Going by points raised by two Hindu NGOs in condemning Bersih 3.0, the Hindraf rally is wrong. Or did the NGOs get it wrong?
COMMENT
In 2007, over 50,0000 Malaysian Indians took to the streets due to the marginalisation of the Indian poor. The demonstration was a success under the flagship of what was then known as the Hindraf 5.
The Indians who rallied were emotionally charged and angered by the demolition of Hindu temples and body-snatching cases.
Were their actions of organising rallies also against Hinduism?
This is the question that came to my mind after two Hindu NGOs came out to condemn the Bersih 3.0 rally that took place on April 28 in Kuala Lumpur.
The Malaysia Hindu Dharma Mamandram (MHDM) and Malaysia Hindu Sangam (MHS) claimed that Hinduism strictly prohibits its followers from participating in rallies which can spark violence and cause damage to public property, reported Bernama.
The report states that such awareness was a factor that contributed to fewer Indian participation.
MHDM president Professor NS Rajendran said: “Such rallies are not encouraged by any religion, including Hinduism. Any demand should be channelled through peaceful means for amicable discussion.”
MHS president RS Mohan Shan, meanwhile, said: “Hinduism prohibits followers from acting on emotion and damaging public property and burdening others.”
Weak arguments
Going by the arguments presented by Rajendran and Mohan Shan, why did they not come forward to
criticise the Hindraf rally participants in 2007?
The two NGOs also were not at the forefront in raising issues concerning the Hindu community when there were disputes over the faith of the deceased.
My next counter-argument is their claim that Hinduism prohibited its followers from joining rallies that can spark violence.
Two epics central to the Hindus seem to say otherwise.
In the “Ramayana”, Lord Rama kills King Valee while the latter is battling Sugreeva (Valee’s brother) over their kingdom.
Rama does so by hiding up a tree. This action is justified by the dharma of the just against injustice.
In the “Bhagavad Gita”, Lord Krishna advises Prince Arjuna to battle against his cousins and relatives to uphold truth and justice.
The advice forms an essential part of the Mahabharata.
So pray, tell, how does a rally for free and fair elections go against Hinduism?
Both Rajendran and Mohan Shan also touched on the number of Indians who were present on April 28.
Having been in the thick of action on April 28, I would rather say that the number of Indians were small as it reflected the population of the Indian community in Malaysia, not because of their so- called “awarenesss”.
Oddly enough, both Rajendran and Mohan Shan appear to be in the dark about Bersih steering committee’s various negotiations with the Election Commission to raise and resolve various electoral issues before deciding on the two Bersih rallies.
The negotiations are peaceful means that failed to arrest the issues such as dirty electoral roll but the rally raised awareness among the people.
COMMENT
In 2007, over 50,0000 Malaysian Indians took to the streets due to the marginalisation of the Indian poor. The demonstration was a success under the flagship of what was then known as the Hindraf 5.The Indians who rallied were emotionally charged and angered by the demolition of Hindu temples and body-snatching cases.
Were their actions of organising rallies also against Hinduism?
This is the question that came to my mind after two Hindu NGOs came out to condemn the Bersih 3.0 rally that took place on April 28 in Kuala Lumpur.
The Malaysia Hindu Dharma Mamandram (MHDM) and Malaysia Hindu Sangam (MHS) claimed that Hinduism strictly prohibits its followers from participating in rallies which can spark violence and cause damage to public property, reported Bernama.
The report states that such awareness was a factor that contributed to fewer Indian participation.
MHDM president Professor NS Rajendran said: “Such rallies are not encouraged by any religion, including Hinduism. Any demand should be channelled through peaceful means for amicable discussion.”
MHS president RS Mohan Shan, meanwhile, said: “Hinduism prohibits followers from acting on emotion and damaging public property and burdening others.”
Weak arguments
Going by the arguments presented by Rajendran and Mohan Shan, why did they not come forward to
criticise the Hindraf rally participants in 2007?
The two NGOs also were not at the forefront in raising issues concerning the Hindu community when there were disputes over the faith of the deceased.
My next counter-argument is their claim that Hinduism prohibited its followers from joining rallies that can spark violence.
Two epics central to the Hindus seem to say otherwise.
In the “Ramayana”, Lord Rama kills King Valee while the latter is battling Sugreeva (Valee’s brother) over their kingdom.
Rama does so by hiding up a tree. This action is justified by the dharma of the just against injustice.
In the “Bhagavad Gita”, Lord Krishna advises Prince Arjuna to battle against his cousins and relatives to uphold truth and justice.
The advice forms an essential part of the Mahabharata.
So pray, tell, how does a rally for free and fair elections go against Hinduism?
Both Rajendran and Mohan Shan also touched on the number of Indians who were present on April 28.
Having been in the thick of action on April 28, I would rather say that the number of Indians were small as it reflected the population of the Indian community in Malaysia, not because of their so- called “awarenesss”.
Oddly enough, both Rajendran and Mohan Shan appear to be in the dark about Bersih steering committee’s various negotiations with the Election Commission to raise and resolve various electoral issues before deciding on the two Bersih rallies.
The negotiations are peaceful means that failed to arrest the issues such as dirty electoral roll but the rally raised awareness among the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment