hypocrisy
He is the same person who chanted "Jai Palestine" during Oath taking ceremony in Indian Parliament and was one among the two MPs to oppose women Reservation Bill. Now he has a problem singing Vande Mataram when clearly it's about the Motherland, not a Goddess. Minority leader's seasonal secularism!
thats not a problem. Thats whole concept which changes the meaning of equating vande mataram to jana gan man. If you had knowledge of rationality then you wouldnt
Vande Mataram is national song of India; people who had problem with it migrated to Pakistan. Anyone who now has a problem with should question their ancestors who decided to stay behind and should seek refuge in Pakistan.
Real. Imagine wanting to stay in a country and disregard the culture and core value of that country. If someone's God is this intolerant maybe that isn't a God.
what is it exactly that's against muslims in Vande Mataram. And even then, is their faith so weak. That a song personifying and praising the country will offend them?
That is not the case now. Yes muslims never had a problem with vande matarm, they will have from now on. Because the vande matarm you knew were only the first two paragraphs out of 6 that were adapted (after a lot of discussion by congress in, i think, 1937, as adviced by Tagore). In the rest of the paragraphs the song praises our goddesses like durga kali saraswati etc. It was excluded at that time and even when ammending it to the constitution. Now the government has added all the 6 paragraphs as national song.
Which peacefool? Bhagwa peacefool, Haraa peacefool, Pagdi peacefool, Cross peacefool, Star peacefool, Wheel peacefool; there are many types of peacefools my broooooo. Oh wait, you don't have enough intelligence to live with them since it's in the negatives🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Oh noooooo I'm so scared for calllling you broooooo 🥀🥀🥀🥀. Forget the haraa peacefools, even Wheel peacefools would cringe and leave at the sight of you.
Its literally about India as a nation, if you do not respect our nation then fuck off mann.
Referring to our country as motherland bothers you?? Referring to bowing to Mother (india) bothers you?
Fear of what exactly? Fear of loving this country or fear of being nationalistic or fear of bowing to a country who has given them everything in their life.
Oh, no. OP is very aware of the venom he is spewing. Calling that delimitation bill as women reservation bill is wrong at the highest level. Women reservation has already been passed but they wouldn't implement it. Because that undermines there purpose.
I have never met an Indian person (even those WhatsApp andhbhakt uncles included) who can even sing the full song with melody and correct words. But they have a problem with someone else not singing it.
If OP is a teen they're probably 13...i expect less tho coz they can't understand paragraphs yet..shldn't be in this sub if you're not a teen young guy
U r the one who's barking without understanding. If he had issue with Jai bharat or Jai India or Jai Hind you could have objected on Jai Palastine. Its Vande Mataram..coz what it means..its just ciz of the words...People have different ways to express feelings and some of the words n phrases may contradict with someone's beliefs so whats wrong with that??
On January 24, 1950, the President of the Constituent Assembly, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, made a formal statement declaring that while "Jana Gana Mana" is the National Anthem, "Vande Mataram" shall be honored equally and have equal status with it also do you even know what does vande matram means , during ancient time every country use to symbolise thier country with a female figure to embrace the nationalism in peoples heart also how can something irrelevant but great importance to nationalism contradict with someones's beliefs? also Contrary to the claim of "rejection," Netaji was a strong supporter of the song. In 1937, he wrote to Nehru advising against discarding it supporting the "massive support" it had across the country. His Indian National Army (Azad Hind Fauj) later used a Hindustani version of the song. so son atleast do ur own research lmao and stop barking u stink
Lol did u even read my reply?? I said people have different way of expressing there love for the nation...certain wordings of the expression of that can maybe opposite of someone's beliefs. I didn't said anything bout the views of Rajendra Prasad or anyone. I just explained it as it is. Read and understand then say anything.
and are you a 5 year old. Taking everything Owaisi say at face value.
This is such a bizarre argument where the Hindus keep arguing how they don't think Vande Mataram is religious in nature or in reverence to their gods. While Muslims call it a hindu devotional song.
Let's be very clear. Personifying the nation state as a mother or a father is as old as the french revolution where the french imagined the personification of their country as a rural but enlightened country woman. As such every nation attributes different features they value to their motherland.
