Image Courtesy: PTI
 
Dialogue is the core part of democratic process. The question is can there be a dialogue between two opposite ideologies on Indian horizon, the one of Indian nationalism and the other of Hindu nationalism? We witnessed a strange spectacle when the Pranab Mukherjee, the lifelong congressman and believer in the plural, inclusive Indian nationalism accepted to speak on the platform of RSS, the apex organization promoting narrow, divisive and exclusive Hindu nationalism. The visit of Ex-President to address RSS event was strongly opposed by a large section of Congress leaders and many others, on the ground that RSS is adept at gaining legitimacy from such visits while at the same time working opposite to the message of the invited guests.
 
Mahatma Gandhi was one such visitor to RSS, who was killed due to the ideology of hate propagated by RSS. “All their (RSS) leaders’ speeches were full of communal poison. As a final result, the poisonous atmosphere was created in which such a ghastly tragedy (Gandhi’s murder) became possible. RSS men expressed their joy and distributed sweets after Gandhi’s death,” read Sardar Patel’s letter. Whether there can be a dialogue with RSS has been a question on the minds of many.
 
What happened at the event when Pranab Mukherjee paid a visit to Nagpur (June 7, 2108)? To begin with, Mukherjee visited RSS founder KB Hedgewar’s birthplace and wrote, “Today I came here to pay my respects and homage to a great son of Mother India KB Hedgewar ji.” Whether out of courtesy for the host, should one write in such a manner is a matter of debate again as Hedgewar, guided by his Hindu nationalism called Muslims Yavan snakes. Hedgewar-RSS also kept aloof from the freedom movement, which gave us Independence and later the Indian Constitution.
 
Mukherjee to his credit did talk of pluralism and the inclusive nature of Indian Constitution, India being a meeting ground of different people, he said, “It is our composite culture which makes us into a nation. India’s nationhood is not one language, one religion, one entity.” He advised the RSS swayamsevaks, “You are young, disciplined, well trained and athletic. Please wish for peace, harmony and happiness. Our motherland is asking for that, our motherland deserves that,” and also that “Any attempt at defining our nationhood in terms of dogmas and identities of religion, region, hatred and intolerance will only lead to dilution of our national identity.” The highlight of his speech was his recalling Surendranath Bannerjee for his phrase “Nation in the making” as this phrase aptly defines the emergence of Indian nationalism during the freedom movement, in contrast to RSS assertion that we are a Hindu nation from times immemorial.
 
He also remembered the values of Gandhi and Nehru in trying to understand India’s past and Sardar Patel’s contribution in merging the princely states into India. Mukherjee toed the line of Indian culture as a synthesis of different streams, “It is our composite culture which makes us into a nation. India’s nationhood is not one language, one religion, one entity.” And more significantly he pointed out that secularism and pluralism are the soul of India which is constituted by “It is Perennial Universalism of 1.3 billion people who use more than 122 languages and 1600 dialects, practice seven major religions and belong to three major ethnic groups, who live under one system, one flag and one identity of being Bharatiya,” He proceeded to reflect on the vast pluralism enshrined in the Indian society. “India’s nationhood is not one language, one enemy and one religion,” he said.
 
In a way, despite slipping on the point of praising Hedgewar, he did speak about the values enshrined in the Indian constitution. Mostly what one does not speak on such occasions also matters a lot. The present scenario created due to RSS Hindu nationalism, where hate has been created around emotive issues like Ram Temple, Cow, beef, love jihad needed to be underlined. The direct connection of the present atmosphere of narrowness and intolerance needed to be drawn out. He did not mention the important fact that the current intimidating and sectarian atmosphere building up in the country is due to the Hindu nationalist agenda. While he correctly articulated the pluralism and diversity of the country, he failed to mention the political fallout of RSS agenda and left an open space where vague homilies, ‘we respect different opinions’ are put forward by the RSS ideologues without at all registering the differences which are too deep for such ‘respecting others opinions.’ The contrast between agenda of two nationalisms, Hindu nationalism and Indian nationalism needed to be drawn out.
 
True, RSS has grown into a huge organization and the discourse emanating from its stable is dominating the social scene. Today, undoubtedly, values of pluralism, which Mukherjee talked about, need to be underlined more than before. In the aftermath of his speech, what is more likely to happen is the attempt to show that what RSS says and what Mukherjee said are complimentary. It will be an exercise in creating further legitimacy for RSS. For RSS, building Ram Temple (demolishing Babri mosque) is part of nation-building, for RSS taking up the issue of cow and beef is nation-building. While for the stream of Gandhi-Nehru-Patel-Indian nationalism such issues have no place on the political horizon. What matters for this stream is what Mukherjee pointed out aptly, “People are at the centre of all activities of the State and nothing should be done to divide them. The aim of the State should be to galvanize them to fight a concerted war against poverty, disease and deprivation. Only then can we create a nation where nationalism flows automatically.”
 
Surely despite good articulation of Indian nationalism by ex-President, the likely outcome of the visit has been described well by his daughter Sharmishtha Mukherjee, who said, ‘the speech will be forgotten and pictures will remain.’ The pictures will be circulated with different content, enhancing legitimacy for the divisive agenda of RSS.
 

