(Some of) us after all the water that has flowed down the Gomti since the demolition of the Babari mosque, are disposed to giye the BJP the benefit of the doubt. Thus a new political discourse about the party seems under way as the new president, Bangaru Laxman, puts across his call to Muslims ... PM Vajpayee, has been inviting us to believe that the BJP is the BJP and the Parivar-others are just that - the others. Except that, the small matter that "cultural nationalism' is common to the BJP and the expedient 'others' is acknowledged by one and all ..
Unfortunately for Laxman, his call is barely out when the National Minorities Commission in a unanimous report holds the Bajrang Dal and the VHP squarely responsible for the latest communal killings in Surat ... With the inauguration by Laxman of a new political season of camaraderie with the Muslims, some governmental condemnation would be forthcoming. But no. Over the last decade, even the governmental BJP, not to speak of the organisational set-up, is struck with deathly silence when the naughty 'others' behave to pattern ...
At any rate, the coup de. grace to Laxman's ... call to the 15 or so per cent Muslim populace comes finally from no less a person than the so-called 'Nehruvian' Vajpayee himself. Prior to leaving for the United States, Vajpayee had paid obeisance to his "soul-bhumi" at Nagpur, even as a lactical visit was made there to Ambedkar's deeksha- sthal. But at Staten Island, the full-fledged saffron cat came gleefully out of the prime ministerial bag. Honestly enough. with the verve of spontaneity, at the swarmingly Hindutva jamboree awash with sadhus, sants and Hindutva rashtravadi perorations, the Prime Minister acknowledged that he is swayamsevak first and Pradhan Mantri after, and, god-willing, a two-thirds majority in Parliament in the days to come would see the implementation of the full Hindutva agenda. Saffron knight in VHP armour – thus spake our Prime Minister on foreign soil ...
There is, indeed, good reason why the VHP calls itself the "Vishwa' Hindu Parishad ...
What is the vision of the VHP? I cite from the September 1983 issue of the VHP journal, Vishwa Hindu. We are told that Jerusalem is indeed 'Yedushalyam,' that is 'the shrine of the Lord of Yadus, i.e. Krishna.' Further, "Icteverybody know that the Dome of the Rock and the nearby Al Aqsa though currently being misused as mosque are ancient Krishna temples." As to the claims of the Great Britain, we are instructed that St. Paul's Cathedral in London in origin' was 'Gopal (Krishna) Mandir'; at its tent is a Statue of Lord Shiva with the trident,' and inside its most dominant feature is the 'Sudarshan Chakra of Lon Krishna.' Come to Europe proper and we learn that the Notre Dame Church was 'originally the temple of the Mother Goddess, Devi Bhagvati, Parvati, Bhawani Chandi alias Durga.' Indeed. Paris itself was 'Parameshwarium' which the Romans distorted to 'Parisorium' and which, by impure declension, became Paris. Yes, what you call river Seine is the distorted name of 'Sindhu.' Most of all, did Laxman know when he gave his call to the Indian Muslims that the Kaaba in Mecca was a 'gigantic Vishnu temple'? ... Finally, Bill Clinton and any future American President may note that 'in pre-Christian times, all people in the entire world were Hindus'! And the U.N. chief. Kofi Annan, as well ought to take all that in, since the VHP is currently an applicant with the United Nations Economic and Social Council for ECOSOC consultative status, stating it is an NGO 'located in New Delhi that works for the total welfare of humanity.' To this organisation our Prime Minister gave his blessings at Staten Island.
J. P. Mathur, now dethroned, insists in a television appearance that the BJP retains its agenda which after all is its authentic 'pehchaan,' One wonders how poor Mr. Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi receives the new Laxman message. given that, after the recent reshuffle, he remains where be was. And when did any one last hear of Sikander Bahklt?
Congressisation? ... The party cannot Congressise itself so long as its ideological/cultural apparatus continues willy-nilly. to be drawn from that- Goliath of extra-constitutional authority - more enormous than the late- lamented Sanjay Gandhi - called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Whatever the sins of the Congress ... it cannot be said the party has at any stage been an ideologue of cultural fascism. Whereas P. V. Narasimha Rao's somnambulant complicity in the Babari episode was indeed a clinching event for the Muslims to turn away from the Congress, it was not the sole reason. It was an event which, so to speak, climaxed their seething perception that whereas Congress regimes might have provided physical security, the party never did anything to make them equal partners in the labours and fruits of nation-building ...
Despite, therefore, the 'appeasement' package announced by M. Venkaiah Naidu - that the BJP will promote Urdu, facilitate the Haj and find more Muslim candidates if the Muslims 'come closer' - it is not likely that the new Laxman gesture will fool many of them. Indeed, one expects that in any election to come. The Muslims will not hesitate to vote the Congress if in any constituency they perceive its candidate to he the best placed to defeat the BJP, The Sangh Parivar needs to realise that till the time an explicit repudiation of the Savarkar thesis that such inhabitants whose punyabhoomi lies outside the territories of Bharat ean never be trusted enough to be "loyal' to pitrabhoomi is forthcoming, the Muslims will remain skepucal with good cause.