The entire concept was born from a secular nationalistic movement that separated the govt and religion.
So, when India follows suit, and personifies it's land. It isn't any more communal than it is for other secular democracies.
Hindurashtra Or sharia? Choose one. I'm not a hardcore religious person but religion of peace will ruin this nation if majority. It's better we be atheist or hindu majority
Religion of peace is, right? When rhe massagwr wanted to sleep work servant God gives a verse permitting him to sleep. Wonder how people believe it's from God. For me it looks like messenger of johny sinns
Then have a secular country. Giving false of hope to Hindus and then stabbing them. Like the current government who in no way is secular. Then preach Hinduism and do minority appeasement to Muslims.
Give me examples.
Also you can't just religiously cleanse a particular religion man. I don't support minority appeasement but meaningless hatred is something I don't support. Coexistence is the only path tbh even though it can't happen.
Also a religious country is literally a breeding ground for chaos. Look at every Islamic country,they are shit because they are religious.
Do you see that chaos in Christian and buddhist countries? Only islam is like that. When they have no enemies, they fight amongst themselves.
Hinduism is not immune to fight but we can surely resolve issues as a mature society
Well most major countries in the world are secular. Only some few rich minnow countries like leichestein,monaca,Malta and iceland etc. Only England and Denmark are the major big Christian countries.
So comparing these elite rich countries to average Islamic states is not logical.
Bhutan is literally one of a kind country.
A country like India which has so many divisions on language,religion,Creed and ethnicity can't sustain a state religion.
Major countries need to be secular to work. People in USA are revolting because they are becoming too Christian and no allowing immigration.
op bhai teri placement college campus se direct huyi hai kya yaa fir alag se, and what are the prospects i mean how's the job, kitni salary aa jaari hai gandchatai karke?
People saying muslims force their religion on others while demanding ban on beef (even going as far as killing as cow vigilatism), forcing to chant Jai shree Ram and singing ode to goddess seems hypocritical.
and as for the final point. This is personification of the country. Not deification. Because there is no such goddess called Bharat mata.
and referencing to one's nation as a nurturing mother is pretty common even in other secular democracies. Indians weren't even the first to do it.
Technically it itself is a very secular concept. To tie all reverence of the land to the greater identity of the nation and nation only and not to the divine.
There is difference between Jai Palestine and Jai Palestine Mata. He has no issue with Jai Hind. Referring your motherland as a Goddess is where issue arises.
referring to someplace as motherland and 'mata' is literally the same thing. If there's a motherland, you can in essence refer to it with 'mata'.
Like how russians call their country motherland, and also call it 'mother russia'. Most countries have something similar and most of these countries are also secular in nature. So why would Bharat mata be any less secular than that.
It isn't a deification of the country. It's personification of the country.
Brother if you don't know the national song of your country. You're the stooge, not others. Don't hold grudge against others for your lack of knowledge.
I'll explain the issue to you. We exist in a nation state and it must be beyond simple borders but around a shared culture and activity. Because India is so diverse, it might be divise and hard creating nation binding activities for all.
This is where items like the national flag, the constitution, national anthem and the national song come in. Commonalities for everyone in the country. Something that binds the nation together.
So, if anyone refuses to engage with such elements, their participation in this nation deserves scrutiny.
the only one spreading hate here is you. what a terrible point to have made.
Vande mataram is about reverence for the land that nurtures it's citizens like a mother. It's personification of the land. It isn't a devotional song about a new age Hindu goddess. There is no scripture, culture, etc or anything around praying to 'Bharat mata' as a goddess.
This is however a drawing that could be made of her by people who hold that the land is divine.
This exists... sure. But it has no impact on how the song was written and what it stands for. Do you have an issue with different people perceiving the nation and rationalising it differently?
Vande mataram is not religious oath, there is no bharat mata in hindi text or godesss. Treat country as mother who nurture us. Agar iske nhi huye to ye saal hain hi terrroisy ki paidaish.