The post Will RSS consider Pranab Mukherjee’s Inclusive Indian Nationalism? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
“90% of hateful comments made during the NDA’s current terms are by BJP politicians. During the NDA period, a total of 44 political leaders made hateful comments. Of them, 34 politicians, or 77%, are from the BJP. 10 leaders, or 23% of the offenders, are from other political parties, including the Congress, the Samajwadi Party and Lalu Yadav’s Rashtriya Janata Dal.” The communal issues were regularly thrown up. Vinay Katiyar of BJP said temple has to be built up in Ayodhya. He said this at a time when the matters are lying in the court. On similar lines RSS Supremo Mohan Bhagwat has been declaring that the temple will be built in his life time.

The incidents of mob lynching in the name of Cow, beef have been skyrocketing. While Mohammad Ikhlaq and Junaid are few names stuck in the memory; there are many, who have been attacked by hysterical mobs on the pretexts of skinning, killing, trading cows. The statistics of IndiaSpend@ shows these acts of violence have gone up with Modi sarkar. According to the data collected by IndiaSpend, based on the content analysis of media reporting, “Muslims were the target of 51% of violence centered on bovine issues over nearly eight years (2010 to 2017) and comprised 86% of 28 Indians killed in 63 incidents. As many of 97 per cent of these attacks were reported after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government came to power in May 2014, and about half the cow-related violence — 32 of 63 cases –were from states governed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), recorded until June 25, 2017.”

The emotive issues related to Nationalism have been dominating the scene. Mohan Bhagwat of RSS said early March 2016 that “Now the time has come when we have to tell the new generation to chant ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ (Hail Mother India). There is no such slogan in our Constitution, while some prefer to follow the slogan, Jai Hind, without any reservation.

The issue of love jihad has been taking horrible turn. On December 6, 2017; gruesome murder of a poor Muslim laborer Ifrazul Khan, shook the nation. His killer Shambhulal Regar not only hacked him to death, burnt him, got the whole incident videotaped and uploaded it. Killing of Afrazul by Shambhulal Regar has been inspired by the social media propaganda about love jihad by divisive forces and shows the brutality to which hate created by this ideology can penetrate the vitals of society. Regar has support from sections of society and funds were raised for his family which shows that the degree of hate is not superficial. It is making deeper inroads with the all pervading Hindu nationalism. PUCL report on the incident says that Shambhulal was “a clone of the RSS hate factory and indulged in the gruesome hate crime.” Frightened by the crime many Bengali immigrants have left for their state.

In the case of conversions to Hinduism in Agra (10 December 2014) nearly 350 pavement dwellers-rag pickers and other destitute sections were promised that if they participate in the religious function they will be given the ration card and BPL cards. This was done by the Bajrang Dal activist and the Hindu Janjagriti Samiti both outfits affiliated to RSS. The process is part of Ghar Vapasi campaign.
 
In a subtle encouragement to the criminals the Prime Minster has been generally keeping quiet for a long time on ‘hate crimes’ and then blurts bland statement which in a way does not reprimand the criminals, who are inspired by his own ideology. On completion of six months in power, Yogi Government brought out a brochure related to the tourism development. The booklet omits to mention the biggest tourist spot of UP Taj Mahal. Some leaders of BJP went on to label Taj Mahal as a symbol of foreign rule and a shame on Nation.

The issue of film Padmavati was very curious. Even before the film was released there were protests, even without seeing the film. It was said that film is an insult to Rajput honor. As such the film is based on a novel, a fiction, Padmavat. Padmavati is not a historical character she is creation of fiction. Fact is; the film distorts is the presentation of Khilji, who is shown to be a barbarian, running after women and devoid of culture, while historical accounts tell us he was a cultured king, who not only built Hauz Khas but also streamlined the market mechanism of trade in Delhi.

As hate speech and statements related to history, which demonize Muslims, is on the rise, the communal violence also went up, showing this in year 2017, which saw a rise of 17%, (from 703 incidences in 2016 to 822 in 2017). Kasganj violence came as a new pattern of instigating violence. A group of ABVP-VHP workers entered the Muslim locality armed with weapons, shouting ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ and giving anti Pakistan slogans. They wanted the Muslims, who were celebrating Republic Day to make way for their rally to pass through that narrow lane and violence followed. Similarly the Kathua rape and murder will remain a matter of deep shame. Here in addition to the patriarchal notion, communalism was the factor.

The assertiveness of so called fringe groups, the increasing hate speech, is leading to an atmosphere where the sense of insecurity among the religious minorities has gone up. The appeal of Archbishop of Delhi Couto to observe fast is just a small reflection of the sense of helpless, which the minorities are perceiving with Modi Sarkar, which is pursuing its agenda of Hindu Rashtra.

The post Increasing Divisiveness: Modi Sarkar’s Communal agenda appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The central tactic of BJP and communal organizations is to bypass the issues related to people’s needs and to distract the attention towards those related to emotive issues. Issues which can put his opponents in a bad light have been regularly resorted to by Modi. For creating this Modi can go to the extent of saying untruths with great amount of confidence. In this statement-question raised, he is speaking a lie on one side and is also trying to glorify his icon Savarkar on the other.

As a matter of fact, while the Indian National Congress had differences with revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh, they respected the high level of commitment and dedication of these young men. There are reports in the Tribune  at the time about Nehru visiting the jail to meet Bhagat Sing and his comrades. The reports in Tribune on August 9 and 10 of 1929, tell us about Nehru’s meeting the jailed revolutionaries, inquiring on them.
 
