Posts Tagged ‘Jesus’

Church, prayer hall, prayer conducted at a house etc and the attack of such places: Secularism and communalism behind! (1)

March 15, 2018

Church, prayer hall, prayer conducted at a house etc and the attack of such places: Secularism and communalism behind! (1)

Madurai church attack - Miscreants vandalize church

Pentecostal Church attacked in Madurai 11-03-2018: The incident happened around 9.30 am when priest Ravi Jacob was taking part in a prayer session. “A gang of 50 men led by a religious outfit leader”, protected by a gunman, entered the church and started attacking M. Ravi Jacob[1]. A prayer home of a Pentecostal church in Sikkandar Chavadi here was vandalized and copies of the Bible were burnt, allegedly by members of a “Hindu right wing group”on Sunday 11-03-2018[2]. Another report says, “Some members, reportedly of the same group”, later went to three other prayer homes belonging to Pentecostal church in nearby areas and verbally abused the pastors and worshippers and threatened to attack the homes if they were not shut in a week[3]. Jacob, the pastor at the Sikkandar Chavadi prayer home, which is a branch of Rhema Church, said more than 10 people, including a person who had an armed policeman as his Personal Security Officer (PSO), came to the prayer home in the morning[4]. “I, my wife, two children and a few others who had come for the prayer were there. The men used abusive language and roughed up me and my wife,” he said. He alleged that they later took out copies of the Bible present at the home, along with his mobile phone and a few other belongings, and burnt them in the street[5].

Madurai church attack - Right wing vandalize -The Hindu

Christians accused “Hindu Munnani” for attack: Corroborating his allegations, the family who owned the place, which is a small tile-roofed structure in a narrow lane, said the pastor had rented the place a couple of months ago and visited it on Sundays for prayer meetings. Jerome Jegatheesan, pastor of ‘Bethesda Varthaiyin Jeba Veedu’ prayer home in Koodal Pudur, said a group of people visited the home a couple of hours after the incident at Sikkandar Chavadi. “They abused us in filthy language and asked us to stop our activities,” he said. Sasi Sugathiya, a pastor with Living God Church, said two other prayer homes in Koodal Puthur area were also threatened on Sunday. The video of the group threatening one of the prayer homes was uploaded on Facebook by a person claiming to be a Hindu Munnani member. However, there is Christian  material and burning them, but, there was no commotion, as everything was going on the road and the event was evidently recorded ny many [6]. It is appears strange, as the attacker himself to present evidence to the public to prove that he attacked or involved in such act. This is similar to earlier NDTV propaganda about the Gujarat riots where, the Hindutwa group heads were depicted as “claiming themselves with pride that they indulged in such violence.”

Police version of the attack: N. Manivannan, Madurai Superintendent of Police, said a case had been registered based on Ravi Jacob’s complaint against 10 unidentified Hindu Munnani cadre. He, said, “We have identified three persons involved in the incident. However, we are yet to arrest any of them.” On the presence of a PSO, he said the police were yet to confirm that. “If a PSO was present, it will make the identification of the accused easy,” he added. Stressing that there were no attacks on the other three prayer homes, Madurai City Commissioner of Police Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal said the group appeared to have threatened the pastors to close the homes by claiming that they did not have permission. “We have registered cases and appropriate action will be taken swiftly,” he said.  However, it can be noted that politicians like Vaiko accused police that they have registered a case against the “unidentified” persons. Therefore, it is evident that the issue of “illegal churches” has been converted into “secular” and “communal” one.

Madurai church attack - Notices to illegal prayer halls- TOI

30 prayer halls in Tamil Nadu receive notice, HC stays closure of one (October 2017)[7]: District authorities have issued show-cause notice to about 30 Christian prayer halls in Coimbatore district alone, threatening to close them down for conducting prayers without prior permission. But, the Madras high court came to the rescue of one such hall, when it stayed a notice issued by a jurisdictional tahsildar to a Sulur-based prayer hall. Concurring with the submissions of P Wilson, senior counsel for the prayer hall, Justice K Ravichandrabaabu said: “The court is of the prima facie view that the petitioner is entitled to an interim relief of stay for a period of four weeks subject to the condition that under the guise of conducting prayers the petitioner shall not cause any nuisance by way to the public.” The judge then ordered notice to the tahsildar concerned and district collector returnable by four weeks. Though Selvasingh Samuel, 37, who is pastor of a prayer hall at Sultanpet in Sulur taluk in Coimbatore district, won the relief for his prayer hall, the pattern as per which the notices were slapped on similar prayer halls in the region is unmistakable. Some of the notices were identical and referred to complaints and apprehension of public order disturbances in the regions concerned. They also raised the bogey of prayer being conducted without prior permission from authorities[8].

