Only true Rambhaktas like Hanuman are welcomed.

vijay wrote:

All persons are bhaktas of some god or godman. That is not an issue. What Gadkari said was "that this government is of Rambhaktas" thereby meaning that those who believe in other gods than Rama are not of concern to the govt. In saying so there is a deeper meaning and such statements are made n a calculated manner to draw a polarised response and bond certain class of bhaktas together. What is the need for minister to make such statement.  In fact they enjoy doing so because it draws typical responses as is seen in this forum also. Ramayana is a great story which has withstood the vagaries of time. I do not agree that Rambhaktas do not have Swiss accounts. Have you not heard  " Moonh me Ram bhagal mein Choori"

 

When Gandhi was hit by the bullet he said "Hey Ram" does that mean he did not have all the people of this country in his mind but only wanted to say he belonged to BJP? Ram has nothing to do with BJP but it's common for all gods a name only that denotes our faith. We have never objected that half the songs have Moosa, Moula Allah Khuda etc and anyone objecting in singing them. Or Muslim ministers swearing by Allah or Khuda every sentence but anyone even mentioned them. 

When Pakistani Prime Minister started his speech in last UNO meeting he began it with a Ayat of Quran, does that mean he wanted to convert UNO into a masque? That is knid of funny example if Gadkari said the government has Rambhakta in it. There certainly are Ram Bhakta, Allah ke bande and people from all religion in the government as well they represent all sects Including of course Rambhaktas.. 

To my mind there could be a rational and well-informed debate if Ram Chandra was a mythological or historical figure and there should not be an iota of doubt about the greatness of our two timeless classical epics. I am also not in doubt that the immortal creators of them purely depended on their fertile imagination or subjectivity to create them. Isn't it simply breathtaking that such highly evolved human beings walked upon the earth when other parts of the globe were groping in Cimmerian darkness. I can not reason with myself why our mouthends should be foaming in holy anger when the very name of Ram is taken. The father of the nation dreamed of 'Ramrajya' making it synonymous with good governance. If one judges the present day rulers by the moral yardsticks of Ram, they are worst caricatures and not even dwarfed pygmies in comparison. He was a 'rajarshee' who was symbol of truth,sacrifice and love. 

Please read the line ' I am also not in doubt' as I firmly doubt.

One may follow any religion but what sense it makes to say that the govt. is not of citizens but of followers of certain deity- Rama, Krishna, Christ or whosoever. . 

One is not against Rambhaktas. It is the associated agenda, which makes lot many persons uncomfortable, when a particular class of ruling dispensation continuously resorts to exploiting the name of Rama. Gandhijis use of Rama and present day leaders use are simply not comparable.When Anna invokes Rama no one accuses him. When Ram's name is used to garner votes it is that which becomes objectionable.What Pakistanis do should not be of concern to us, after how they have messed it up in name of religion.Secularism is respecting all religions equally and not bringing it into politics. Anti secularists have fallen prey to the design of politicians.

What I attempted at was to elucidate on what Ram was quintessentially, not a word on the credentials on Rambhakats or the quality of their devotion to him. So many things could be about the credentials of our so-called secular parties and their pseudo brand of secularim. How does one justify their miserable failure to evolve a uniform civil code?How does one justify state funding of religious pilgrimmage of a particular community? What about Indira Gandhi' famous and much-hyped trips

to religious places on the eve of elections,Rajiv' unlocking Ram temple's door,his infamous role in the Shahbano case? 

The different religious faiths came together in 1947 to form the Indian nation on the mutual agreement that each religion can follow its practices and this is guaranteed by the Constitution. Hindus follow their religious practices like Muslims, Sikhs,Christians follow theirs. All non religious activities are governed by common laws irrespective of one's religion. A uniform civil code can happen when society is more mature than today. The will of some fundamentalists can not be forced upon other religion followers. Secularism means keeping religion away from politics but does not bar one to follow their religion and beliefs including politicians including Indira Gandhi. Rajiv's opening of Ram temple's door and role in Shahbano case were mistakes which should not have happened, but that does not dilute secularism in any way.