Motilal Nehru had even formed a committee to demand humane treatment for the revolutionaries who were on a fast unto death. In his autobiography, Towards Freedom, Nehru gives a very touching account of his meeting with Bhagat Singh, Jatin Das and other young men. “I happened to be in Lahore when the hunger strike was already a month old. I was given permission to visit some of the prisoners in the prison, and I availed myself of this. I saw Bhagat Singh for the first time, and Jatindranath Das and a few others. They were all very weak and bedridden, and it was hardly possible to talk to them much. Bhagat Singh had an attractive, intellectual face, remarkably calm and peaceful. There seemed to be no anger in it. He looked and talked with great gentleness, but then I suppose that anyone who has been fasting for a month will look spiritual and gentle. Jatin Das looked milder still, soft and gentle like a young girl. He was in considerable pain when I saw him. He died later, as a result of fasting, on the sixty-first day of the hunger strike.”
 
The other aspect of the statement by Modi is to equate Savarkar with the dedicated young revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh. This seems to be a clever ploy to elevate Savarkar to the level to which he did not belong. While Bhagat Singh was in jail, pending death penalty, he was requested by his family to seek clemency, which Bhagat Singh refused. On the contrary, he wrote to the British government that since he and his comrades have been sentenced to death for waging war against the empire, he should be made to face the firing squad not just death by hanging. On the other hand Savarkar, after being sentenced for his role in the case of murder of a British officer, totally changed his stance in jail. From an anti-British role he wrote series of apology letters, surrendered to the British and promised them to be of help in future! He did remain loyal to British after his release from jail.
 
As a matter of fact the Congress, in recognition of Savarkar’s initial role, was trying to put pressure on British government for his release. But Savarkar was already writing petition after petition to British to release him. From 1920 INC was asking for his unconditional release, but due to reasons best known to him Savarkar preferred to give a written undertaking, which in a way was total surrender. “I hereby acknowledge that I had a fair trial and just sentence. I heartily abhor methods of violence resorted to in days gone by and I feel myself duty bound to uphold [British] law and constitution to the best of my powers and am willing to make the ‘reform’ a success in so far as I may be allowed to do so in future.” (From the facsimile of Savarkar’s letter to British authorities). There are many such letters and British did grant him clemency.

This act of his seeking pardon from British was a betrayal of freedom movement. His followers present it as a tactical ploy to get released so that he could continue his struggle against British rule. As matter of fact after his release Savarkar, floated the concept of Hindu nationalism, brought to fore the concept of Hindutva, (total Hinduness) and stated that there are two nations in the country, Hindu and Muslim! This was precisely the equal and opposite of the politics of Muslim nationalism being brought up by Muslim League. This is what also contributed to partition tragedy.

So Modi on one hand speaks a lie about Congress leaders ignoring those struggling for freedom. On the other he puts Savarkar in the same category as Bhagat Singh. Congress was trying to get Savarkar released. Bhagat Singh remained firm on his ideology and path of resistance against British power. For his principles he undertook a hunger strike in jail. Savarkar on the other side buckled under the jail conditions and surrendered to the British. Goebbels’ methods being resorted by Modi need to be opposed.

The post Lies, Mr Prime Minister! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

What has been happening to the Muslim community as a whole during last few decades is very important to understand as to why reformers like Hamid Dalwai and Arif Mohammad Khan could not cut ice. What is retarding the reform in the community is the increasing sense of insecurity. There are two major phenomena which have heightened this sense of security. At national level the rising communal violence has lead to loss of lives, home and means of livelihood. There is also a great amount of overall economic marginalization of the community for various reasons. These two have impacted on the community to stick to retrograde norms with the conservative Maulanas calling the shots.

Globally, the politics of control over oil resources leading to the rise of terrorism in the name of Islam, has led to rise of global Islamophobia and demonization of Muslims. The very Muslim identity is being presented as a threat to the society. We saw the impact of both of these in rise in the hold of obscurantist leadership and practices within the country. Way back I did observe that my research scholars, in the aftermath of 1992-93 Mumbai violence, started visiting the mosque more often. My faculty colleague switched from a religion neutral surname to one which flaunted his Muslim identity. While, living in IIT Bombay campus also observed that young Muslim girls, wearing Shalwar Kameez or pants tee shirts took recourse to Burqa in the aftermath of Gujarat carnage of 2002.

In the wake of Makkah Masjid, Malegaon, Samjhauta and Ajmer blasts the immediate action from the police force was to arrest many Muslim young men, who were put behind the bars for years before the process of law rescued them. This again came as a great dampener to the process of reform, even education to which a section of Muslim community was avidly longing was put on the backburner in the aftermath of Batla House encounter and demonization of places like Azamgarh or Bhatkal.

How can the reform process succeed in the besieged community? By now, as Mander points out the political marginalization of the community are complete. The aftermath of communal violence came in the form of ghettoisation of Muslim community in places like Mumbra close to Mumbai (92-93 violence) and Juhapura (2002), how much reform can be brought in the intimidated, ghettoized communities. Surely there has been a great effort by many enlightened Muslims to promote education within the community. I did happen to meet successful Muslims professionals in a trip to US. Most of them came forward with a single minded devotion to encourage education among Indian Muslims by supporting educational institutions and by giving scholarship to young Muslim girls and boys, to boost what the reformers like J S Bandookwala in Gujarat and many a Muslim organization scattered all over the country are doing.