Permission given for the construction of a residential house and not for any jamath/prayer hall/madrasa (November 2017): The activists said the complaint was a ploy so that some organisations could continue their “illegal conversions”. Police said they had received complaints from the public that some prayer homes were being running illegally and demanding that these be closed[9]. Incidentally, the Courts have delivered judgments in recent years about the construction of prayer halls, usage of house for conducting prayer etc. In one case, the judge said it has been categorically stated in the stop-work notice that the planning permission was obtained for the construction of a residential house and not for any jamath/prayer hall/madrasa[10]. When there was a specific plan accorded for construction of a residential house, the petitioners cannot deviate and hence the panchayat was right in issuing the stop-work notice and thereafter passing the impugned order of cancellation of planning approval. Proceeding with construction and claiming investment of huge amount on the same cannot be a ground to permit the construction of superstructure to stand there, the judge added[11]. Therefore, if anyone follows the secular rationale of the cases, it has to be applicable to all. However, the secular and Dravidian politicians have taken different stand of accusing the right wing group for the attack.

Complaints from the public that some prayer homes were being running illegally and demanding that these be closed (March 2018): Police said they had received complaints from the public that some prayer homes were being running illegally and demanding that these be closed[12]. This was not a law and order problem, but denial of right to worship and destruction of secularism, the Constitution and democracy, Council president Anthony Pappusamy said in a statement[13]. Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu Latin Bishops’ Council had condemned the attacks and said it was an effort to “chase away” Christians who had a fundamental right to worship. This was not a law and order problem, but denial of right to worship and destruction of secularism, the Constitution and democracy, Council president Anthony Pappusamy said in a statement[14]. A clip of the group reportedly threatening the persons has gone viral. A case was registered yesterday against 10 Hindu Munnani activists, of whom three have been identified. They said some of the activists, during initial questioning, denied that they had attacked the homes and had only staged protests against persons being allegedly lured for conversion. The activists said the complaint was a ploy so that some organisations could continue their “illegal conversions”. Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu Latin Bishops Council had condemned the attacks and said it was an effort to “chase away” Christians who had a fundamental right to worship.

© Vedaprakash

14-03-2018

[1] https://www.dtnext.in/News/TamilNadu/2018/03/12010044/1064765/Miscreants-vandalise-church-in-Madurai.vpf

[2] The Hindu, Hindu right wing group vandalises prayer home, Pon Vasanth B.A. MADURAI, MARCH 11, 2018 22:09 IST; UPDATED: MARCH 13, 2018 00:03 IST

[3] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Madurai/hindu-right-wing-group-vandalises-prayer-home-madurai/article23041946.ece

[4] DNA India, Prayer homes of Pentecostal church attacked in Madurai, Published: Mar 14,2018, 01:30 AM

[5] http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-prayer-homes-of-pentecostal-church-attacked-in-madurai-2593779

[6] Angeline 11 Media works, , Published on Mar 12, 2018; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWgOblb8fuQ

[7] Times of India, 30 prayer halls in Tamil Nadu receive notice, HC stays closure of one, Suresh Kumar | TNN | Oct 24, 2017, 06:39 IST

[8] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/30-prayer-halls-in-tamil-nadu-receive-notice-hc-stays-closure-of-one/articleshow/61193950.cms

[9] Deccan chronicle, Hindu right wing group attacks prayer homes of Madurai’s Pentecostal church, PTI, Published Mar 14, 2018, 1:19 pm IST; Updated Mar 14, 2018, 1:19 pm IST.

[10] DECCAN CHRONICLE, Demolish construction designed to offer namaz: Madras High Court, Published Nov 26, 2017, 1:45 am ISTUpdated Nov 26, 2017, 1:45 am IST

[11] https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/261117/demolish-construction-designed-to-offer-namaz-madras-high-court.html

[12] India today, Prayer homes of Pentecostal church attacked in Madurai, PTI, March 14, 2018UPDATED 12:15 IST (Eds: Recasting overnight story)

[13] https://www.indiatoday.in/pti-feed/story/prayer-homes-of-pentecostal-church-attacked-in-madurai-1189173-2018-03-14

[14] http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/140318/madurai-pentecostal-church-attack-hindu-right-wing-group-bible-copies.html

Advertisements

History, faith and Indian historians A rejoinder to Romila Thapar.

