of Bihar (1993) 2 SCC 16 that when the
Magistrate takes notice of the accusations and applies his mind to the
allegations made in the complaint or police report or information and
on being satisfied that the allegations, if proved, would constitute an
offence, decides to initiate judicial proceedings against the alleged
offender, he is said to have taken cognizance of the offence. In State
of West Bengal v. Mohd. Khalid & Ors. (1995) 1 SCC 684 the Court
after taking note of the fact that the __expression had not been defined in
the Code held :-
"......... In its broad and literal sense, it means taking  notice of an offence. This would include the intention of  initiating judicial proceedings against the offender in  respect of that offence and taking steps to see whether  there is any basis for initiating judicial proceedings or for  other purposes. The word 'cognizance' indicates the  point when a Magistrate or a Judge first takes judicial  notice of an offence. It is entirely a different thing from  initiation of proceedings; rather it is the condition  precedent to the initiation of proceedings by the  Magistrate or the Judge. Cognizance is taken of cases  and not of persons."

It is necessary to mention here that taking cognizance of an
offence is not the same thing as issuance of process. Cognizance is
taken at the initial stage when the Magistrate applies his judicial mind
to the facts mentioned in a complaint or to police report or upon
information received from any other person that an offence has been
committed. The issuance of process is at a subsequent stage when
after considering the material placed before it the Court decides to
proceed against the offenders against whom a prima facie case is
made out.

10. In the present case neither any complaint had been filed nor any
police report had been submitted nor any information had been given
by any person other than the police officer before the Magistrate
competent to take cognizance of the offence. After the FIR had been
lodged and a case had been registered under Section 153-B IPC, the
respondent was arrested by the police and thereafter he had been
produced before the Magistrate. The Magistrate had merely passed an
order remanding him to judicial custody. Section 167 Cr.P.C. finds
place in Chapter XII which deals with Information To The Police And
Their Powers To Investigate. This Section gives the procedure which
has to be followed when investigation cannot be completed within
twenty-four hours and requires that whenever any person is arrested
and detained in custody and it appears that the investigation cannot be
completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by Section 57
and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information
is well founded, he shall be forthwith transmitted to the nearest
Judicial Magistrate along with copy of the entries in the diary. Sub-
section (2) of Section 167 will show that even a Magistrate who has
no jurisdiction to try the case can authorize the detention of the
accused. A limited role has to be performed by the Judicial
Magistrate to whom the accused has been forwarded, viz., to authorize
his detention. This is anterior to Section 190 Cr.P.C. which confers
power upon a Magistrate to take cognizance of an offence. Therefore,
an order remanding an accused to judicial custody does not amount to
taking cognizance of an offence. In such circumstances Section
196(1-A) Cr.P.C. can have no application at all and the High Court
clearly erred in quashing the proceedings on the ground that previous
sanction of the Central Government or of the State Government or of
the District Magistrate had not been obtained. It is important to note
that on the view taken by the High Court, no person accused of an
offence, which is of the nature which requires previous sanction of a
specified authority before taking of cognizance by the Court, can ever
be arrested nor such an offence can be investigated by the police. The
specified authority empowered to grant sanction does so after
applying his mind to the material collected during the course of
investigation. There is no occasion for grant of sanction soon after the
FIR is lodged nor such a power can be exercised before completion of
investigation and collection of evidence. Therefore, the whole
premise on the basis of which the proceedings have been quashed by
the High Court is wholly erroneous in law and is liable to be set aside.

11. There is another aspect of the matter which deserves notice.
The FIR in the case was lodged on 15.1.2005 and the petition under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed within 12 days on 27.1.2005 when the
investigation had just commenced. The petition was allowed by the
High Court on 23.2.2005 when the investigation was still under
progress. No report as contemplated by Section 173 Cr.P.C. had been
submitted by the incharge of the police station concerned to the
Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. Section
482 Cr.P.C. saves inherent powers of the High Court and such a
power can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any Court
or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power can be
exercised to quash the criminal proceedings pending in any Court but
the power cannot be exercised to interfere with the statutory power of
the police to conduct investigation in a cognizable offence. This
question has been examined in detail in Union of India v. Prakash P.
Hinduja & Anr. (2003) 6 SCC 195, where after referring to King
Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad AIR 1945 PC 18, H.N. Rishbud &
Inder Singh v. The State of Delhi AIR 1955 SC 196, State of West
Bengal v. SN Basak AIR 1963 SC 447, Abhinandan Jha & Ors. v.
Dinesh Mishra AIR 1968 SC 117 and State of Bihar & Anr. v. JAC
Saldanha & Ors. (1980) 1 SCC 554, it was observed as under in para
20 of the reports :-
"20. Thus the legal position is absolutely clear and also
settled by judicial authorities that the Court would not
interfere with the investigation or during the course of
investigation which would mean from the time of the
lodging of the First Information Report till the
submission of the report by the officer in charge of police
station in court under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., this field
being exclusively reserved for the investigating agency."