In the present political scenario the fulcrum of politics is shifting to the right and the politicos have to flaunt their Hinduism for electoral purpose. At the same time the assertion like ‘all those living here are Hindus’ (Mohan Bhagwat) do come as an intimidation to sections of the community. In this backdrop the likes of Asghar Ali Engineer, who presented a humane version of Islam and gave the foundation for social reform remained marginalized from the mainstream Muslim community. Muslim community is in the bind. Political marginalization is not an isolated process; it is founded on process of Hate constructed against the community. For this the popularization of communal history and the sense of persecution of Hindus at the hands of earlier Muslim rulers and current Hafiz Saeed’s is part of the popular perception.

One stands with Guha in appreciating the efforts of every Hamid Dalwai or Arif Mohammad Khan, but one also needs to understand the objective situation in which the Muslim community is being pushed into the corner. The ills of ‘two nation theory’, the thorny issue of Kashmir is even now acting as a tormentor of the Muslim community. From last over a decade Muslim friends, whom one never perceived for their religious identity, have started raising the question, ‘what it means to be a Muslim in India today? The whole liberal tradition of Muslims from Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, Zakir Hussain to Ustad Bismillah Khan, Sahir Ludhianvi, Kaifi Azmi and Javed Akhtar are very much a part of Indian Muslim community. The point is why their acceptability is limited within the community.

Even currently the group of ‘Muslims for Secular Democracy’ and ‘Moderate Muslim’ groups is raising their voices against the Mullah version of Islam. The question which should come to the fore is as to why these voices of sanity are not able to make to necessary dent in the broader sections of society gripped by conservatism? Currently, interestingly it is the time where due to impact of Hindu nationalist ideology even faith based knowledge and most retrograde values are being encouraged by the dominant political tendency. In these times to work for progressive reforms among Muslims becomes much more difficult. One hopes a combination of Hamid Dalwais’ passion for reform, Asghar Ali Engineer’s humane interpretation of Islam carries the day from within the community. Outside, the necessary condition is blunting the sharpness of Hindu nationalism, which is creating Hate, Ghettoisation and marginalization of the community.
 

The post Reform in Muslim Community: Comprehensive Approach Needed appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While the situation in each state is different, there is a pattern of the BJP’s strategy, which in a flexible manner, supplemented by massive resources, near-perfect electoral machinery and the backing of its parent organisation’sswayamsevaks is reaping electoral benefits in state after state. In Assam, it focused mainly on the Bangladeshi immigrants, the Muslims swamping the state and threatening that Hindus will be reduced to a minority. It was clever enough to strike alliances even with separatist organisations. Most of the regional organisation in the area looks at Congress as the party that has not focused on development; the BJP, while at one level abuses those differing with its ideology as ‘anti nationals’, has no compunction at all in allying with those who have been talking of separate state or even secession. In Tripura, the left government, despite its clean record, failed to fulfil the aspirations of tribal people and OBCs in matters of reservation. It also failed miserably in creating employment opportunities for the youth, which gave the ground to the BJP to promise and create the illusion of development.

The BJP mainly harped on two major factors here. One is the promise of development. Although by now its claims of development across the country stand exposed as mere vote-catching slogans, in the North East they could still sell Prime Minister NarendraModi as a development man. ManikSarkar’s failure to implement the new pay commissions must have hurt large numbers as they are still stuck at fourth pay commission while talk of seventh pay commission is in the air. In Tripura, they could also emphasise that ‘Hindus are Refugees: Muslim is infiltrators’ to influence the Bengali Hindu votes. In tribal areas, RSS swayamsevaks working consistently by organising religious functions, opening schools etc. for a long time have succeeded in turning the tables, as ManikSarkar’s government failed to address the needs of tribals in matters of opportunities. In matters of beef, the BJP openly took the hypocritical stance that their ban on cow slaughter and eating beef, which is being imposed in different parts of country, will not be enforced in the North East. Like most of the issues raised by RSS-BJP, the holy cow is a political tool for dividing society and when the crunch comes they manipulate the issue as they have done in Kerala and Goa on the issue of beef and cow slaughter.

Towering over Christian voters, Modi talked of rescuing 46 nurses from ISIS captivity in Iraq and Father Alex Premkumar from Taliban captivity. What can one say on these issues? Were they rescued as they were Indians or were they rescued because they belong to a particular religion? As is the wont with Modi-type politics, these situations are exploited in a crass political manner. Despite the fact that their ideology regards Christians and Muslims as foreigners, they at the same time manipulate these identities for electoral gains. In Tripura, the majority of Congress and TMC MLAs migrated to the BJP, and electoral support also shifted to the BJP. What worked for BJP here was the anti-Bangladeshi sentiment along with the illusory promise of development.

In Meghalaya, the situation is different. Though Congress emerged as the single largest party and logically should have been given the chance to form the government, the Hindu nationalist Governor thought otherwise and the second-largest party, in alliance with practically everybody including the BJP, is going to form the Government. Here the failure of the BJP to win over the electorate is writ large on the results; what is putting them in the camp of power is the alliance with a regional party, which has had amicable relations with the Congress. The role of the BJP’s clout, including money and muscle, is the undercurrent of the story.