Now that the BIP-led Centre draws closer to the Israelis and the Americans, the best lesson may be learnt from the case of Jewish-American citizens. After all, their punyabhoomi also lies way outside the borders of USA, yet over time Christian Americans did not only learn to get over old ... acrimonies; Jewish Americans have for long decades now been at the heart of some of the most outstanding achievements of American society. The Indian Muslims have an even better claim historically. They would like to see that recognised. (Source: The Hindu, 2 October, 2000)
On Secular State for a Religious People
Shahabuddin to Indian Express, 13 Oct., 2000
In his article "Mutual Respect and Esteem" (IE, 12 October, 2000), T.V.R. Shenoy has articulated his own concept of 'Hindu Secularism'.
He is right in stating that the concept of secularism has become second cousin to plasticine in some Indian hands, including, if I may add, his own. In India, it is out of place and unrealistic to use the word 'secular' except to define the character of the State we are trying to build in our country, which is multi-religious.
Our people are highly religious. The secular state does not interfere with their religiosity - personal or collective, and the state does not align itself with any particular religion and does not lean towards one or the other, at the inter-face, particularly in situations of conflict. Thus the Indian State is secular; the Indian society is not.
Every religion has its own doctrines. Some are more dogmatic than the others. Some are closed shops; some are expansive; some are local, some are universal, We cannot and should not impose the ethos of one religion over all others or address them as inferior because they have a religious philosophy or spiritual approach of their own different from that of Hinduism. We cannot ask other religions to remould themselves in the Hindu fashion.
Dominic Emmanuel On Gandhi's Secularism
These. days Christians and Muslims are being challenged to prove their patriotism by ideologues who have inherited the ideology of those fanatics who allegedly plotted to kill the father of the nation and who refuse to unfurl the tricolour on Independence Day at their headquarters ...
For Gandhi, every human being was a child of God, regardless of which caste or religion he or she belonged to. He could never accept the thesis that India belonged only to Hindus and that it must become a country of "one people, one culture and one religion". He vehemently opposed the idea of a monoculture or the Hitlerian purity of race. "In no part of the world are one nationality and one religion synonymous terms; nor has it ever been so in India ... If the Hindus believe that India should be peopled only by Hindus, they are living in a dreamland."
Gandhi was consistent in his opposition to bigotry. "It has been my experience that I am always right from my point of view and often wrong from the point of view of my honest critics. I know that we are both right from our respective points of view. And this knowledge prevents me from attributing motives to my opponents or critics ... It is this doctrine manyness of reality that has taught me to judge a Mussalman from his own standpoint and a Christian from his." ... One wonders whether if another Gandhi is born on the Indian soil today, would he be at all welcomed? (Source: The Hindustan Times, 2 October, 2000)
G. P. Sharma On Rewarding Hindu Fundamentalism
... Today, religiosity is treated as a virtue that can be bartered for instant political favour and the distinction between just being religious and overtly religious can make a difference to one's political fortunes. No wonder religious enthusiasts, especially belonging to (the Hindu) community, are trying to occupy every bit of the social space at the behest of their political, bosses. National symbols are being appropriated to communicate a political message couched in religious idiom. The mythical past is being reinvented to serve the cause of politics as well as religion: Various cultural festivals have acquired a new meaning in the changed political context. The scale and manner of their celebration is a kind of political statement. The most. disturbing trends, however, are the indiscriminate construction of places of worship ... and the growing incidence of attacks on Christian missions. Hence, doubtless, religion is being politicised on a scale never before seen ... Such proximity between state and religion raises serious doubts about the secular and plural character of the Indian state ...
Even during British rule ... the colonial state in its enlightened self-interest never tried to tinker with religion ... This did not prevent the British from making use of its divisive power. They quite successfully turned the pre-colonial communitarian divide into a communal one through communal construction of India's past.
However, the colonial state's official agenda never included the sponsorship of any particular religion ...Unlike today, when Parliament has the presence of several saffron-clad personalities, there was no such organic link between the (State and the missionaries) and at no point of time did the missionaries ever try to seek nor did the colonial state try to provide political patronage..
In today's context when religious fervour is at its worst, it is imperative that the state neither cultivates nor gives in to any kind of religious fundamentalism. But, it is becoming increasingly benign toward followers of a particular religious faith so much so that it is willing to cover up their acts of omission and commission. The demolition of the Babari Masjid stands out as a monumental testimony to such a role and points to a growing liaison between state and religion. Today the studied silence of the Indian state on several disturbing incidents involving the (Hindus) has emboldened its followers to commit all sorts of excesses in the name of religion just to please their political patrons. This has not only put the minorities on the defensive but created a scare amongst them and lent credibility to the sectarian argument that with the rise in Hindu fundamentalism there is no place for minorities in India ... As long as religiosity is rewarded politically, brutal incidents like the Staines' murder will be repeated. (Source: The Hindu, 28 September, 2000)