This being the settled legal position, the High Court ought not
to have interfered with and quashed the entire proceedings in exercise
of power conferred by Section 482 Cr.P.C. when the matter was still
at the investigation stage.

12. In the concluding paragraph of the judgment under challenge,
the High Court has also observed that considering the facts and
circumstances and the allegations made in the complaint it could be
said that the initiation of criminal proceedings is abuse of process of
Court and miscarriage of justice. No reasons in support of the
aforesaid observation have been given. As already stated, the case
was still under investigation and the police was in the process of
collecting evidence. The sweeping remark made by the High Court in
the circumstances of the case was wholly unjustified.

13. For the reasons mentioned above, the appeal is allowed and the
judgment and order dated 23.2.2005 of the High Court is set aside. It
is made clear that any observation made in this order is only for the
limited purpose of deciding the appeal and shall not be construed as
an __expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
With modern Hindu India facing a seige from Islam and Isaism it is important to study the demise of heathen Europe. This page gives a good timeline of Isaism's blood-stained passage through Eastern Europe.
Isaistic terrorism in Europe

In Search of Identity
Debates on Religious Conversion in India
bookshot Add to Cart
ISBN13: 9780195677126ISBN10: 0195677129 Paperback, 262 pages
Sep 2005, In Stock due Sep 06 2006
$19.95 (06)
Shipping Details
This builds on a historical account of Hindu-Christian debates from the days of the Raj and analyzes the later of later discussions in the Indian Parliament and also the roles of legislative measures adopted. the study seeks to reveal the major arguments against conversion, for it offers critiques of both while being cognizant of the several reinterpretations of conversion.

"His distinctive contribution lies in his theological analysis of both Hindu objections to conversion and of the reflections on the meaning of conversion among Indian theologians prompted by those objections and by wider changes in Christian theological thinking of the twentieth century. The clear style and broad scope of the book will make it a useful introfuction to the topic even for undergraduate students." --Religious Studies Review

Religious Conversion in India
Modes, Motivations, and Meanings
Rowena Robinson and Sathianathan Clarke
bookshot Add to Cart
ISBN13: 9780195663297ISBN10: 0195663292 Hardback, 436 pages
Aug 2003, In Stock
$45.00 (08)
Shipping Details

This volume covers conversion in India to Islam, Christianity, Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism. It looks at the influences on conversion in a comparative perspective. The book seeks to look at the pre-British, British and post-Independence periods.

Anti-Christian Violence in India

Vinay Lal

At a Glance...

It is reasonable to argue that the ascendancy of the Bharatiya Janata Party [hereafter BJP] to relative supremacy in Indian politics over the course of the last few years bears a direct relationship to the considerable, even dramatic,increase in violence against Christians and other minorities in India. In this short paper, I shall be furnishing a brief chronicle of the recent violence, besides foraying, again briefly, into such questions as the politics of conversion, the inaccuracy of claims regarding the alleged growth of the Christian population in India, and so on.

Christians in Modern India: A Brief Political and Social Survey

The history of Christianity in India goes back to a few decades after the birth of Christ, and there is evidence of Syrian Christians having established themselves in Kerala before 100 AD. India’s contacts with Christianity were renewed with the coming of the Portuguese in 1498: this was wholly inauspicious for the modern beginning of Christianity in India, since the conduct of the Portugese is without exaggeration described as barbaric. The Christian presence became more marked in some respects in the nineteenth century after British rule had been consolidated in India, though here again the pretense was often maintained that British rule had no association with Christianity. The sleight of hand is witnessed, for example, in James Mill’s fatal characterization of Indian history into three periods: Hindu; Muslim; and British.

