A warped, tragic reincarnation of Hinduism calls itself nationalism
On 12 September 1991, during a debate on the Places of Worship (Special Provisions Bill) in the Rajya Sabha, Rajmohan Gandhi warned that those seeking to right the wrongs of history will only produce destruction. ThePrint’s Great Speeches series reprints this text.
If the law is to prevail over intimidation and the Constitution is to prevail over hysteria, and if security, the rule of law, and harmony are to be sought to be restored, then this Bill is unavoidable. I am well aware that a significant section of our political world has charged that this Bill will produce disharmony rather than harmony. I will try to refute that reasoning. But I would like to start by asserting that this Bill is a necessary step for the rule of law and for harmony in the country.
Those who have opposed this Bill have spoken about what they call the necessity to right the wrongs of history. That is a fairly emotive phrase, and it has been used in many parts of the world. It has been used in many places.
Not long ago, we all saw the Mahabharata serial. One great point in the Mahabharata serial is the end of the Kurukshetra war. One of our distinguished Members, Mr RK Narayan, in his book on the Mahabharata, has said that at the end of the Kurukshetra war, the stage is a blank. The Mahabharata is probably the greatest poem of all times, of all climes. But we are so impressed by the politics of the Mahabharata that we have failed to listen to the prophet in the Mahabharata.
The ringing lesson of the Mahabharata down the centuries is: “Those who seek to right the wrongs of history with an attitude of revenge will only produce destruction and more destruction and more destruction.” The Mausala Parva of the Mahabharata is really a demonstration of an attempt to right the wrongs of history. Read the conversation of Satyaki and Kritavarma: “You did this. You killed people like that. You violated every human and civilised law, and we were obliged to take revenge.”
The ringing lesson of the Mahabharata down the centuries is: “Those who seek to right the wrongs of history with an attitude of revenge will only produce destruction and more destruction and more destruction.”
The counter to that was couched in the same or similar language, and the race perished. In the Mausala Parva and in the Anushasana Parva of the Mahabharata, there are more lines about what the prophet in the Mahabharata was trying to tell us and posterity. It says in the Anushasana Parva that mercy is the highest good. It says: “When you use the rod of punishment for your own happiness, there is no happiness in the next world.” It says that laying aside the rod of punishment is the root of happiness.
A distinguished philosopher of West Bengal, Buddhadev Bose, has referred even to the Kurukshetra war in these terms: “No more futile and joyless coming of a kingdom has ever been recorded in human history.” So let us be very careful before we seek to right the wrongs because that is an unending process. Of course, we must face the wrongs of today and seek to right them. But when we go to day-before-yesterday and the century before the previous century and 500 years ago and 1,000 years ago and we seek to right those wrongs, then we are on that path of which the prophet in the Mahabharata warned us.
Madam Vice-Chairman, I hear the powerful voices that say this Bill is anti-Hindu. I see that voice as the voice of a new separatism in our land. It calls itself a new nationalism, but it is a new separatism. It is Hindu separatism. It is Hinduism in a tragic and warped reincarnation. Those behind it, I am sure, are devoted to the Hindu cause but misled by their own emotions and passions. They are seeking to create a Hindu Pakistan, a Hindu Saudi Arabia here in India. Madam Vice-Chairman, the eyes of this new Hindu separatism traverse this land’s length and breadth. These eyes go past the misery, hunger, crippledness, blindness, corruption, and violence. It skips, it flits past all these sad signs and locates as the root of all our misery a site, a structure, built a few hundred years ago as the root cause of our unhappiness today.
I see that voice as the voice of a new separatism in our land. It calls itself a new nationalism, but it is a new separatism. It is Hindu separatism. It is Hinduism in a tragic and warped reincarnation.
This new separatist Hinduism speaks of Hindu honour and Hindu pride. Madam Vice-Chairman, in our blood also, there is a tradition of the desire to fight for Hindu pride and Hindu honor. But when we seek to turn the existence of the feeling of Hindu pride and the feeling of Hindu honour, when we seek to turn that or convert that into cash, into votes, into intimidatory power, into the gun, that is when we cause dishonour to be brought to the Hindu name.
I read the other day in the Organiser , the organ of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a quotation from Sister Nivedita, a great disciple of Swami Vivekananda, with which I fully agree. She spoke of Hinduism as the creation of Hindu character rather than as a reservoir of Hindu customs. Where is that search to create the Hindu character to grapple with the evils of Hindu society today?
There is Punjab, there is Kashmir, there is Assam, about which references have just been made. There is a need for courage. There is a need for wisdom. Nobody can pretend that the ‘atankwad ‘ of Punjab, Kashmir, and Assam is easy to face. Bravery is required in tackling them. But what evidence of bravery have we seen from this new Hindu separatism? We have seen innocent, humble, poor Muslims—not the ‘atankwadis‘ of Kashmir and Punjab tackled, not the ‘atankwadis‘ of Assam tackled—innocent Muslim craftsmen, bunkars, and badhais threatened, their security challenged. Hinduism is proud of real bravery. It is not proud of intimidation in the name of bravery. Madam Vice-Chairman, this new Hindu separatism has to ask itself whether it is really pro-Hindu or whether it is anti-Muslim. I submit that the litmus test of the champions of the new Hindu separatism is: ‘Demonstrate your Hinduism by being anti-Muslim.’
The eyes of this new Hindu separatism traverse this land’s length and breadth. These eyes go past the misery, hunger, crippledness, blindness, corruption, and violence. It skips, it flits past all these sad signs and locates as the root of all our misery a site, a structure, built a few hundred years ago as the root cause of our unhappiness today.
