Bloggers be restrained

Sadly, another blogger in Bangladesh has been hacked to death. The total count in the recent past numbers 4; one among them is a muslim, three are hindus. The muslim is younger in age and therefore could be impulsive. Hindus are 40 something and therefore could have shown restraint in comments. Why anger people ensconsed in their systems of thought? An average person should not throw away life like it happened with the four bloggers. A blogger should understand that he has no right to hurt anybody, not even people whose window of socio-politico-religious discourse is not very wide. A blogger should live rather than preach any philosophy. Everybody should not aspire to be a Jesus Christ, Shri Chaitanya or Mahatma Gandhi. I would rather a person emulate Guru Nanak who went all over India, met many saints and went upto Mecca and settled in his hearth as a family man. Jesus was God personified, Mohammed was given the Quran by Allah, Krishna said by worshipping any God you actually worship me! Gandhi wanted swaraj and self sufficiency. Tagore was a Brahmo, idolised by people who are steeped in idol worship. Ramakrishna said "jato mat tato path", which can be translated to "numerous are athe path of religious observances". Bahaulla was persecuted but he was as generous as Ramakrishna. Bloggers, why should you hurt anybody. Any realization including of the religious type are typically very personal. There are great muslims all around us so why speak anything that remotely can be misrepresented by staunch muslims. There are staunch people in every religion. If my system of thought hurts me, allow me to correct myself. In this world, anybody acts on the basis of one's own conviction not because somebody says for or against that conviction. Beliefs are personal needs. Bloggers be restrained. Keep your liberalism to yourself and live it youself. Do not blog to anger. This is a wide world. Be careful so that you do not anger anybody. Let peace be to people angered. Let them learn to love. If Mohammed was not loving people why would he take the trouble of giving human race the Quran?

More By  :  Sharbaaniranjan Kundu

  • Views: 3115
  • Comments: 4

Comments on this Blog

Comment Thank you Prasad Raoji for educating me on some of the facts. Sir, I really do not know all the details. So, I should refrain from speaking more. While I pay my respects to all the Sikh gurus, I confide, personally I am inclined to be a Vaishnabite. But having said that, I am a Krishna bhakta. And I really do not know whether there is anything more liberal than what Krishna said in the Bhagabat Gita, when he tells Arjuna, people worship different gods get what they want; but they do not know, that by worshipping different gods, they actually worship me! He further says elsewhere, however great be your crime, qualitatively or quantitatively, once you submit yourself to me completely, I pardon you. How liberal! Unparallel, really. This is bhakti. This is complete submission. Only under such light I said do not speak against anybody's faith even if their faith is riddled with miscomprehension. Change comes from within. I for one respect Mohammad because he asked people to comprehend Allah's greatness. A call to understanding, really. My Krishna bhakti, or bhakti for Lord Christ do not come in the way of taking within myself Paigambar Mohammad's message. Thank you Prasadji once more. Best wishes to you and every reader of and its blogs.

Sharbaaniranjan Kundu
23-Aug-2015 11:13 AM

Comment Shri Sharbaaniranjanji, Thanks for taking time to respond to my little note. I am grateful for the goodwill and feeling of friendship shown by you in your rejoinder. In the same spirit I want to share one or two points with you and the esteemed readers of Boloji.Com. You mentioned, "the Sikh leaders who gave their life, could they change Aurangzeb?". Thanks to the internet and the Wikipedia, a lay person like me who lives on far off shores from mother India can to some extent talk knowledgeably on these matters. The short answer to your question is, yes, the Sikh resistance produced the desired results. According to Wikipedia: In 1675, Aurangzeb publicly executed the ninth Sikh Guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji. Guru Tegh Bahadur sacrificed himself to save the Hindu Pandits of Kashmir who, had been threatened with death if they refused to accept conversion to Islam. His son Guru Gobind ji further militarised his followers with the inception of the Khalsa. Gobind Singh sent Aurangzeb his letter, the Zafarnama (Notification of Victory) that questioned the Emperor's Godliness, while indicting his deceit and treachery. Sikhs believe this document caused Aurangzeb to realize his many mistaken policies and lose the will to live, leading to his death in 1707. Getting back to the topic of the ill fated bloggers of Bangladesh, I do not know all the details leading to their murder by religious fanatics. Did the bloggers tempt fate somehow by inviting violence on themselves? I do believe that is what the Charlie hebdo staff did in France. They were given ultimatum by the terrorists, but they went ahead anyway with publishing their provocative cartoons bringing the events to a tragic end. Sincerely, Prasad Rao

Prasad Rao
23-Aug-2015 05:50 AM

Comment Thank you Prasad Rao. I do not know whether you are the same Mr Rao I know. Are you? Thanks. Tell me Mr Rao, the sikh leaders who gave their life, could they change Aurangzeb? We adore those sikh leaders, surely ; but transformation of a saintly group of people to a martial race do not change the world. Does it? Sar katta sakte hai lekin sar jhukaa sakte nahin. It is a creed. No point speaking for or against such a creed. The other day a Buddhist gentleman told me only Buddhism never spoke of aggression for religious expansionism. Of course, he is mistaken. Jainism goes far ahead in that respect. Of course Buddhism is very practical. That is why it reached across shores. When matters of religion get engulfed by violence, I for one can not sub-serve such a view. But again, as I said, I should refrain from making comments. For faith, belief, system of thoughts are very personal. They have their own logic. When they become social and assume gigantic proportions are difficult to tell. Human beings are all the time trying to find answers to mysteries of life, existence, nature and this universe. Even science has led to Hiroshima, Nagasaki! What can be said Mr Rao! Thanks anyway Mr Rao for you opened up and spoke your view. That is really good, socially. Thanks again. Best wishes.

19-Aug-2015 08:12 AM

Comment The advice here to bloggers to be restrained seems prudent. I wish you went a little more into the details behind the murders of the 4 bloggers in B'desh. Similar situation existed with Charlie Hebdo magazine in Frace. A segment of public opinion thought the weekly was provocative in publishing offensive cartoons under threat from terrorist groups and could have softened a bit instead of daring them to act. Lakhs of followers of Guru Nanak stood for principles and willingly gave their life for what they believed is correct over the centuries untill today. They were not cowed down by the threats of other religionists. Fanatics and bullys do not need a reason to attack you. The fact you are of different religion, region, color is good enough. You don't have to say or do anything to provoke them. I do believe discretion is better part of valor, but at the same time we have to be rational not to blame the victims. With regards.

Prasad Rao
11-Aug-2015 03:22 AM

Name *
Email ID
 (will not be published)
Verification Code*

Can't read? Reload

Please fill the above code for verification.