Some of the anti-Christian sentiments harbored by contemporary Hindu extremists dwell on the time when India was under British colonial rule, and when a substantial number of Christian missionaries openly voiced crude anti-Hindu sentiments. There is also the widespread belief among advocates of a more militant Hinduism that the colonial state encouraged conversions of lower-caste Hindus and otherwise promoted Christianity as a state religion, but on the whole there is little to substantiate this view, though doubtless Christians were looked upon more sympathetically than they had been in India under Muslim or Hindu rulers. It is a remarkable fact that in 200 years when India was under British rule, the Christian population of India never exceeded 3% of the population. Though the sentiments of Hindus were often flagrantly wounded by Christian missionaries, whose insensitivity and arrogance come across in countless number of texts, missionaries today are nonetheless more often remembered for performing social work in both metropolitan centers and more remote parts of the country, and for establishing schools where the bulk of the Indian elites still receive their schooling (see Bhavana Pankaj, "India’s Christians Protest Persecution", Asian Week [7 January 1999]).

The reality faced by Christians in modern India is that they are a small minority and not noticeably present in public life. They are dwarfed by the Hindus (nearly 78% of the population) and Muslims (around 14% of the population). The much smaller Parsi population has had a far more tangible and far-reaching impact on Indian civilization as well as what is called "nation-building". The militant Hindus have spread a canard that the Christian population is increasing rapidly in India, and they have attempted to create the widespread impression that lower-caste Hindus are being forcibly converted in large numbers to Christianity. For instance, on the very day that Pope John Paul II arrived in India in late 1999, an advertisement in the form of an open letter addressed to the Pope was placed in Indian newspapers by the Citizens Committee of the Dharma Raksha Sammelan [Association for Protection of the Hindu Faith] in Chennai [Madras], which stated that "the Christian missionary activity in our nation is tearing apart families and communities in every strata of our society." The letter states that "religious conversion, which seems to be synonymous with papal work, is violence pure and simple." Purporting to speak on behalf of the nation, the letter concluded thus: "We Indians are deeply hurt by the spurt in the aggressive campaigning of the Church to convert the people of India by all available means" (see V. Sridhar, "A Numbers Game", Frontline [Madras], Vol. 16, no. 25 (27 November 1999). In fact, there have been many other similar calls for an end to conversion (for example, M. V. Kamath, "Mission Impossible: Putting an End to Conversion Activity", Times of India 13 October 1999), all implicitly based on one of more of the following assumptions, all patently false: (1) Christian missionary activity is illegal; (2) the Christian population is increasing dramatically; (3) and that conversions take place forcibly, or are otherwise inauthentic because the converts are seduced with offers of money or other forms of patronage.

The evidence to the contrary is ample. The Constitution of India (1950) recognizes the right to freedom of religious worship, and the Constituent Assembly, which drafted the Indian Constitution, recognized further that people have the right to "propagate religion". More importantly, the Census of India, which remains the most authoritative source for population statistics, clearly shows that the Christian community has stagnated and even registered a small decline in recent years. In an article published by Rajendra K. Chaddha in the magazine Organiser (31 October 1999), which is the mouthpiece for the BJP, the Hindu nationalist party that has been governing India since March 1998, it was claimed that the Christian population had grown from 2.53% of the total population of India in 1981 to 2.61% of the total population. However, the Census of India tells a different, and obviously more reliable, story. While the rate of growth of the Christian population was higher than that of the population as a whole between 1921 and 1971, the gap narrowed and was eventually reversed. Thus, between 1981 and 1991, Christians declined from 2.45% to 2.32% of the entire population. Moreover, while the population of India increased by 23.79% between 1981 and 1991, the Christian population grew by only 16.89% in the same period. . The Justice Wadhava Commission of Inquiry appointed by the Government of India came to the same conclusion, and it adds the interesting fact that between 1991 and 1998 the Hindu population increased by 2.5%, while the Christian population increased by .008% (see V. Sridhar’s article in Frontline [above]; Rajeev Dhavan, "Christians in India", The Hindu (5 November 1999); and P. R. Ram, "To Be or Not To Be: The Conversion Debate", available through South Asia Citizens Wire).

In short, the most common rationale offered for violence against Christians in India, namely that the community is growing at an alarming rate through forced conversions, is absurd and has been decisively rejected by the print media and the world of scholarship. Even if the allegations made by Hindu extremists were true, they cannot be offered as an excuse for violence against another religious community. It is also the case, though the scholarly and popular literature on this question leaves much to be deisred, that recent converts to Christianity fare much worse than those Indian Christians who have been members of that faith for one or more generations. Recent converts are seen as traitors to Hinduism, as people who are against the tide of history and fail to recognize that India is -- as the Hindu militants would like to think -- a Hindu nation, and as people who are determined to weaken India in the face of opposition from hostile countries, including Pakistan. There may also be some resentment against the generally improved lifestyle of Christians: rates of literacy among both Christian men and women are higher than among Hindu men and women, and in the various indices that are used internationally to determine social and economic development, such as infant mortality rate, maternal mortality rate, and death rate, Christians score better.