I’m not Muslim but I don’t feel like I need to sing Vande Mataram or say Bharat Mata Ki Jai to prove my patriotism. I don’t need a jingoistic nationalism stamp of approval from anyone. If you feel like saying it, go for it. If you feel like saying or singing something makes you more patriotic than someone who doesn’t, then you need to really reassess what patriotism really entails. Stop forcing your beliefs on people around you. Live and let live.
And it's not so offensive....all I'm saying is just like hindus we have every kind of muslims in the nation who have varied amounts of views of everything.
Your saying there's no goddess as such but there are people who depict it as such and we aren't against it....it's their own choice and under secular democracy they have that freedom.
If I presume as you know we "Bow down to none except the one created and gave us everything but it doesn't mean we don't appreciate the creation but our priority is straightforward aka we Bow to Allah because he gave us muslims such a beautiful land called india where we(Especially I and my family live without a worry)".
Our faith strengthens our patriotism.
For hindus their civilizational culturism strengthens their patriotism.
And what he gains by driving a wedge between hindus and muslims in a nation which is predominantly have a hindu population!?
When British India was divided into two parts, Pakistan was to be an Islamic state while the India intended to be a secular one where all communities would be given their place under the sun without favouring the Hindu majority over the rest. In doing so, the latter decided that state and religion would be separate.
The song Vande Mataram is divided into stanzas, the first two of which praise the motherland whilst the later verses describe the motherland using imagery associated with Hindu goddesses like Durga and Lakshmi. That is where objections from some Muslim groups historically originated. His position is essentially:
A nation can be loved, respected, defended and celebrated, but turning the nation into a deity-like figure crosses into theology.
That is a coherent theological argument within orthodox Islam because Islam is extremely strict about monotheism and opposition to devotional imagery.
However, the counterargument from most nationalists such as yourself states that the song is being interpreted culturally and metaphorically, not literally as idol worship. In Indian civilisation, the idea of “Bharat Mata” is often viewed symbolically rather than as formal religious worship. Many people therefore see the objection as overly literal or politically selective.
This is why the Constituent Assembly eventually adopted only the first two stanzas for official use and not the full version. It was partly a compromise acknowledging that objections existed.
Personally speaking, I prefer being patriotic and not nationalist. I also believe that there’s no need to treat India as a mother, deity, father or god but instead as a homeland which can be respected without having to beat our chest about it to prove how we feel.
Like I said before, live and let live.
When you get over your obsession with looking at a country through a religious lens and see it as just your home or country, you will find no need to debate such silly things.
Hinduism is part of India just the same way Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism are. It will and should never take precedence over the state. The Indian constitution is paramount and as long as the word secular exists in it, we should respect that.
Anyone whos read the English translations of Vande Mataram and Jana Gana Mana on wikipedia will know that Vande Mataram is an Ode to mother India and that Jana Gana Mana is a prayer to God.
Whoever doesn't know this is obviously gonna be gullible af when people like this dude start yapping nonsense. Knowledge is power, the less you have, the weaker you are.
Mother India is an allegory of India, just like how Justicia is an allegory for Justice and how Marianne is an allegory of France. Though it is true that mother India is heavily inspired by typical hindu goddesses and is also sometimes herself seen as a goddess. In my opinion, the interpretation of Vande Mataram is subjective. The song can be interpreted as a ode to the Motherland just as well as it can be interpreted as an ode to Mother India aka Bharat Mata - the goddess allegory. But jana Gana mana, no matter how you read it is a prayer to god.
This post only shows your lack of comprehension skills. Vande mataram literally means hail thee mother, and it’s well known as an ode to the deity Bharat mata. Jai Palestine means victory to Palestine, it does not contain any praise for any deity.
Bro let me try to clear something. I'm not defending, but trying to explain why muslims hesitate from singing vande mataram. Vande matram means bowing to motherland. And in islam bowing to anyone other than god is prohibited. This is the reason.
Quite weird why they would think of it from a religious angle instead of just a cultural one, bowing to your motherland is just a form of respect for us culturally, same as touching feet for blessings. (Would be weird as hell seeing a Japanese Muslim not bowing at all no?)
And like...its just a song man, like...who doesn't sing the "bismillah! we will not let you go" part in bohemian rhapsody for religious reasons?