There are a lot of lessons for the left in Tripura to learn, with the issue of addressing the problems of the youth, tribals and the OBCs being paramount. Moreover, the issue of the BJP manipulating all possible ways to come to power is something that can be ignored only at the risk of severe declines in the electoral power of the left and other parties. What is being labeled as Karat line, not allying with Congress, will surely decimate the left in the times to come, probably sooner rather than later, as this line underestimates the potential and deeper agenda of BJP-RSS. It ignores the threat of the powerful electoral machine built by BJP over time, and its capability of manipulating issues like beef, and the conversion by Christian missionaries, and taking two different positions in different parts of the country and getting away with it.

The emotive politics unleashed by the BJP-RSS is visible again through the attack on Lenin’s statue and the attacks on CPM workers. What is in store for future of the region if democratic forces don’t rise to the occasion is anybody’s guess.
 

The post BJP’s forays into the North Eastern States and its anti-minority agenda appeared first on SabrangIndia.

RSS is one of the only organisation which claims to be cultural and yet controls the political agenda of the national ruling party. Over the years, taking its agenda of Hindu Rashtra further, it has grown and is the largest organisation in the country. Its Chief, the Sarsangh Chalak (Supreme Dictator) is the one who not only controls the RSS, but indirectly exercises control over all the affiliate organisations like BJP, VHP, Bajrang dal, ABVP and hundreds of outfits scattered in most of the arenas of our social and political life. Its Chief keeps spelling out its agenda on occasions. The one held at Agra, Rashtroday Samagam (National Awakening Conclave, Feb 24, 2018), was one such where he spoke on issues related to the agenda of Hindu Rashtra. Many of the formulations presented by him may sound very bizarre, but it seems these are the subtle expressions of deeper agenda of this organisation.

He said that Hindus should unite, and not fight along caste lines. Hindustan is the country of Hindus, and they have no other place to go. What he is calling as fight along caste lines, are actually movements for social justice. The struggle against the caste structure of Hinduism has been old, the initial one’s were in the form of Lord Gautama Buddha’s teachings and later Saints like Kabir, Tukaram and Namdeo articulated anti caste sentiments in their works of profound wisdom. What is being called as fight along caste lines begins during colonial period with efforts of the likes of Jotirao Phule who ensured that education reaches the untouchables. Ambedkar took this further and struggles for caste equality picked up.

It is at this point of time that Hindu Mahasabha and RSS, who were upset due to social changes parallel to freedom movement that they started talking of Hindu Unity! They stand for social status quo while likes of Ambedkar will go for annihilation of caste. So Ambedkar burnt Manusmriti and later became the Chairman of drafting committee of Indian Constitution, which gives us Equality. This lofted principle of equality was also backed up by affirmative action from the state to ensure that equality does not remain on paper but state is the agent to bring in substantive equality.

Hindu nationalist politics; as it is for status quo; opposed reservations and affirmative action. On the pretext of merit, it launched ‘Youth for Equality’. One understands those who are on the side of social equality have been talking of measures to eradicate structural inequality and work towards social justice. So what Bhagwat says may sound innocuous, but it hides the deeper agenda of his organization, and that is also manifested when different leaders from this stable call for changing Indian constitution and when their ideologues like Golwalkar stand to praise Manusmriti and as they feel uncomfortable with Indian Constitution.

What does he mean that Hindus have no other place to go? He may be unaware that many Indians, Hindus included have been undertaking economic migrations all over the World. While US, Canada, Australia and UK are the hot favorites, there are many other countries where Hindus have been emigrating and settling. His statement is factually incorrect.

Also saying that this land belongs to Hindus is a simplification. As such the barometer of who is an Indian is Indian Constitution. Who came to constitute India becomes clear from the composition of freedom movement in which people from all religions participated in equal measure. In earlier history also, this land has been thriving with diversity when nomadic tribes initially and kings of different dynasties like the Shaaks, Hunsa and then Muslims who came as invaders in North, while Zoroastrians came through sea route and the first phase of Islam and Christianity came to Malabar Coast in Kerala. Even the word Hindu initially began as a geographical category, and Hindu as a religion came to be constructed much later.

It is true that India is multi religious, but to say that all those living here are Hindus is a travesty of truth. To say that Hindus celebrate diversity as Bhagawat said; is a bigger lie. Hindutva ideologue Savarkar went on to define Hindu as one who regards this land as Holy land and father land. Golwalklar focused on the greatness of scriptures, so where do Muslims and Christians stand in this scheme of things? As such even large sections of Sikhs, Buddhist and Jains will also not like to be labeled as Hindus. As far the diversity, he is right that large section of Hindus in the mould of Gandhi respect other religions and diversity emerging from that. As far as the agenda of RSS combine is concerned, it is based on sectarianism and narrowness. The central agenda of their politics is not around economic betterment, social and gender justice but is structured around divisive issues which lead to intolerance.

Their major issues Ram Temple, Mother Cow, Love Jihad, Vande Mataram and Ghar Wapasi are constructed around rejecting the diversity.

Most of the utterances of this combine are far away from what the Indian Constitution says. His assertion that all those who regard Bharat Mata as their mother, again is in a mould which is far away from Indian Constitution’s values. Constitution tells as we are India that is Bharat. To bring in Bharat mata ki Jai, which people from some religions may not be comfortable with is a deliberate ploy to bring narrowness and intolerance in our political life. To say that Muslims are also Hindus, is an intimidating statement. First to say they are Hindus and then to insist that as Hindus they have to respect scriptures like Manusmriti, to worship lord Ram and cow, seems to be a clever move.