The Hindutva literature on conversion, finally, has entirely failed to enter into an engagement on the complex philosophical, political, and ethical questions surrounding conversion. Some of the Hindutva advocates, whose contempt for Gandhi is barely disguised, have brazenly furnished Gandhi’s views as justification for their opposition to conversion. Gandhi was not keen on conversion, partly because he held to the view that the convert had an inadquate understanding of his or her own faith; and Gandhi did not think that any one religion was superior to another. But absolutely nothing in Gandhi’s life, teachings, or writings can even remotely be summoned in support of the view that Gnadhi would have opposed a person’s right and desire to convert, and it is unthinkable that he would have countenanced the use of violence to prevent conversion. In this matter as in many others, the militant Hindus have shown themselves extraordinarily adept in abusing and manipulating Gandhi.

Anti-Christian Violence in India, 1997-2000

The media first actively began to report incidents of violence against Christians in 1997. As I have argued earlier, the increase of violence against Christians must be viewed in the context of the rise of Hindu nationalism and the ascendancy of the BJP to political power at the center of the nation. From 1964 to 1996, only 38 incidents of violence against Christians were registered in the country, though doubtless many incidents were not recorded at all; in 1997 alone, 24 incidents were noted by the United Christian Forum for Human Rights, and in 1998, the number had gone up to 90, though some Christian spokespersons have claimed that the true figure is several times higher. Hindu militants, one can safely conclude, see the rise of the BJP and other like-minded parties as an invitation to commit violence against Christians and other minorities with impunity.

Though incidents of violence against Christians have occurred in nearly all parts of India, the violence has been largely confined to north, central, and western India, to the states of Gujarat, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and the capital area of New Delhi -- not coincidentally, most of these areas have been under BJP rule in recent years. Some of the more gruesome incidents took place in eastern India, in the state of Orissa. Intimidation of Christians has extended to such acts as arson (the fire-bombing of Churches), the distribution of threatening literature, the forcible reconversion of recent converts back to Hinduism, the burning of Bibles; there have also been incidents, though much fewer in number, involving the rape of nuns and the murder of both Christian priests and missionaries. Cases of physical assault have also been recorded from various parts of the country: on 5 November 1999, 26 students -- not all Christians -- of St. Joseph’s Evening College, Bangalore, were attacked by 40 VHP activists for allegedly converting lower-caste Hindus (the Dalits) to Christianity (Walter Fernandes, "Caste as vested interest", The Hindu [4 January 2000]). In Gujarat alone, where the BJP grip over power is very strong, 22 churches were burnt or destroyed, and another 16 damaged, in 1997. In the following year, 1998, according to the United Christian Forum for Human Rights, 5 nuns were raped, 9 killed, and 25 subjected to physical abuse (see Ravi Arvind Palat, "Violence against Christians in India", New Zealand Herald [26 January 1999]; also V. Venkatesan, "A pattern of persecution", Frontline 15, no. 26 [19 December 1998]). In mid-June 2000, four churches in different parts of India were bombed, while in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh, church graves were desecrated. In the same month, a church in Maharashtra was ransacked, and an evangelist working for the India Campus Crusade for Christ was found stabbed to death at his home (see Robert Marquand, "In India, a Pattern of Attacks on Christians", Christian Science Monitor ([29 June 2000]).

There have also been at least five widely known cases involving the murder of Christian clergymen, though perhaps as many as 20 priests and pastors may have been killed. Two might be mentioned by way of illustration. The entire country was shocked in January 1999 when an Australian Baptist missionary, Graham Staines, was murdered along with his two sons by being burnt alive inside a locked car. Staines had lived in India for the greater part of his life, and was working among lepers in Orissa, one of India’s most deprived regions (see the Human Rights Report and State Department Report, as cited below). His assailant, a Hindu militant by the name of Dara Singh, went around boasting about his deed, and even gave television interviews, while the police claimed that he could not be found. On 7 June 2000, the Catholic priest, George Kuzhikandam, was murdered in his sleep in a church in Mathura in Uttar Pradesh. The church cook, Vijay Ekka, who slept near the murdered clergyman and first reported the murder, was taken away by the police for interrogation, and himself died in police custody. Though the police claimed he had committed suicide, the autopsy indicated that he had been strangled. It is widely believed that the cook was silenced.

