As Nepal is heading toward democratic transition, religious fundamentalists and royalists are trying to destabilize the country under the cover of defending Hinduism. These are the people who were kicked out of the power by April’s popular Peoples’ Movement. They were desperately looking for an opportunity to fight back. They found one in the parliament’s historic proclamation that declared Nepal, the world’s only Hindu kingdom, a secular state.

The anarchic mobs of Hindu fundamentalists are not only burning copies of newspaper that wrote in favor of secularism but also trying to exploit the public sentiment in cases like mistreating of a patient by a hospital. The other day, extremists burnt the copies of Kantipur daily with an editorial welcoming the secularism. It is widely believed that extremists were instigating the protest against Kathmandu’s Everest Nursing Home yesterday and the day before yesterday.
we have to stabalize this rise og huduism fundamentalism , or else GOD save us.

source: http://www.blog.com.np/united-we-blog/2006/05/26/neutralize-hindu-fundamentalism-in-nepal/

Hey Seveleaves
I never said hinduism flourished during shah dynasty. Well the impact of hinduism started well before malla and lichhavis .Even the kiratis called their god as kirateswor mahadev.

But the hinduism flourised in the valley and infact all over the principalities of today's Nepal .. when hindus of northern india started to migrate twds nepal...i.e well before shah's dynasty

Till now, despite of the majority being hindu, no religious fundamentalist groups could rise in nepal like in india. but now they r going to be strong. n what led to this? if they had just curtailed the king's powers, and had done nothing about the religion at this point of time, would this have happened?

The name "Hindu" was given by the British for the people that lived across the Indus river. Modern day "Hinduism" has been around for very very long time. It is one of the oldest religion of the world. There was no Buddhism, Hinduism or Muslimism in the old days. There was only one "dharma" - sanatana dharma. Buddha also advocated for the same religion, Buddha did not say it is a new religion, he said that he preaches dharma that is "sanatana". The modern day "Hinduism" has been defined and limited after the Muslim invasion more so after the British invasion.

People should get the facts straight before hammering on the religion.

there was not much religious violence under Saddam Hussein. at least we didn't hear about the Sunnis and Shiites fighting it out. Now that Saddam Hussein is gone, people are exploiting religious sentiments. sectarian violence is on the rise in Iraq. Why not reinstate Saddam Hussein to bring peace to Iraq?

Yeah why not bring back "Hindu Nepal" to avert the rise of future religious violence in Nepal?

What kind of fuzzy logic is this? And this is the logic being espoused by the many supporters of "Hindu State" on this sajha thread!

Secularism per se doesn't create violence; Hindu fundamentalism does, but Hindu fundamentalists are eager to blame it all on secularism. Secularism's being made a punching bag here. Their argument that "Hindu state" will avert religious violence is fallacious. Hell, it sure as hell was not able to avert Mr. Narayan Pokharel's murder allegedly by Hindu fundamentalists.

Secularism doesn't pose any threats to Hinduism. It is not going to uproot Hinduism. Well, it will certainly put Hinduism on an equal footing with other religions in the eye of law and the state. And this is good news. But Hindu fundamentalists don't want this, which goes onto show that they are really religious bigots and supremacists in disguise!

The problem with the many Hindu fundamentalists is that even as they argue that under Hindu Nepal, there had been religiuos harmony (which is, of course, all hogwash) they are keen to bash Christian missionaries. Just read about their Christian bashing in other threads of Sajha. These guys are hypocrites - while championing "Hindu state" as fostering religiuos harmony, they are increasingly being hostile toward Christian missionaries.

There is no doubt that Nepali Hindus are playing right into the hands of the India-based Hindu fundamentalist orgs and parties (who think Nepal is their "pewa") and their stooges (eg Bharat Keshari Simha, Sachhit Shumsher Rana, and the palace wallahs).

Any wonder the protests in Birgunj were fomented by a few hardcore royalists (and Hindu fundamentalists from across the border) who have since been exposed by the local papers!!!

cut the crap karmapa u are comparing hindu with saddam hussein regime.U are just out of ur mind .. u r just hindu hater not for secularism.Thats it.

Advocating for secularism doesn't make one a Hindu hater. Any idiot knows that. Apparently you don't, Imi!

You will probably be the first to lick Thackary's boots if he were he to come to Nepal - your devotion to India-based Hindu fundamentalist orgs and their stooges in Nepal is becoming increasingly well known in Sajha.

Congratulations!

Under Saddam Hussein, there was religious harmony in Iraq too!
Most people in Sajha argue there was religiuos harmony under "Hindu Nepal".
Now that Saddam Hussein is out of power, Sunnis and Shiites are fighting it out.
Now that Nepal has gone secular, there will likely be religious violence in Nepal.

So let's make Nepal a "Hindu state" again to avert religious violence.
This is tantamount to arguing let's reinstate Saddam Hussein to power to create

Logically, the comparison is apt!
--------------------------------------

My argument is that secularism doesn't beget religious violence. Hindu fundamentalists and the royalists such Bharat Kshari do.

hey why do we discuss on a topic that is posted on Blognepal? It is known that Blognepal is paid and managed by the money of Madam Sujata Koirala.

Karmapa , u are hindu hater but u r trying to act too smart ass.U got platform to bash hindus u are not hindu and u are trying to potray how much u care about hindus and benefit from it.So u can fool anybody but not me.UR logic that hindu and sadam comaprision is way out of ur mind .Inorder to prove u r point u r going to the maximum extent of idioitic reasoning .anybody here reading knows that.
This is just a concern.future will tell what is going to happen for now u stop bashing hindus.U have done enough u must be satisfed to forth all the anger towards hindus.U don't listen to what i say in other thread so i don't have to listen .U cannot convince me .As i can't .Stop dragging my name .OK!!!

Yeah isn't that how an argument of a deeply divided kind usually ends. "I hold on to my views. You hold onto yours. I don't have to listen to you. You don't have to listen to me." Coming from you, this sounds like the last resort of a person who is at his wits' end.

What I find most stupid is when people on Sajha argue that secularism is going to invite religious violence and that the government should reinstate "Hindu Nepal" to foster religious harmony. This is a myth, just like saying King is an incarnation of a Hindu god and the like. It is a throwback to a period when many of us were brainwashed into believing this crap during the Panchayat era. And people are still parroting this.

But more than rationale or logic or what not, what religion one was born into is gonna have more bearing on what position people will take on the Hindu state vs secular state issue. So I don't blame the Hindus in Sajha for arguing for "Hindu state".

Imi, don't take too seriously my comparison between saddam and hinduism. you know as well as i do the world doesn't run on logic - although it does once in a while show holes in peoples' received wisdom.

but surely pay attention to my contention that many of the people who are arguing for "Hindu Nepal" are playing right into the hands of the India-based Hindu fundamentalists organisations and their stooges in Nepal knowingly or unknowingly. Hinduisation of Nepal will only lead to Indianisation of Nepal, and strengthen the royalists. Besides, this trend may infect the country's distinctively Nepali kind of Hinduism with a more virulent /fundamentalistic strain imported from India.

Hindu fundamentalism of an Indian/royalist kind poses a bigger threat to the Hinduism of a Nepali kind than secularism.

My wit has not ended But you are turning deaf and Blind!!!

one more thing in lay man way.i have already put my reasoning so many times in other threads too. But here is my stubborness as u so yours:"I DON'T WANT TO COMPROMISE THE TRADITION ,VALUES AND NAMES ASSOCIATED WITH FOR MERE POLITICAL GAME OF FEW LEADERS ,WHEN THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ACTUAL SOCIAL CHANGE AND THE INTENTION OF THE POLITICIANS ARE TO EXPLOIT THIS ISSUE" GOT IT!!!
your BS logic as you said is not going to convince me that secularism is good for nepal because it will uplift hindus and minorities.That doesn't work like that.Who we,hindu, posses threat from we well very know .An outsider do not need to act like messiah .Rejoice and celebrate the loss of Hindus.congratulations!!!