A few days ago, as most of India awoke to 1991, the BJP-VHP-RSS moved back from 1528 to 1526, with some leading units having stormed into the 5th century and others more intrepid claiming to have pierced the mists of even earlier centuries. Hurrah! While the world marches towards the 21st century... India's saffron brigade is in glorious retreat. Should one laugh or cry at the irrelevance of it all- the crass revivalism, the absurdity of trying to rewrite history, the militant divisiveness and the extraordinary expenditure of time and energy on non-issues?....
...The asthi kalash processions press on...with the aim of visiting 100,000 places by January 14 while highly provocative cassettes and tapes, some of them unauthorised, continue to vitiate the atmosphere. Surcharged emotions have spilled into the streets in the most widespread and cruellest riots since 1947-50, barring the 1984 carnage... The VHP continues to insist that... the Ram Janmabhoomi Mandir will be built precisely where it wants it, and that similar restoration or restitution must follow in Mathura and Varanasi. The larger objective now openly proclaimed by the VHP-RSS-BJP is the establishment of a Hindu Rashtra. The goal is far from religious. It is electoral and political.... Integral humanism, Gandhian socialism and secularism have been moth-balled in favour of what is increasingly turning out to be.... chauvinism.
The ultimate argument is that the Ayodhya issue is a matter of faith which transcends evidence or judicial process. Faith is a legitimate basis for action but can never be above the law where it infringes the rights of others. Nor is faith the exclusive prerogative of any one group or sect. And where was faith earlier when the faithful were in office or held positions of power?... Others, far more knowledgeable than I, strongly assert that there is no scriptural sanction in any shastra for sanctifying the exact birthsite of Ram, even if this was not a matter of conjecture and considerable controversy.
To limit Ram, Maryada Purushottam, an avatar of Vishnu, to the narrow confines of some national coordinates is surely to diminish the majesty and grandeur of the boundless and timeless godhead which is omnipresent...
The objective of Hindu Rashtra is unquestionable if it is based on the original definition of the term Hindu, which means one who lives in Hind. There can be no quarrel with Hindu Rashtra as a cultural expression either. Who would deny the greatness, even the centrality of the very vibrant Hindu culture. But admitting and accepting this is not to deny the place in and contribution of other streams- the Islamic, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh, Christian and Parsee among others- to India's cultural heritage. One has only to look around to see evidence of synthesis and harmony.... The genius of Hinduism has been and remains its catholicity and eclecticism, its tolerance and ability to accommodate. This has.... only added to its richness. To depart from this essential tradition is itself a denigration of something precious and vital.
Some ideologues of the VHP-RSS-BJP have sought to project the theory that while every society is anchored in a dominant civilisation, the logical and legitimate driving force of Hindu civilisational battle before the triumph of Hindu civilisation has in India been challenged by Islam and, thereafter, the British - Marxist- modern- secular- Nehruvian model. The current social upheaval ... represents the final stage of this epic civilisation. Hence Hindu Rashtra... The narrowing definition of 'Hindu' and the politicisation of the term by rejecting whole chunks of Indian history and culture can only result in drift to theocracy. This would impose a self-defined majoritarian norm on the country, in variance with the established Indian constitutional consensus around a plural, democratic society with fraternity as one of its principal pillars. Denying diversity in favour of a unitarian concept can only divide the country with some more equal than others.
Consider the rhetoric and look at the doctrines being taken out of the closet or being interpreted anew. The RSS has long distinguished between indigenous and foreign religions. This is a narrowly geographical or real estate view of nationhood but meaningless otherwise... Christianity and Islam are the so-called foreign religions but they came to India round 56 A.D. with St. Thomas and in the 8th century respectively. And predating or alongside Hinduism there have been even older and parallel faiths. What then does 'indigenous' mean? When does history begin? This is entirely specious reasoning.
The analogy of the Japanese administration recently apologising to the Chinese and Korean people for the pre-War sins of Imperial Japan is wrongly cited to demand that Muslim Indians, described as Babar's progeny, should similarly atone for the alleged wrongs committed by their religious forebears hundreds of years ago. Who is to apologise to whom and for what? Here is a monstrous new two nation or master race theory being resurrected on behalf of some self-selected, chosen people. What better justification for Khalistan or Muslim Kashmir as claimed by Pakistan? Likewise, the strange suggestion that Muslims and Christians, after all, have some other 'homeland' in which to seek refuge if need be: but where else can Hindus go? Each of these propositions is utterly fanciful, and abhorrent products of a sick mind. The Crusades and Inquisition with their intolerant cruelties characterise unfortunate chapters of the past and can be no guide to a better future. To seek vicarious revenge for history is to return to the depths of medieval barbarism. All communalism are bad. Minority communalism can lead to isolationism and separatism... Majority communalism spells fascism.