From: [email protected]
To: 

http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/modi-ever-the-rss-pracharak-741624
The 56-inch mountain has at long last heaved - and produced the proverbial 
mouse.

After eight months of maun vrata over issues of religious tension, Narendra 
Modi has now disclosed that his "government will ensure that there is complete 
freedom of faith" and "will not allow any religious group, belonging to the 
majority or the minority, to incite hatred against others, overtly or covertly".

Excellent - except that this is what he should have said - and done - at the 
Shah Alam refugee camp in Ahmedabad in 2002 when an anti-Muslim pogrom was 
taking place under his watch.  There was neither a word of sympathy then, nor 
any action to establish that his Government was with the victims, not the 
perpetrators.  Indeed, it was not until he was compelled to accompany Prime 
Minister Vajpayee to the Shah Alam camp a full month later that he even made 
his first visit to the camp.  And when, finally, a word of sympathy came from 
him a decade or so later, it was to compare the murdered, injured and looted 
Muslims to a puppy dog accidently coming under the wheels of a car.

Nor is this the first time Modi has declared  that he "strongly condemn(s) 
State violence".  He had said it before to the BJP's Parliamentary Party.  But 
with what result?  Only the filthy statements from those he selected to 
represent his Party in the Lok Sabha and adorn his Council of Ministers.  
Perhaps he cannot deprive Sakshi Maharaj of his seat but by what standards does 
he continue to include Sadhvi Jyoti among his Ministers?  In the behavior of a 
whole cohort of his most ardent supporters, there is no indication that "equal 
respect for all religions" is in their "DNA".  If they do not have that in 
their DNA - as manifestly they do not- what are they doing sitting beside and 
behind him in Parliament?

And talking of Parliament, why did Modi so adamantly refuse to come to the 
Rajya Sabha and say exactly what he did to the Syrian Christians? The 
Opposition was demanding no more.  They wanted him to unequivocally declare on 
the floor of the sacred precincts of Parliament that he "consider(ed) the 
freedom to have, to retain and to adopt, a religion or belief (as) a personal 
choice of a citizen". He did not because he was afraid of being questioned 
about the gap between such an oral declaration and the ugly effects of ghar 
waapsi, love jihad and election-oriented riots strewed around him.

The RSS pracharak in Modi is manifested in virtually every sentence of his 
speech.  Note that all his quotes come from Hindu religious texts.  He finds 
nothing in the Dhammapada or the Holy Quran, in the Zend Avesta or the Torah or 
even the Guru Granth Saheb to share with his audience.  He talks of "spiritual 
exchanges thousands of years back" between "the Indian saints and Greek sages", 
but rears away from even hinting at the spiritual exchanges between Muslim 
saints and Hindu sages over more than a thousand years that have given rise to 
the synthesis of spiritualism that defines the whole of India today. Nor does 
Modi's constricted conflation of "India" with "Hindu" allow him to talk 
expansively of the profound influence of Buddhism and Jainism on Hindu 
spiritual thought and traditions and over most of the period from Asoka (3rd 
century BC) to Harshvardhan (7th century AD) - that is close to a millennium - 
which eventually gave rise to Sankara's Advaita which resolved the age-long 
disputation within the Hindu fold of whether Mind or Matter are one or 
separate.  No, his quotes are all from Rig Veda and "ancient Indian sayings".  
Nothing from Guru Nanak or Guru Gobind Singh, nothing from the saints of the 
Bhakti Movement.  Indeed, given  that Modi was in a Christian church,  neither 
he nor his speechwriters could find anything  to cite from the Bible or more 
recent Christian philosophers.  Surely, Gandhiji's devotion to "Lead Kindly 
Light" or the Sermon on the Mount could have found more reflection in his 
remarks.

"Spiritualism", said Modi, "is rooted in India's heritage".  Of course it is.  
But it is a spiritualism that derives from India being  a confluence of 
virtually every religion the world has or has known.  Compare any page of 
Jawaharlal Nehru's Discovery of India and Modi's speech, and the gap becomes 
glaring between a truly profound understanding of India's numerous spiritual 
traditions and Modi's one-way street. For Modi to affirm, however, that 
important religions have gone into the making of India's contemporary spiritual 
heritage would be to deny Savarkar's fundamental proposition that only those 
Indians are genuine Indians who regard India as not only their "pitrubhoomi" 
but also their "punyabhoomi".  That is precisely why he spoke of "Mother India" 
having given "birth to many religious and spiritual streams" but completely 
ignored the many religions and spiritual streams that have come into India, 
that have been imported into our cultures and civilization over and over again. 
 Consider the contrast between Modi's boast that "some of them (religions born 
in India) have even travelled beyond Indian borders" with sidelining the 
religions born outside India but which have travelled into India, crossing 
Indian borders and becoming part and parcel of our composite Hindu and 
non-Hindu heritage.  Modi's speech privileges those religions born within India 
over those whose origins lie elsewhere.  That is not the Hindu tradition.  It 
is Hindutva at its most naked.

Let us not forget that when Modi presented a copy of the Gita to the Emperor of 
Japan, he sneered that "secularists" back home would object. That is to totally 
misunderstand "secularism".  Secularism is not about being anti-Hindu or 
anti-Gita.  We secularists regard the Gita as integral to not just the Hindu 
Way of Life, but the Indian Way of Life.  We would also applaud Modi presenting 
a copy of the Holy Quran, printed at the Darul Uloom, to Prime Minister Koirala 
when he next visits Kathmandu; or of Dara Shikoh's Persian translation of the 
Upanishads to Nawaz Sharif were Modi to ever meet Sharif again; or even a copy 
of the Torah printed in Jew Town, Kochi to the Israeli President:  that would 
be to give full expression to India's pluralism.  It is in the active 
celebration of all of its faiths and beliefs, in rejoicing that all things 
Indian are not only Hindu, in bringing together all Indians instead of 
sequestering some of them in khaki half-pants in Nagpur, that the true spirit 
of India lies.

The time now is for Modi to fulfill - particularly with respect to his own 
Sangh Parivar and associated outfits - that he really will "act strongly in 
this regard."Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the 
personal opinions of the author. NDTV is not responsible for the accuracy, 
completeness, suitability, or validity of any information on this article. All 
information is provided on an as-is basis. The information, facts or opinions 
appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not 
assume any responsibility or liability for the same.


                                          

Reply via email to