I read again in the Organiser the other day, September 8, 1991, an article by Shri Sitaram Goel: “Islam, like Christianity or Marxism, is a variant of the same imperialist theme. So Islam is imperialism.” I read in the same Organiser , the same article, about Christianity: “It has managed to smuggle into our Constitution a clause that converting heathens is its fundamental right.” That clause, guaranteeing freedom of expression and the freedom to practice and propagate religion, was not smuggled into our Constitution. To state this is to cast a slur on Pandit Nehru, Sardar Patel, Baba Saheb Ambedkar, Rajendra Prasad, and the other stalwarts who helped create our Constitution. No, it is wrong to say that Hinduism requires anti-Islam as its foundation. Hinduism came to this earth much before Islam did, and dislike of Islam is not necessary as a foundation, expansion, or extension of true Hinduism. (Interruptions.)
Mr Vice-Chairman, in my devotion to Hinduism, I did not look at the Chair. Sir, Hitler succeeded in persuading a large number of his compatriots that virtually all the problems in Germany of his time were created by the Jews: the Jews controlled the cash, the Jews controlled the culture, the Jews controlled the media, the Jews were the smugglers. So, deal with the Jews, and all the problems of Germany would disappear. Something of that nature is being spread by the champions of the new Hindu separatism, and sadly, the Muslims are presented as the cause for many of the ills of India today. Then there is this desire for the re-writing of history. Once again, I have to quote from the Organiser, and here this is—the ‘Organiser Independence Day Special’:
“A large number of scholars supposedly met or did meet, obviously in Bangalore, and what did they resolve? It is resolved that the Government of India, the various State Governments, universities, colleges, schools, and bodies connected with framing the curricula, should incorporate the results of new researches pertaining to ancient Indian history, culture, and archaeology, in the textbooks at various levels in place of the old, incorrect, and outmoded theories which unfortunately still continue to appear in our textbooks.”
This new Hindu separatism has to ask itself whether it is really pro-Hindu or whether it is anti-Muslim. I submit that the litmus test of the champions of the new Hindu separatism is: ‘Demonstrate your Hinduism by being anti-Muslim.’
And what are supposed to be these outmoded theories? That the Aryans did come originally from outside. That many of the Hindu ideas were born even as the Aryans were traveling from Central Asia to India. That thought, that knowledge, that result of historical research is to be banished from all school books. History has to be re-written so that it can be demonstrated that Hinduism alone is the religion of the land and that Islam, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism are foreign religions and, therefore, Muslims, Christians, and Parsis must be second-rate citizens.
I charge that Lord Rama, whose name we take when we are about to die or when our near ones are about to die, the name for the Almighty, the all-loving, the preserver, the protector, has been sought to be made a politician. Nanaji Deshmukh, for whom I have great regard, in an article wrote some months ago: “Rama was a politician.” That is the gift of the champions of the new separatism to Hindu society today. (Interruptions .) Well, Rama is a member of all parties, of all nations. I certainly don’t mind the BJP getting a share, but we too have our share of Lord Rama.
Vice-Chairman Bhaskar Annaji Masodkar: It is a universal concept.
Rajmohan Gandhi: That is precisely the point. It is a universal concept and not a nationalist concept.
NKP Salve (Maharashtra): Maryada Purushottam.
Rajmohan Gandhi: More than Maryada Purushottam.
Vice-Chairman Bhaskar Annaji Masodkar: He does not want to put in “Maryada.”
Pramod Mahajan (Maharashtra): In the stock exchange, the share of Rama is going up every day.
Rajmohan Gandhi : And the name for the Almighty all over the world. And you don’t build temples for a national hero. You build temples for the Almighty.
Finally, I must speak about Mahatma Gandhi, who is supposed to be responsible, in the eyes of this separatism, for the partition of our country. Yes, Mahatma Gandhi said, “Partition over my dead body.” And yes, partition came before his dead body. There was only a gap of four or five months, six months. His dead body was available, but if any man fought to prevent partition in India, his name was Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
He may have failed. He may have failed, but he fought with his life, and he fought with his death, to prevent partition or to undo the division and the hatred of partition.
Syama Prasad Mookerjee at the time of partition was a champion of the partition of Bengal. Sarat Chandra Bose and Mahatma Gandhi tried, but they failed to have a united Bengal. Syama Prasad Mookerjee said, “No, Bengal must be partitioned.” Who was the champion of partition at that time? All right. Mahatma Gandhi prevented three-quarters of India from going to Pakistan. Veer Savarkar—I have great respect for him. I have seen the cell in the Andamans where he was incarcerated for ten long years. Veer Savarkar said before Jinnah Sahib that India consists of two nations, the Hindu nation and the Muslim nation. Are we, therefore, to spend time proving that Savarkar created partition, Syama Prasad Mookerjee created partition, Mahatma Gandhi created partition? That is a futile controversy.
At this time, let our eyes, our concerned eyes, traverse our land and see the real causes of disharmony, of suffering, of misery, and try and deal with those rather than encourage this sad, dangerous, and emotional battle over the issue of an ancient building with a disputed history. Mr Vice-Chairman, today the emotions are very strong, and they may help you gain political success of a small or a large kind, but new emotions will be created. New wrongs of an ancient time will be sought to be righted, and there can be scores of struggles to right the ancient wrongs in India, and then logic also will return, in a manner reminiscent of Kurukshetra and the Mausala Parva . I will, therefore, appeal to the Bharatiya Janata Party and its supporters to see the issue in its true perspective, to understand the spirit in which this Bill is being brought before this House. Let us make this a national resolve: thus far, no further. Yes, there will be disputes, but violent confrontations shall be avoided. The neighbour’s right will be respected. The neighbour’s feelings will be respected, and together we will look at the future and the present, not so much at the past.”
This is part of ThePrint’s Great Speeches series. It features speeches and debates that shaped modern India.