July 16, 2009
History, faith and Indian historians A rejoinder to Romila Thapar.
Published on September 29th, 2007 In Uncategorized |  Views 1116
The following is my response to the Editor, The Hindu. However, “The Hindu” has not been publishing views opposing to its ideology. Generally, it is said that N. Ram does not encourage anything that is against Marxism etc. Whatever, may be the fact, the copy is posted here for debate and discussion:A rejoinder to Romila Thapar Romila Thapar, an eminent historian of India has written her opinion in “The Hindu” under the caption, “Where fusion cannot work – faith and history” (The Hindu, September 28, 2007). For the article, see: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/0928/stories/2007092855231200.htm and with reference to this, I respond as follows:

Historians have never been honest in dealing with the historical issues involving faith and history, and there only faith and history have been brought into conflict. It is not fusing faith and history or vice versa. Historians know very well that it is their belief that history can be only based on what is written or has been written. It is their faith that they do not believe that if lived man of one million or 1 billon did not live if he has not left any historical record. But how scientists would say about it?

Historians believe about past events that they should have happened like this; at the same time other set of historians interpret that the same events could have happened in different way. Historians have accepted that they do not require any objectivity in their historical studies or methodology. So again, it their strong faith that they believe that objectivity is not required. But any other professional would accept it? Therefore historical faith and history cannot be independent. Without faith of the past or faith ion archaeological methods, historians cannot work independently. When historians have decided to differ, there would be difference only. Historians believed that Aryans invaded India destroyed Dravidians and so on. At that time itself, the believers and even Sanskrit scholars clarified that it was gross misinterpretation of Vedas. But none cared. Now, the historians have retracted, but the books remain containing such unhistorical writings. So how can their premises, their methods of enquiry, and their formulations be dissimilar?

You say, “When historians speak of the historicity of person, place, or event, they require evidence — singular or plural — that proves the existence of any of these and this evidence is based on data relating to space and time. The two important spaces in the Valmiki Ramayana are Ayodhya and Lanka, on the location of which scholarly opinion differs”. Yes, what are those “scholarly opinions”? An opinion is nothing but belief or faith only as their views is estimated depending upon their attitudes and outlook.

What you say about the foot print of Mohammed kept in Jama Masjid or the hair kept in a Kashmir mosque? Have you ever recommended for chemical analysis or DNA test? Have historians ever tried their scientific methodology? Where has gone their scientific temper? You claim, “It is said that the Ram Setu is cultural heritage and therefore cannot be destroyed even if it is a natural geological formation and not man-made. Has the idea become the heritage? To search for a non-existent man-made structure takes away from the imaginative leap of a fantasy and denies the fascinating layering of folk-lore”. When H. D. Sankalia [1972:46] asserted that there were no evidences for Asoka, Chandragupta Maurya etc., as no horizontal excavations had been done, historians did not worry and search for Asoka or Chandragupta. When Vincent Smith [1990:231-267] wrote that Asoka killed his brothers etc., you also repeated the song in your book [1963:20-54]. Accepting Kalhana as historian, you ignored the Asoka, as he recorded. So why can’t deny this Asoka and accept the Asoka of Kalhana? It is only “the majority idea / opinion / faith” that only this Asoka could be “Mauryan Asoka” in spite of lacking historical evidences, created and established one Asoka! So even existed person was consigned to imaginary leap of fantasy and made fable!

Even after the so-called “authorized / critical edition” [Vol I-1960, II-1962, III-1963, IV-1965, V-1966, VI-1971], the mention of different Ramayanas is irrelevant, immaterial and incompetent.

As a historian, it is surprising that you have lied to the whole world like this:  “This does not happen with the biographies of those who were known to be historical figures and who founded belief systems: the Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammad. Their biographies adhere largely to a single story-line and this helps to endorse the ‘official’ narrative of their life. Their existence is recorded in other sources as well that are not just narratives of their lives but have diverse associations. The historicity of the Buddha, for example, is established, among other things, by the fact that a couple of centuries after he died, the emperor Ashoka on a visit to Lumbini had a pillar erected to commemorate the Buddha’s place of birth. This is recorded in an inscription on the pillar”.

