HVK Archives: Hinduism includes Sikhs , Jains and Buddhists
Hinduism includes Sikhs , Jains and Buddhists - Organiser
Posted By ashok (ashokvc@giasbm01.vsnl.net.in)
8 September 1996
Title : Hinduism includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists
Author :
Publication : Organiser
Date : September 8, 1996
Excerpts : Interview of Mr Buta Singh by Organiser
representative Pramod Kumar
What is your opinion about the proposed reservation bill
for the so-called dalit Christian?
My opinion is that when any section of the poor people is
helped it is for the good of the country. And
Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, whosoever is poor, if
they get some respite it is good; I welcome it. But at
the same time this facility of reservation cannot be
thrown open to anybody or everybody. There was a
philosophy behind it when reservation was introduced in
the Constitution. Unless and until that purpose is
fulfilled this resection policy should not be misused.
Although there are other methods of helping the poor
sections of our society-and the government should find
ways and means to help the poor sections even if they are
Christians, Muslims, Sikhs or Hindus in spite of their
being other than Hindus. The reservation was meant only
for the Hindus and their offshoots. And the Christians
can now enjoy the same benefits by claiming to be
backward or being economically weak. Why should they be
brought into the fold of Scheduled Castes or Scheduled
Tribes? Especially when they are not themselves keen
about it? That is my point of Blew.
What will be the over-all effect of this move?
Effect? Of course, any political party would like to
gamer as much public support by throwing concessions to
the weaker sections as they can. And the effect will be
the same if the Christians are given the same concessions
not as scheduled castes or scheduled tribes but as Other
Backward Class they will be as happy as otherwise.
They are not talking in terms of weaker or poor sections;
they are going to gone it to the self-styled 'dalit'
Christians...
There is no "dalit Christian" as such. "Dalit"
(depressed) is an epithet used only for a certain section
among the Hindus. The description dalit comes from the
prevalence of Varnavyavastha or the caste-system. And
there is no varnavyuvastha in Christianity or Islam.
Therefore you may use any other word but dalit.
Christians are not dalit, Muslims are not dalit only
Hindus can be called dalits. I have therefore said that
they should fulfil the basic criterion, namely being
dalit, which they cannot.
How come they have started calling themselves "dalit
Christians"?
I do not think any Christian organisation has come
forward with the proposal that they should be called
"dalit Christians". It amount to introducing caste
system in Christianity where it does not obtain. In fact
Christianity abhors the caste-system. The Christians
themselves would not like to be given a caste appellation
like dalit. Yes, if you want to include Christians as an
Other Backward Class, you can do that. But there
certainly can be no dalit among Muslims or Christians.
Mother Teresa has also demanded reservation for
Christian.
The Mother must have supported the move because she wants
to be kind to the poor of all communities and therefore
she must have supported the weaker section among
Christians also.
But on the eve of the recent general elections the Rao
Government tried to bring an ordinance on this matter,
which was however turned down by the President. What h
your comment?
Yes, there also I had made my position very clear, that
if the Christians also were extended, the benefits I
welcome it. But they should not have it as dalits, they
should get it as Other Backward Class.
Do you support that Christians should also be extended
reservation from the existing quota of SCs?
Certainly not. That is reserved only for dalits on the
basis of untouchability, Christians should not draw the
benefits from the SC/ST quota. They are not untouchable.
They can be accommodated in the Other Backward Class
quota.
What percentage should it be?
It may be according to their population.
Would you oppose this Bill?
Now, I am not a Member of Parliament. SO personally I
cannot do anything. But our party will act as per its
stand.
But your party favours the proposal?
It favours reservation for Christians, but not as dalits.
Only as a weaker section.
It is argued that when Sikhs and Buddhists are enjoying
the benefits of reservation, why not Christians?
This argument is given by those who have no knowledge of
the Indian Constitution. Article 25 of the Constitution
says that Hinduism includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists
among Hindus.
But a General Secretary of your party Shri B. P. Maurya
does, not agree with this fact?
Maurya Saheb has been a senior lawyer. I am an ordinary
man. But I have read the Constitution that says :
"Hinduism includes Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists among
Hindus."
Shri Maurya argued that Master Tara Singh had brought an
amendment to the Constitution after which Sikhism was
declared a separate religion?
That was a political agreement. After this agreement
Sikhs have been given a right to propagate their way of
worship. It has been included in the same Article 25 of
the Constitution. But the definition of Hindu had not
been changed.
Back
Top
|
