There's a debate in Mahabharata regarding the dharma under normal circumstances, i.e., Varnashrama Dharma, and dharma under calamitous circumstances, i.e., Apad Dharma.

Traditional Hindu scholars have emhpasised that people must avoid Apad Dharma because it's part of Mahabharata and if people keep Mahabharata in their homes, then they create war like situations in their homes.

But then there are others who point out that Apad Dharma is in actually the bigger of the two parvas in MB, viz., the Shanti Parva, with the other being Yuddha Parva. Satya P. Agarwal suggests that Apad Dharma is part of the peace making process and also suggests that Apad Dharma is a better framework to conduct oneself during calamitous scenarios.

Hindus need to first understand whether this land was Waqf donation? If so, then Muslims can claim it back anytime.

Tomorrow, they might exploit by taking over the temple, even demolishing it, by stating that it's a Waqf land.

Then they might use this as an example to destroy all other temples stating those temples were also similarly based on Waqf donation.

If any Hindu community wants to accept any such donation, they should explicitly ensure it through a gift-deed where in it is clearly stated that the donated land is not waqf property.

Why Khalistani propaganda is disinfo?

Khalistanis have built up an immigration network whereby they maintain the story of persecution of Sikhs in India in order for them to get easy and convenient visa approvals.

This persecution is a myth because the 1984 anti-Sikh riots were political and not religious. They were a result of two terrorists assassinating Indian PM, Mrs. Gandhi.

Those terrorists were part of a revolutionary group actively encouraged by Pakistan's ISI to play divide and rule against Hindu-Sikh brotherhood. Many Hindus also sacrificed their lives.

So certainly, there is no anti-Sikh hatred in India, or persecution of Sikhs, or some kind of genocide going against them. Anything that suggests so is engaging in disinformation. That makes any Khalistani agitation an exercise in disinfo.

It begins with humanity not with humans. It should begin with humans, but then it starts going into firkawariyat, distinguishing humans on the basis of kaffir, munafiq, murtadd dhimmi and so on and such other categories.

What is the basis on which it is considered superior? How does it begin with humans when it clearly classifies humans on the basis of how much hardcore belief they have in dogmas of Islam.

In what way is it superior? Acting as a collective hive mentality? Yes. Acting as a single vote bloc? Yes. Rallying people for carrying out violence. Yes. But these things do not make any religion superior. Unless a religion helps liberates a human from the pain of death and attachments to materiality, it's not a religion. On the other hand Islam promises rewards, 72 hoors, spoils of war, maal-e-ganimat, sex slaves, concubines to the soldiers who help Islam achieve victory over the 'infidels'. Islam divides humans, so how can it talk about 'humanity'.

What an absurd claim.

Shows he himself does not know anything about Islam.