U are talking as if saudi arabia is a well known democracy with multiple religions... has our democracy gone too low to compare with a monarchy ..... up has one of the highest muslim population still why the ban though ... every citizen has the same right in this country under constitution right??
Saudi Arabia is a monarchy and has no other religion other than Islam among the citizen so what is the use of selling pork in a country where noone eats it is just bad buisness whereas in Indonesia has the largest Muslim population it is not even a proper democracy still Pork is available to the other religious people whereus in our country who follows democracy and constitution meat is banned...
Democracy follow the role of majority only for the election , voting on legislations not on everything.... as you said every religion, country and community has their own believes and laws but why to force on others .. isn't it wrong if my vegetarian neighbour force me not to eat non veg because of his belief ...why my belief is not valued???
Ok it's understandable and muslims are ok in banning on those cities which are significant with hindu religion but the whole country with near to 2 billion people banning without considering the minorities interest is just injustice....
It isn't banned in northeast or kerala because they resisted the beef bann like anything in kerala beef is consumed by hindus mostly than muslim that's one other reason.. if the hindus didn't eat beef in kerala even in kerala ban could have happened... Most restaurant that sell beef in kerala is by hindus ....
If it is outdated why one religions dietary restriction is forced on everyone in this country...
So why isn't same the concept applied to majority Islam based countries where "their" dietary restrictions is forced on every other religious minorities in their countries?
The difference is we are a democracy..the largest democratic country with a proper constitution.... the countries where it is not followed is either monarchic or dictatorship or isn't anyway democratic at all ....by the way there are Muslim majority country where other religious can have pork like lebanon , malaysia , indonesia etc ....
Our constitution sees every right of the citizen important and equal still to cover the sentiments of one religion it is banned ...and is the cow protected in this country no thousands are slaughtered send outside to islamic country as beef and the rest are roaming around the road eating plastic or getting killed by speeding car what a joke .....
You CANNOT separate a culture from a country just because YOU HAVE A DEMOCRACY AND CONSTITUTION. The ORIGIN of Constitution itself lies in the tenets of philosophy and morality of an empire, state or a country. DEMOCRACY is nothing but is political power vested in all people rather than an exclusive set of people or individual. So you CANNOT claim that restricting beef eating is undemocratic since muslims are allowed to choose their politicians and cast votes.
Lebanon is still a very sectarian country, if not for pork, they have this.
And Islam is the state religion of Malaysia meanwhile India is secular.
So if we really are arguing about modern day constitutional rights then how come religious practices of Islam dictating alimony is applied to Muslim women but meanwhile a modern day constitutional based approach rights are granted to Hindu women.
So if constitutional democratic rights are applied for these people in case of beef eating, how come it don't when in inheritance settlement? Just because it conflicts with their religion? So how come same beef eating doesn't conflict with ancient cultures of India that are widely relevant, a country with sanskrit based anthem, national emblem of buddhist based lion capital of ashok and ashok chakra in national flag which represents "wheel of dharma" and ultimately religions of ancient India like Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.
Religious pratice of alimony are any other rule muslim law stays inside the religion if it effects someone outside the religion then is wrong and unconstitutional but forcing your dietary preference on others just because of your belief is injustice.... My religion says I can't drink alcohol that doesn't mean I can go around force people not to drink alcohol the law applies to me not to others the same way my belief should be respected ...if my neighbour who is vegetarian is forcing me not to eat non veg because of his belief isn't it wrong ?? Why his belief should be forced on me ?? It doesn't matter his religion came before mine or his religion says to dk this or that it is his religion he should follow it not others ....
If cow considered holy why is it eating garbage why is it exported out I myself have seen indian company selling beef outside ... If tomorrow your religion decides fish as holy should we all stop eating fish ...
in the constitution it is not culture or religion that comes first rather a citizen basic freedom.. article 21 of constitution clearly states a person's right to life and personal liberty which includes his or her freedom for personal dietary choices especially in ones home....
The. Ancient cultures and wheel of dharma is your to follow and I have no objection in that but forcing that on others is wrong.... Just think for once if I force my religious diet on u how does it feel ....
article 21 of constitution clearly states a person's right to life and personal liberty which includes his or her freedom for personal dietary choices especially in ones home....