Anti-Christian violence in India has been widely noted, and in April 1999 Human Rights Watch visited the Dangs district in southeastern Gujarat, where over a period of 10 days, from 25 December 1998 to 3 January 1999, there were numerous violent and clearly premeditated attacks on Christians and their institutions. Their 1999 report on the violence perpretrated against Christians furnishes a detailed record of what they saw and heard, and provides the testimony of those victimized (it can be accessed at http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/indiachr/christians). A chronological record, as well as the historical background to the present spate of violence, can also be found in the U.S. State Department’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom for 1999: India (released by the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, Washington, DC, 9 September 1999). Shortly before dying in a car crash in Poland in the summer of 2000, Archbishop Alan de Lastic of New Delhi addressed a letter to Prime Minister Vajpayee, drawing his attention to the attacks upon Christians in all parts of the country, and stating that the thugs engaged in violent activity and attacks upon Christians "know no action will be taken [against them], and they can get away with any kind of violence" (Seema Mustafa, "Archbishop to PM: Your Silence Kills", The Asian Age (14 May 2000). The Archbishop noted that the Christian community was threatened with its worst crisis since India acquired independence in 1947 (see Pamela Constable, ‘The Burden of the Cross in India", Washington Post [3 July 2000]).

The evidence for violence against Christians in India is consequently incontrovertible. There are numerous compilations of atrocities perpetrated upon Christians, and they suggest an alarming pattern of violence: the intimidation of priests; threats placed against Christian schools; false allegations against Christian priests; the destruction of Christian institutions, such as the Damian Leprosy Hospital complex run by Catholic nuns for 31 years; attacks upon churches; assault upon Christian nuns and pastors, such as in the city of Jhansi on 2 May 2000; the distribution of scurrilous literature; and murder of Christians.


Re: Organizing Principles: Racist Love (Score: 1)
by Tao on Monday, May 16 @ 12:07:11 EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)
Excellent article. 1972? Holy cow.
The Chinese were the target of the largest missionary campaign ever mounted in the history of mankind. It's now in its fifth century.</b> The American missionary movement is now in its second century. In 1871, the Reverend John L. Nevius wrote:

The Chinese as a race are, as compared with the European nations, of a phlegmatic and impassive temperament, and physically less active and energetic. Children are not fond of athletic and vigorous sports, but prefer marbles, kite-flying, and some quiet games of gall, spinning tops, etc. Men take an easy stroll for recreation, but never a rapid walk for exercise, and are seldom in a hurry or excited. They are characteristically timid and docile... While the Chinese are deficient in active courage and daring, they are not passive in resistance. They are comparatively apathetic as regards to pain and death, and have great powers of physical endurance as well as great persistency and obstinacy. On an average a Chinese tailor will work on his bench or a literary man over books with his pen, more hours a day than our race can.
The Chinese in the parlance of the Bible, were raw material for the "flock," pathological sheep for the shepherd. The adjectives applied to the Chinese ring with scriptural imagery. We are meek, timid, passive, docile, industrious. We have the patience of Job. We are humble. A race without sinful manhood, born to mortify our flesh. Religion has been used to subjugate the blacks, chicanos, and Indians along with guns and whips. The difference between these groups and the Chinese was that the Christians, taking Chinese hospitality for timidity and docility, weren't afraid of us as they were of other races.</i>

Those of you who find Christianity attractive should read this carefully. One of the reasons I rejected Christianity at an early age is the implied racism in every tenet. Very few "Christian" churches follow the true teachings of Christ. Sure, honor Christ and his teachings...but support churches? You're supporting your own subjugation.

The sources of Chinese-American self-contempt are white Christianity, the sojourner's state of humiliation, overt white racism, and legislative racism. Each served to exclude the Chinese-American from the realm of manliness and American culture.

While legislative racism has receded and sojourners are less prevalent, the media today is the omnipresent substitute, spreading the virus of white supremacy into more and more minds, without overt coercion. Sure, you can watch Jet Li or Jackie Chan kick some ass, but they can NEVER be allowed to express any sexual characteristics on screen. That is not permissible in the white supremacist mindset.

Only when Asia's economies eclipse those of the US and Europe will this change. It will take decades. And it may result in trade wars and open wars, resulting in US media demonization of Asians and Asian Americans. Be aware....be careful.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hauma Hamiddha+Aug 9 2006, 09:53 AM-->QUOTE(Hauma Hamiddha @ Aug 9 2006, 09:53 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->With modern Hindu India facing a seige from Islam and Isaism it is important to study the demise of heathen Europe. This page gives a good timeline of Isaism's blood-stained passage through Eastern Europe.
Isaistic terrorism in Europe

some greek opinion about heathens.
wait to see coments especialy about pope behaviour
catholicism and yoga


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)