The Times of India, 19 November, 1990

...There is large section of BJP which thinks that an extreme view on the question of religion is neither beneficial to them nor the nation. There is a section in the BJP.... who are equally concerned and worried about the situation as I am.

...All religions have a certain set of formalities and if you go beyond those you are considered to be out of the purview of that faith or religion. But Hindu religion is such a religion where even an atheist is a Hindu. Nobody questions this. You worship or you don't worship; you observe rituals or don't observe rituals so the mind is free from obsessions... Hindu religion has never tried to discard other religions.

...It is superior because it is more accommodating and if this superiority is not there Hindu religion will not remain. Hindu religion has survived only because it could not be put into a strait-jacket. It could not be regimented. Whenever there was an attempt of regimentation of Hindu religion it crumbled...

...I am not trying to woo anybody. You cannot woo Hindus. Anyone who is trying to woo Hindus is living in a fool's paradise. Hindus cannot be won over on this slogan. Temporarily they may be but ultimately they will be guided by their philosophy.... This new philosophy of Hinduism is a total aberration. A distortion.

...If the people do not have any hope for the future they cling to old identities like caste and religion. Then you become sectarian and narrow minded. Another thing is that we do not know the problems of humanity and we do not understand them. The best answer to this was given by Swami Vivekananda... that every religion had created a well of their own and thus failed to see the ocean of humanity.

The only way is to tell the people the facts of history. After all Tulsidas was born after Babar. Tulsidas wrote Ramayana and no one could be a greater devotee of Ram than Tulsidas but in the whole Ramayana there is not one word against the Muslims. That was Hindu religion and that is why I am proud of being a Hindu. This is not being communal. It is being objective. It is being proud of your heritage, culture and civilisation. Any nation, any community, any person who is not proud of his past, not aware of his present and not confident of his future cannot be a nationalist.

It cannot (lead to a communal divide) provided they consider religion as an instrument of communion between man and God.

...My solution is that people should sit together and reach an understanding. If that is not possible then we cannot hurt the feelings of one section. This, in my opinion, is not Hinduism. Therefore, I shall like to appeal to leaders of both the communities. We cannot afford to quarrel on this issue. We have to live together. Why don't people understand that if 10,000 Muslims could not be eliminated when Babar came, how can you eliminate 12 crore from this country? Or if Babar, Aurangzeb or Taimur could not eliminate Hindu religion, do you think some malvis are going to be able to eliminate it? The only way is that people should understand and accept the reality.

...It is possible. It has to be made possible. And I am quite confident that approached with confidence and trust this is possible.

I am ready to compromise on everything provided they do not demolish the mosque. I am willing to go to any extent provided they do not hurt the sentiment of the other community. That is the only criteria.