Bhagwat calls Rana Pratap’s battles as part of freedom struggle. This is not innocuous, Rana Pratap fought for his Mansabdari (status) against Akbar, not for India against British. As per Bhagwat, the battle against Muslim king automatically makes you part of freedom movement not knowing that even Akbar was represented by Raja Mansingh in the battle about which he is referring to! 

The post Hindus, Muslims and the lies of Mohan Bhagwat appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The formula of success for BJP has been well internalized by the party; divisive emotive issues, return of Lord Ram in election seasons, supplementing other identity issues like Holy cow, Vande matram, Love jihad etc.; have formed the powerful armamentarium of this party. As we are to face the general elections in a year to come, Lord Ram is being brought back to the social-political scene yet again.

This time around, RSS chief Mohan Bhagawat set the ball rolling with his prodding in Udupi Dharma Sanasad of VHP in November 2017. The cue was taken up by VHP and under the aegis of VHP and Muslim Rashtriya Manch, and yatra started from Ayodhya in UP to Rameshwaram in Tamilnadu. The organization convening the whole exercise is Shri Ramdas Mission Universal Society from Maharashtra. It is having the Rath shaped in the pattern of the proposed temple at Ayodhya. The yatra’s agenda is politically clear; its major aims reveals yet again as to what do these followers of Hindu nationalism aim at. Their demands include establishing Ram Rajya, a grand temple at Ayodhya, to include Ramayana in school syllabus and to shift the weekly holiday of Sunday to Thursday etc.

While Muslim Rashtriya Manch is an organization handy in for RSS to pretend as if Muslims also support it, the truth is that majority of Muslims by now realize that the religious minorities are being relegated to second-class citizenship, with all the violence around Beef, Love Jihad, Tiranga (tricolour) etc. Surely among the nearly 16 crore Muslim population, there are bound to have the likes of Zafar Sareshwalas, who will like to curry the favours’ from BJP for various reasons and blow the trumpet of ruling party. Let’s have a look at the demands posed by the Yatra. As far as the establishment of Ram Rajya is concerned, the same Ram Rajya can be looked at in various ways. Gandhi tried to look at it in an inclusive way, by seeing the parity of Ram and Rahim, Ishwar and Allah. Ambedkar and Periyar were deeply disturbed by Lord Ram’s killing of Bali from behind and killing of Dalit Shambuk as he was doing penance, despite caste norms not permitting it. Ram projected by Advani-BJP-RSS is intimidating to minorities and has an exclusive approach.

Many a Muslim majority countries are having weekly off on Friday, on those lines, the demand has been put forward to have it on Thursday. What is to be seen primarily is that India is currently connected with offices worldwide, business offices will have better functioning in keeping with global norms. As far as introducing Ramayana in school syllabus is concerned RSS VHP again seems to have a narrow view. One recalls that ABVP, the student wing of RSS had created ruckus against the seminal essay on Lord Ram by A K Ramanujan, Three Hundred Ramayana’s… and got it deleted from the syllabus. This essay tells us that there are many versions of Lord Ram story. The telling of these diverse Ramayana’s is at variance with each other. For example Ram story, ‘Ramkin’ prevalent in Thailand, has Lord Hanuman, not as a celibate but a family man. The Ramayana prevalent in parts of Andhra has a version which is from the angle of women. Again Valmiki Ramayana and Tulsidas Ramayana also have some nuanced difference. RSS combine has a single version to uphold. So which Ramayana will be introduced?

As such the issues raised by this combine have no relevance to the needs of Hindus, despite the claims that RSS is for Hindus. What will social and economic goals be achieved by the Ram Temple or Ram Rath yatra? Will it solve the issues of Hindu farmers or Hindu jobless youth? Will this enhance the health and nutritional status of Hindu women and children? Will it address the issues of Dalits who are facing caste atrocities or will it any way help the women, incidents of violence against whom are rising by the day?

The yatra is being taken out at a time when Supreme Court is in the process of hearing the case related to land dispute where the Babri mosque was located. What signal does this Yatra give regarding the upholding the decisions of the Courts? The Hindu nationalists are diverting the social attention and resources in directions which relate purely to emotive aspects of dominant sections of society. Yogi Adityanath in his budget has given provisions for Ram Idol in Ayodhya, allotted money for celebrating Divali and Holi. A state where children have died due to lack of Oxygen cylinders such a budget is an insult to the concept of social welfare. Such Yatras are purely having political goals. If Gandhi’s Ram is asked what will he prefer to have at the site where Mosque was demolished, surely his answer would be to have a public utility like a Hospital or a University, and not his temple!
 

The post Ram Rajya Rath Yatra: The road to Power appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The story so far is that in Kasganj in Shahid Abdul Hamid chowk a program was organized by minority community to celebrate the day, chairs were laid etc. The motorbike rider youths nearly 90 or so belonging to RSS affiliates ABVP came, carrying tricolor and the saffron flags. They also had clubs and other armaments as per some reports, videos. They insisted at the Chowk to remove the chairs as they had to pass from there. The local Muslims asked them to join the program rather than disturb it. The clash ensued. The tricolor-saffron flag wielding youth shouted the slogans, ‘Pakistan Murdabad’ (Death to Pakistan), Hindi Hindu Hindustan, Katve Bhago Pakistan, (Muslims go to Pakistan) ‘Is Desh Mein Rahna hai to Vande Matram kahna Hoga’ (If you want to live in this country, you will have to say Vande Matram). In the clash and bullet firing that followed, two men received bullet injuries of which Chandan Gupta, who was also a participant of the bike rally died and other Muslim labourer Naushad is being treated in hospital, having been severely injured.

