What RSS chief says is not binding for everyone, there are takers and there are no takers. In area mostly middle east, every Indian is called as Hindu, people from India are called as Hindu in middle east and this is reality, Hindustan is a Urdu term and it is related to Hindu and in middle east, people of India are called as Hindu, It is true while speaking they have lesser knowledge that Hindu relates to a religion. The word Hindustan comes out from word Hindu which derived from Sindhu, westerners cannot utter word Sindu and that is why they called as Indus civilisation and then India. Unlike Indonesia which have politically recognised the important attached with Hindu instead India or Bharat or Hindustan as whatever for namesake always relates Hindu with religion but in reality Sanatan dharma is the religion the oldest in world and oldest survived religions.

The people from India are called 'Hindi' and not 'Hindu' which is a religion. The slogan 'Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai' was also coined to indicate that Indian natioality may be described as 'Hindi' (not Hindu). However since 1950, our constitution refers to the country as India or Bharat. So matter ends here. Also, we may be called 'Hindustani' irrespective of religion. But not 'Hindu' if the religion is not Hindu. It is better to avoid controversy and use only 'Indian' or 'Bhartiya'. Otherwise our valuable energy and time will be wasted in such meaningless issues instead of real problems of people. But the saffron brigade lives on emotions only- may be Hindu Rashtra, Babri demolition or other similar emotive issues.

People of India in middle east are called as Hindu irrespective of religions, and that is what RSS tells if outisiders can call every Indian as Hindu why not Indians. Honorable supreme court also in one of its verdict says Hindu is a way of life,

What RSS chief says is not binding for everyone, there are takers and there are no takers. In area mostly middle east, every Indian is called as Hindu, people from India are called as Hindu in middle east and this is reality, Hindustan is a Urdu term and it is related to Hindu and in middle east, people of India are called as Hindu, It is true while speaking they have lesser knowledge that Hindu relates to a religion. The word Hindustan comes out from word Hindu which derived from Sindhu, westerners cannot utter word Sindu and that is why they called as Indus civilisation and then India. Unlike Indonesia which have politically recognised the important attached with Hindu instead India or Bharat or Hindustan as whatever for namesake always relates Hindu with religion but in reality Sanatan dharma is the religion the oldest in world and oldest survived religions.

The people from India are called 'Hindi' and not 'Hindu' which is a religion. The slogan 'Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai' was also coined to indicate that Indian natioality may be described as 'Hindi' (not Hindu). However since 1950, our constitution refers to the country as India or Bharat. So matter ends here. Also, we may be called 'Hindustani' irrespective of religion. But not 'Hindu' if the religion is not Hindu. It is better to avoid controversy and use only 'Indian' or 'Bhartiya'. Otherwise our valuable energy and time will be wasted in such meaningless issues instead of real problems of people. But the saffron brigade lives on emotions only- may be Hindu Rashtra, Babri demolition or other similar emotive issues.

People of India in middle east are called as Hindu irrespective of religions, and that is what RSS tells if outisiders can call every Indian as Hindu why not Indians. Honorable supreme court also in one of its verdict says Hindu is a way of life,

These are needless controversies. In India, Hindu is a religion and even in matrinimonials, employment and service particulars etcc, this is religion. By diverting to such topics with the real object of fascistic chauvanism, the saffron lobby is attempting to creatre an unhealthy environment and rift.

What RSS chief says is not binding for everyone, there are takers and there are no takers. In area mostly middle east, every Indian is called as Hindu, people from India are called as Hindu in middle east and this is reality, Hindustan is a Urdu term and it is related to Hindu and in middle east, people of India are called as Hindu, It is true while speaking they have lesser knowledge that Hindu relates to a religion. The word Hindustan comes out from word Hindu which derived from Sindhu, westerners cannot utter word Sindu and that is why they called as Indus civilisation and then India. Unlike Indonesia which have politically recognised the important attached with Hindu instead India or Bharat or Hindustan as whatever for namesake always relates Hindu with religion but in reality Sanatan dharma is the religion the oldest in world and oldest survived religions.

The people from India are called 'Hindi' and not 'Hindu' which is a religion. The slogan 'Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai' was also coined to indicate that Indian natioality may be described as 'Hindi' (not Hindu). However since 1950, our constitution refers to the country as India or Bharat. So matter ends here. Also, we may be called 'Hindustani' irrespective of religion. But not 'Hindu' if the religion is not Hindu. It is better to avoid controversy and use only 'Indian' or 'Bhartiya'. Otherwise our valuable energy and time will be wasted in such meaningless issues instead of real problems of people. But the saffron brigade lives on emotions only- may be Hindu Rashtra, Babri demolition or other similar emotive issues.

People of India in middle east are called as Hindu irrespective of religions, and that is what RSS tells if outisiders can call every Indian as Hindu why not Indians. Honorable supreme court also in one of its verdict says Hindu is a way of life,

These are needless controversies. In India, Hindu is a religion and even in matrinimonials, employment and service particulars etcc, this is religion. By diverting to such topics with the real object of fascistic chauvanism, the saffron lobby is attempting to creatre an unhealthy environment and rift.

Please don't mind my saying so but who introduced these forms where one has to write his surname first then his name and the same forms contain the column to fill the cast, sub-cast etc. All government forms are incomplete without these formalities. Recently (few years before) they started counting public on religious basis to facilitate a particular cast on numbers basis. Isn't that a useless exercise of pleasing a particular cast? What is the need of counting people of a country based on caste and creed if not the policy of vote bank working behind it?

What RSS chief says is not binding for everyone, there are takers and there are no takers. In area mostly middle east, every Indian is called as Hindu, people from India are called as Hindu in middle east and this is reality, Hindustan is a Urdu term and it is related to Hindu and in middle east, people of India are called as Hindu, It is true while speaking they have lesser knowledge that Hindu relates to a religion. The word Hindustan comes out from word Hindu which derived from Sindhu, westerners cannot utter word Sindu and that is why they called as Indus civilisation and then India. Unlike Indonesia which have politically recognised the important attached with Hindu instead India or Bharat or Hindustan as whatever for namesake always relates Hindu with religion but in reality Sanatan dharma is the religion the oldest in world and oldest survived religions.

The people from India are called 'Hindi' and not 'Hindu' which is a religion. The slogan 'Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai' was also coined to indicate that Indian natioality may be described as 'Hindi' (not Hindu). However since 1950, our constitution refers to the country as India or Bharat. So matter ends here. Also, we may be called 'Hindustani' irrespective of religion. But not 'Hindu' if the religion is not Hindu. It is better to avoid controversy and use only 'Indian' or 'Bhartiya'. Otherwise our valuable energy and time will be wasted in such meaningless issues instead of real problems of people. But the saffron brigade lives on emotions only- may be Hindu Rashtra, Babri demolition or other similar emotive issues.

People of India in middle east are called as Hindu irrespective of religions, and that is what RSS tells if outisiders can call every Indian as Hindu why not Indians. Honorable supreme court also in one of its verdict says Hindu is a way of life,

These are needless controversies. In India, Hindu is a religion and even in matrinimonials, employment and service particulars etcc, this is religion. By diverting to such topics with the real object of fascistic chauvanism, the saffron lobby is attempting to creatre an unhealthy environment and rift.

Please don't mind my saying so but who introduced these forms where one has to write his surname first then his name and the same forms contain the column to fill the cast, sub-cast etc. All government forms are incomplete without these formalities. Recently (few years before) they started counting public on religious basis to facilitate a particular cast on numbers basis. Isn't that a useless exercise of pleasing a particular cast? What is the need of counting people of a country based on caste and creed if not the policy of vote bank working behind it?

Probably, government need staistics for census, social welfare schemes etc. So these colums are required. But what is significant in this thread is that your nationality is Indian or Bartiya (not Hindu) and religion is Hindu, Islam, Sikh etc.

What RSS chief says is not binding for everyone, there are takers and there are no takers. In area mostly middle east, every Indian is called as Hindu, people from India are called as Hindu in middle east and this is reality, Hindustan is a Urdu term and it is related to Hindu and in middle east, people of India are called as Hindu, It is true while speaking they have lesser knowledge that Hindu relates to a religion. The word Hindustan comes out from word Hindu which derived from Sindhu, westerners cannot utter word Sindu and that is why they called as Indus civilisation and then India. Unlike Indonesia which have politically recognised the important attached with Hindu instead India or Bharat or Hindustan as whatever for namesake always relates Hindu with religion but in reality Sanatan dharma is the religion the oldest in world and oldest survived religions.

The people from India are called 'Hindi' and not 'Hindu' which is a religion. The slogan 'Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai' was also coined to indicate that Indian natioality may be described as 'Hindi' (not Hindu). However since 1950, our constitution refers to the country as India or Bharat. So matter ends here. Also, we may be called 'Hindustani' irrespective of religion. But not 'Hindu' if the religion is not Hindu. It is better to avoid controversy and use only 'Indian' or 'Bhartiya'. Otherwise our valuable energy and time will be wasted in such meaningless issues instead of real problems of people. But the saffron brigade lives on emotions only- may be Hindu Rashtra, Babri demolition or other similar emotive issues.

People of India in middle east are called as Hindu irrespective of religions, and that is what RSS tells if outisiders can call every Indian as Hindu why not Indians. Honorable supreme court also in one of its verdict says Hindu is a way of life,

These are needless controversies. In India, Hindu is a religion and even in matrinimonials, employment and service particulars etcc, this is religion. By diverting to such topics with the real object of fascistic chauvanism, the saffron lobby is attempting to creatre an unhealthy environment and rift.

Please don't mind my saying so but who introduced these forms where one has to write his surname first then his name and the same forms contain the column to fill the cast, sub-cast etc. All government forms are incomplete without these formalities. Recently (few years before) they started counting public on religious basis to facilitate a particular cast on numbers basis. Isn't that a useless exercise of pleasing a particular cast? What is the need of counting people of a country based on caste and creed if not the policy of vote bank working behind it?

Probably, government need staistics for census, social welfare schemes etc. So these colums are required. But what is significant in this thread is that your nationality is Indian or Bartiya (not Hindu) and religion is Hindu, Islam, Sikh etc.

Sorry, I thought was about Hindutwa aggressive lobby. As long Bhartiyta is concerned, I am all for it.

What RSS chief says is not binding for everyone, there are takers and there are no takers. In area mostly middle east, every Indian is called as Hindu, people from India are called as Hindu in middle east and this is reality, Hindustan is a Urdu term and it is related to Hindu and in middle east, people of India are called as Hindu, It is true while speaking they have lesser knowledge that Hindu relates to a religion. The word Hindustan comes out from word Hindu which derived from Sindhu, westerners cannot utter word Sindu and that is why they called as Indus civilisation and then India. Unlike Indonesia which have politically recognised the important attached with Hindu instead India or Bharat or Hindustan as whatever for namesake always relates Hindu with religion but in reality Sanatan dharma is the religion the oldest in world and oldest survived religions.

The people from India are called 'Hindi' and not 'Hindu' which is a religion. The slogan 'Hindi Cheeni Bhai Bhai' was also coined to indicate that Indian natioality may be described as 'Hindi' (not Hindu). However since 1950, our constitution refers to the country as India or Bharat. So matter ends here. Also, we may be called 'Hindustani' irrespective of religion. But not 'Hindu' if the religion is not Hindu. It is better to avoid controversy and use only 'Indian' or 'Bhartiya'. Otherwise our valuable energy and time will be wasted in such meaningless issues instead of real problems of people. But the saffron brigade lives on emotions only- may be Hindu Rashtra, Babri demolition or other similar emotive issues.

People of India in middle east are called as Hindu irrespective of religions, and that is what RSS tells if outisiders can call every Indian as Hindu why not Indians. Honorable supreme court also in one of its verdict says Hindu is a way of life,

These are needless controversies. In India, Hindu is a religion and even in matrinimonials, employment and service particulars etcc, this is religion. By diverting to such topics with the real object of fascistic chauvanism, the saffron lobby is attempting to creatre an unhealthy environment and rift.

Please don't mind my saying so but who introduced these forms where one has to write his surname first then his name and the same forms contain the column to fill the cast, sub-cast etc. All government forms are incomplete without these formalities. Recently (few years before) they started counting public on religious basis to facilitate a particular cast on numbers basis. Isn't that a useless exercise of pleasing a particular cast? What is the need of counting people of a country based on caste and creed if not the policy of vote bank working behind it?

Probably, government need staistics for census, social welfare schemes etc. So these colums are required. But what is significant in this thread is that your nationality is Indian or Bartiya (not Hindu) and religion is Hindu, Islam, Sikh etc.

Sorry, I thought was about Hindutwa aggressive lobby. As long Bhartiyta is concerned, I am all for it.

Really the thread is about Hindu aggressive lobby but this is limited to their over eagerness for Hindu nation. One said that every Indian is Hindu. I don't mind if everyone readily accepts this. But even the Sikhs do not accept this. I remember that when some BJP leader had remarked that Sikhs are 'keshdhaari Hindus', Badal retorted saying that in that case Muslims are Sunnatdhaari Hindus. Just Indian or Bhartiya suffice to indicate our nationality. This is also in current practice.