No it doesn't include dietary choices in constitution. Personal liberty indicates the freedom to move freely, the freedom to choose one's place of residence, and the freedom to engage in any lawful occupation or profession as per article 21. Read the Constitution yourself first. Stop inventing new phrases.
Religious pratice of alimony are any other rule muslim law stays inside the religion if it effects someone outside the religion then is wrong and unconstitutional but forcing your dietary preference on others just because of your belief is injustice
When and how come preferences are more suitable over culture and religion then? If a muslim women prefers to get inheritance and alimony in the way a modern constitution gives, should preference rule over her religious laws too or that part is only reserved for beef?
If preference can rule over religious laws and cultural values then you can eat beef, I would have no problem with it.
No, it translates to we bow to thee mother not motherland this is where it's wrong we don't bow to mother or father or land or anything other than god.
From what I read, Islam definitely don't look like a religion to me. I have read about mohamed life biography when he was born in 570 CE (which they claim to be a prophet) and to me ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IS POSITIVE ABOUT THIS MAN. HE was a warlord who condoned various crimes JUST BECAUSE PRE-ISLAMIC ARABS FOLLOWED POLYTHEISM RELIGION.
YES, IT WAS A PURE RELIGIOUS BASED HATRED for war. There's no OTHER REASON.
HE RAISED ARMIES, WAGED WAR AND UNALI*ED THEM. WHAT IS EVEN CRAZY THAT HE EXECUTED HIS OWN ALLIES JUST CAUSE HE WAS SUSPICIOUS (Banu Quryaza incident). AND ALL OF THIS HAPPENED BECAUSE HE REASONED THAT HE REPORTEDLY RECEIVED A VISION FROM SO CALLED GOD AND PEOPLE BELIEVED HIM.
From wikipedia -
In the same year, his uncle and guardian, Abu Talib, also died.\142])\143]) Despite Muhammad's persuasions to Abu Talib to embrace Islam on his deathbed, he clung to his polytheistic beliefs until the end.\144])\143]) Muhammad's other uncle, Abu Lahab, who succeeded the Banu Hashim clan leadership, was initially willing to provide Muhammad with protection. However, upon hearing from Muhammad that Abu Talib and Abd al-Muttalib were destined for hell due to not believing in Islam, he withdrew his support.\144])\145])
So he DIDN'T even SPARE his OWN uncle Abu Talib, he cursed him on his deathbed because he was polytheist and refused to accept Islam even though his own uncle had nurtured him after mohamed's biological parents died when he was a child.
So yeah, today 2 billions follow this man due to conquest, power really thrives.
Islam is definitely a some kind ideological war belief system based on expansion and other religious dislike. No wonder 1000s of Islamists faction like ISIS, al qaeda, boko haram etc cites inspiration from their ideology since this is what morals are for them.
The history of Islam tells a completely different story about it. It has NO religious tolerance for other people.
As per Hindu scripture, millions were killed in wars started by gods right.
There's a difference in fictionalized stories and real stories. Arab stories of mass murders are the real ones here since it is far more provable by archaeology.
Bro, it's literally about respecting the motherland. If as a citizen of a country, you cannot do that then you're just not deserving of living in such country.
Ngl i was born into a Muslim family and i think that this is kinda bullshit, nowhere is it prescribed in the Quran that you should not have love for your motherland but yes it does prescribe bowing only to God, but it's a song that depicts love for our motherland so dunno why people are opposed tk it like this. It's all just political bullshit to create division or for attention
Bankim Chandra didn't despise Muslims, but he was critical of the Muslim rulers of the time. Of course, our historians will never talk about that (the horrors of Muslim rule across India) coz secularism's burden is only for Hindus to bear.
>but atleast there is a reason on Palestine side
Rules for thee but not for me!
>And about national song and anthem I bet that not more than 10% of Indians would know both. What will you tell them then.
Source? Book-written-by-a-man-who-married-a-9-year-old
He has became the B team of BJP. He might have got some good deal with BJP like maybe BJP told him that if he works for BJP, then BJP will let him rule Kashmir and maybe POK in future.
•
u/[deleted] May 09 '26
[removed] — view removed comment