A section of TV and other media presented it as if Muslims were resisting the tricolor hoisting so they opposed the bikers and forced them to shout pro Pakistan slogans, something which is far from truth. The role of a section of media is very negative in communal violence. Police as usual did not stop or control the inciting mob. On the following day Rajveer Singh, BJP MP, at the cremation of Chandan Gupta further added to the fury after which the mobs resorted to selectively burning vehicles and shops in the Muslim locality. Yogi Adityanath Government has by now announced a compensation of 20 Lakhs for Chandan Gupta, hopefully compensation for other injuries and damages will be forthcoming.

An interesting sidelight took place this time around. Raghvendra Vikram Singh the DM of Bareilly in his Hindi Facebook post criticized the event saying that “by now it has become a trend to take out procession in Muslim localities and shout anti Pakistan slogans. Are these people Pakistanis?” The post was taken down after intimidating trolling and the state administration expressing displeasure over the post, he wrote, “I apologize if some sentiments were hurt by what I said, but there is no denying that our secular ethos is at stake; there are things which need to be protected at all cost.” Another officer, Rashmi Varun (Deputy Director, Statistics, Saharanpur) in another post said that Chandan has been killed by saffron politics. (Hindustan.com)

The tragic violence has led to loss of one innocent life; injuries to few and loss of social property. The compensation so far has been selective. The whole incident and the Facebook post of DM reveals the deeper dynamics of how the violence gets orchestrated. The mechanisms of these do keep changing over a period of time, but what is constant is an evil innovation of techniques to target the vulnerable minorities. Earlier it had been taking the procession with loud music in front of the mosque and putting beef in temple. With time one saw that in Mumbai violence of 92-93 Maha Artis (Invocation Prayer) were devised to mobilize Hindus, the dispersing mass after the prayer would indulge in anti-minority violence. One has also seen the issue of love jihad being used in Muzaffarnagar violence. The girl who is supposed has been victim denied being harassed by the Muslim boy, but the mobilization of Jats-Hindus continued nevertheless. One can see the changing pattern of issues which are used to incite the violence.

What strikes one in Kasganj is that anatomy of violence is very clear. Seems this may be a preparation for the elections which are in the offing a year later. The tiranga (tricolor) issue is quite paradoxical for Muslims. They hurl it or abstain from it, both ways they are damned. What is more interesting is that tricolor, which was opposed by RSS at the time of independence on the ground that number three is evil as per Hindu ethos and that the real flag of Hindus is saffron alone, today stands to use the same tricolor to browbeat and to make it a vehicle for polarization, through its affiliates like ABVP and VHP.  It seems as a follow-up to what happened in Kasganj, RSS is now organizing rallies in different cities and towns across the state. The rallies at this juncture look to be a “show of strength” in which uniformed cadres of the RSS and its affiliates in the Sangh Parivar will be marching with sticks.

To cover the whole thing BJP leadership wants to project that minorities opposed the tricolor and shouted pro Pakistan slogans! One knows that all through BJP electoral strength has been going up courtesy violence and consequent polarization. The society needs to protect itself against such aggressive abuse of tricolor for inciting violence, and be careful not to fall in the traps of provocation on any ground whatsoever.

The post Kasganj Violence: Unveiling the Anatomy of a Riot appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Couple of controversies was associated with his Somanth temple visit; here someone advertised via photo shopped picture that RG signed in a register for non-Hindus while visiting the temple. Later it turned out that there is only one Visitors’ register which he had signed. His party’s spokespersons made it clear that he is a Shiv Bhakt, a janeudhari Hindu (sacred thread wearing). Our Prime Minster disturbed by his visit to Somnath spoke a blatant lie that “

“Today some people are remembering Somnath, I have to ask them – Have you forgotten your history? Your family members, our first Prime Minister, were not happy with the idea of a temple being built there,” He stated at a rally..  The truth is that Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru both had opposed the renovation of temple at the state expenses and not the temple renovation as such. While RG’s visits are coming to the focus now most of the leaders of BJP are very explicit about their visits to holy places and make a great din about it.

When we begin from Nehru, he was an agnostic and very critical of blind faith, a great promoter of scientific temper, a value which finds place in our constitution as well. The major visits to temples by top leaders as such begin with Indira Gandhi in late seventies and early eighties. She probably was shaken by the Ayatollah Khomeini, a cleric coming to power in Iran and the rising influence of RSS here in India. She must have seen that the impact of religion in social life is increasing, and so such visits by her. During the decades of eighties as such religion did not remain a private matter as envisaged by our Constitution; by people like Gandhi and Nehru and a blatant use of religion in political arena began with BJP, dumping its original agenda of Gandhian socialism and picking up Ram Temple as the central political plank. This paid BJP rich electoral dividends in times to come.