6      This does not happen with the biographies of those who were known to be historical figures and who founded belief systems: the Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammad.

It is well known that there are no biographies of Buddha, Jesus Christ and Mohammed as you asserted. This is blatant lie. Give me references of such biographies. What was written after such existed or non-existed personalities after them perhaps even after 300 years cannot be a biography. About different Buddhas, I am surprised that you say nothing is there. You do not remember how a Buddha had to come to fight with Adi Sankara? Moreover, it is well known about the different versions of Jesus, Christs etc., even before and after the so-called Jesus Christ combine. About Mohammed, I am also afraid of giving details just like you. Any way, just I tell there are books – M. Cook [1983:65], P. Crone [1987:75-76], Ibn Warraq [1995:66-85].

6      Their biographies adhere largely to a single story-line and this helps to endorse the ‘official’ narrative of their life.

Why they should largely adhere to a single line? How this helps “official” narrative? How “official” it could be of “their life”? Why can’t you write as a historian instead of believer here?

That the “biographers” were compelled or forced to accept or adhere to a single line proves that many lines were left out. And still small number of biographers who did not adhere to a single line is also exposed. Then, what you are talking about? Majority view and minority view? Condemn the “lesser” and accept or approve the Larger”! Adhere to one-line and forget many lines! What sort of historian you are? That man Karunanidhi has become a senile man and talks differently. Do you also do the same think as a senile lady?

How you endorse such one-liners? Is there any historical methodology to that effect? Which University teaches such approving of one-line biography by eminent historians like you?

Do not fool Indians. Ernest Renan, J. M. Robertson and so many reputed authorities are there on the subject matter of Jesus Christ and Christianity. Any way, it is your cowardice gets exposed, as you never whispered anything, when there was much Christian opposition to screening of “Da Vinci Code”. However, when the so-called “Hindutva judgment” came out, you vociferously jumped and asserted that “We would go to Court”. Everything appeared in “the Hindu” itself with your face. Madam, what happened? But now you come siding with atheists, anti-Hindus, anti-nationals as a historian suppressing the recent past and forgetting your own past!

6      Their existence is recorded in other sources as well that are not just narratives of their lives but have diverse associations.

So also Rama.

Why then your argument goes differently.

In fact, their associations differ. But, Ramayana core story, as H. D. Sankalia in his “Ramayana Myth or Reality” that it had been there nearly for 3000 years [1972:62].

How “That their existences is recorded in other sources” help you to decide?

It may be noted that historians and scholars have pointed out that Christ story was copied from
Krishna! Rama was repeatedly mentioned in different literature not because of variance, but influence and impact created on the people well before 2500-3000 YBP. Was the Sangam poet a fool to record in his poem about his discussion with his army about the mode of crossing over the ocean to Lanka”. How that poet was imaging that that Lanka should have been the Lanka of Ramayana in his times i.e, 2500 – 3000 YBP?

6      The historicity of the Buddha, for example, is established, among other things, by the fact that a couple of centuries after he died, the emperor Ashoka on a visit to Lumbini had a pillar erected to commemorate the Buddha’s place of birth. This is recorded in an inscription on the pillar

Recently, there has been lot of information coming out as to how the British historians including the ASI officials, specifically Alois Anton Furher had fabricated the Stone Casket with Asokan inscriptions and planted there. For his forgey, he was dismissed from the service. The sudden disappearance of Buhler also intriguing in the context. For more details see: http://www.lumkap.org.uk . note now also the ASI officials are in a soup!

6      “From the point of view of archaeology and history, the Archaeological Survey of
India was correct in stating that there is to date no evidence to conclusively prove the historicity of Rama. The annulling of this statement was also a political act. Reliably proven evidence is of the utmost significance to history but not so to faith”.

The present ASI officials are not like A. A. Fuherer to fabricate or forge Asokan inscriptions or like John Marshall to suppress the ASI report of Banrejee. They could have verified the greatest Indian archaeologist view in their affidavit. But, evidently, being the stooges of politicians, as politicians they acted ad they would get the sack, unless they are innocent or have guts to expose the politicians, who ordered them to do so. Leave alone the ASI people. The ASGCS / other standing councils who drafted the affidavit, vetted the affidavits etc.., also are responsible. Therefore, if all acted as a gang to malign and blaspheme Rama, it is not history but mystery. And do not you think that such culprits should be punished?