The centrality of places of worship in our political space got intensified and the rightward shift of Indian politics, ascendance of religious right in form of BJP-RSS started going up. The attitude of different political formations was diverse.. Apart from temple visits, the social aspect of Ramadan, the Iftar was organized by many politicians. Now the competitive religiosity took over by political parties, led by the BJP, for whose leaders carrying religion on their sleeves was most overt. Some religio-social programs like Karva Chauth were overtly celebrated by the likes of Sushma Swaraj, while Lalu Yadav ardently organized the Chat puja. Now these rituals are dime a dozen to be recounted here. In the era where the religion is overtly being used for political agenda, the visits to temples is a sub set of actions, being resorted to by even those who do not primarily indulge in politics in the name of religion. BJP ruled state Governments have gone further with the likes of Yeddyyurappa making huge donations to temples when he was CM and MP Government printing and publishing Hanuman Chailsa through its publications departments..

The need is to distinguish between social aspects of religion and ‘religion as a cover of political agenda’. The change from the times of Nehru where the practice of secularism by state was regarded as ‘not secular enough’, we have come to the times where the word secularism is being called as the biggest lie of India by the BJP leaders like Yogi Adityanath. In the campaign, which is picking up in Karnataka as a prelude to Assembly elections, the BJP leadership is presenting Congress as the anti Hindu party.. Most of the election campaigns are being taken on the terrain of religion as witnessed in Gujarat, where the famed Vikas, gave way to Mughalia Sultan, Allauddin Khilji and the like. The lip service to the issues of people related to bread, butter shelter education and employment is being aggressively substituted by emotive issues related to religion.

It’s a tragic sign of times where the political terrain has been mixed with religion. It’s a terrible time that leaders of a national party like Congress have to visit the temples to wash off the anti Hindu tag from their foreheads. The temple visits are not soft Hindutva in any way. The popularizer of the word Hindutva, Savarkar himself was an atheist, focusing on politics in the name of Hinduism rather than religiosity. Nehru had said that his biggest challenge is to uphold secular Constitution in a society grip of religiosity, with religiosity dominating the social space today, what would he say?  

The post Temples, Politics and Leaders: From Jawaharlal Nehru to Rahul Gandhi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Surely BJP’s intentions have to be understood and his apology is purely strategic. BJP as a party has to work within the confines of Constitution as it has to swear by it legally. Still, when BJP led NDA Government came to power in 1998, it did appoint Venkatchaliah Commission to review the Constitution; probably that was the first open and subtle ‘statement of purpose’ from its side. It’s another matter that seeing the total opposition to its move of reviewing Constitution from large sections of society, the Commission report was dumped.

After Modi led NDA Government came to power (2014), on the occasion of Republic day 2015, it issued an advertisement with the preamble of Constitution in which words Secular and Socialist were missing. In November 2017 Yogi Adityanath stated that the word secularism is the biggest lie in India.

The BJP will not reveal its deeper agenda so easily at present. Still, it can be understood that BJP is not comfortable with the present Constitution and laws be it the one related to Article 370 (Kashmir), Article 25 (freedom of religion), article 30 (about minorities setting up educational institutions). As BJP is a part of RSS combine, one has to look at what RSS ideologues state, what its associates like VHP and others say on the issue. These organisations have times and again articulated their opposition to Indian Constitution and their goal of making the one based on Holy Indian scriptures.

As such the whole attempt of Hindu nationalist political formations is to try to pave the way for Hindu nationalism by using the democratic secular space which the present Constitution gives.RSS ideologue Golwalkar in his writings like ‘Bunch Of Thoughts’ argues that territorial nationalism, which is the basis of Indian Constitution, is a barbarism, since according to him a nation is ‘not a mere bundle of political and economic rights’ but an embodiment of national culture —in India, ‘ancient and sublime’ Hinduism. It sneers at democracy, which Golwalkar sees as alien to Hindu culture, and lavishes praise on the Code of Manu, whom Golwalkar salutes as ‘the first, the greatest, and the wisest lawgiver of mankind’.

When the Constituent Assembly of India passed the Constitution of India on November 26, 1949, RSS was not happy. Its organ, Organiser in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained: “But in our Constitution, there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits, that means nothing.”

VD Savarkar has been the major ideologue from whom most of the Hindu nationalists draw their inspiration. He argued: “Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law.”

Deendayal Upadhyay has been another major ideologue of RSS combine. He was part of Bharatiya Janasangh, previous avatar of BJP. He says that India had written a Constitution imitative of the West, divorced from any real connection to our mode of life and from authentically Indian ideas about the relationship between the individual and society.

Like previous ideologues Upadhyay also felt that the Constitution should embody a Hindu political philosophy befitting an ancient nation like Bharat, that of reducing the Indian national idea to a territory and the people on it was fallacious. According to him the nationalist movement, from the Khilafat agitation onwards, has turned towards a policy of appeasement of the Muslim community, a policy, in turn, sought to be justified by the need to forge a united front against the British.

He was all through critical of Indian Constitution, as he argued his case for the Hindu nation. His ideology seems to be one of the major inspirations for present leadership of BJP. BJP’s discomfort with articles 25, 30 and 370 etc. is mainly as these articles aim at affirmative action in a plural diverse society. These draw from the basic notion of Equality inherent in the Indian constitution. Most of the ideologues, the source of BJP ideology uphold Manusmririti, no wonder this was the precise book which architect of Indian Constitution, Babasaheb Ambedkar consigned to the flames!
 

The post Does the BJP intend to change the Indian Constitution? appeared first on SabrangIndia.