6      Blasphemy does not lie in doubting historicity.

Yes, Romila you doubt the historicity of others also as listed – Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammed – Do not be contended with one-line official version. You are a historian. You should go by primary sources – historical documents. Nothing more, nothing less!

To what extent you can doubt the historicity of them along with Rama or otherwise, we are going to see. Or children will wait and see!

Of course the question of blasphemy, who will decide? The Courts? Let us see!

6      The historian is not required to pronounce on the legitimacy of faith. But the historian can try and explain the historical context to why, in a particular space and time, a particular faith acquires support. And we need to remind ourselves that our heritage has been constantly enriched not just by those of faith but also by those who contend with faith.

Yes, you know very well if you start analyzing with the legitimacy of faith of – Buddha, Jesus Christ, Mohammed.

So you decide which faith has to be supported in a particular space in time?

Accordingly, it is evident that you do not support the faith of Rama.

Yes, Rama baktas have been living with content even after what you historians have done in the case of Ramajanmabhumi issue.

Of course, they may not be knowing what your people have been doing in the Indian History Congress presenting papers taking Ayodhya to Afganisthan etc. Note that even in
Calicut, during last IHC, you have to live on Rama just like Karyu. The lady who got selected as GS said some thing on Rama! Poor Rama-baktas kept quite.

6      If there is a strong faith — in the religious sense — among millions of people, then it does not require to be protected through massive demonstrations and the killing of innocent persons, through political mobilisation. Nor do archaeology and history have to be brought in to keep that faith intact. Faith finds its own place and function, as do archaeology and history. And the place and function of each is separate.

Yeah, oh woman, you do not know how many Ramabaktas were burned and killed. You want Rama-baktas to forget everything. But try to interpret mischievously, what happened to the three in Bangalore. Note, it is because of Karu, that happened. Fighting with Karnataka, he earned enormous enmity with Kannadigas. And this man used to come there and say as he used to go to Gopalapuram and Oliver Road

. So not vulgarize the issue with your perversity. Do not suppress the facts.

The honesty of archeologists and historians, only Indians have to certify.

6      To say that the partial removal of an underwater formation in the Palk Straits is going to hurt the faith of millions is not giving faith its due. Is faith so fragile that it requires the support of an underwater geological formation believed to have been constructed by a deity?

You can blast Bamian Buddhas, you can destroy IVC. Like Aurangazeb you can go on demolish temples. Like Dr. F.J A. Flynn, you can smuggle artifacts and coins. Your historians and archaeologists aid and abet. But he would be caught red-handed in
Delhi airport. So demolish Rama-sethu! Yes, nothing will happen or happens.

6      Making faith into a political issue in order to win elections is surely offensive to faith?

Karu is doing that. Cong is coding that. None else links it with politics.

6      What is at issue is not whether Rama existed or not, or whether the underwater formation or a part of it was originally a bridge constructed at his behest. What is at issue is a different and crucial set of questions that require neither faith nor archaeology but require intelligent expertise: questions that are being willfully (sic) diverted by bringing in faith. Will the removal of a part of the natural formation eventually cause immense ecological damage and leave the coasts of south India and Sri Lanka open to catastrophes, to potential tsunamis in the future? Or can it be so planned that such a potentiality is avoided?

Scientists have discussed enough. I do not think you have ay competency here.

6      What would be the economic benefits of such a scheme in enhancing communication and exchange? Would the benefits reach out to local communities and if so, how? Equally important, one would like to know precisely what role will be played by the multinational corporations and their associates in
India. Who will finance and control the various segments of such an immense project? It is only when such details are made transparent that we will also get some clues to the subterranean activities that are doubtless already simmering. These are the questions that should be asked of this project and that at this point in time should be occupying public space.

Oh now, it is clear. You write like what Karu talked and talking. Do you have any alliance with Karu? The “Mount Road Maha Vishnu” has marriage alliance with Karu. You have connection with Ram. So also Karu, Kanimozhi and Ramajayam with “The Hindu”. So what is the alliance. At whose behest, you are writing and talking the language of Karunanidhi?

Any way thank you for exposing yourself.

Thank you for revealing that Karunanidhi, Congress, you and others are doing this only for election.

VEDAPRAKASH

(29-09-2007)

57, Poonamalle High Road,

Maduravoyal, Chennai – 602 102.

letters@thehindu.co.in, vedamvedaprakash@yahoo.com

To

The Editor,

The Hindu,

Mount Road,

Chennai – 600 002.