Help
us bear the burden of secularism
By M.
V. Kamnath
http://www.organiser.org/31dec2000/mfinger.html
Recently, a distinguished columnist, T.V.R.
Shenoy, made a point in relation to the Babri
‘Masjid’ affair that beautifully summed up the dilemma of the Hindus in
India. He said: “Help us bear the burden of
secularism.” He was addressing the
minorities. It must have come straight from the heart. It was, as the French
would say: cri de coeur. The cry of the heart.
For no other country in the world from east to west, faces the agony that the
Hindus in India have to face. They are the injured party; but they are crucified
by the secularists—most of them themselves Hindus—at every stage. No country
in the world has been so ravaged and raped by outside forces as India has been
down the centuries: Not Japan, not China, not Russia, none of the European
countries, neither the Arab nations and certainly not the United States of
America. Krishnadevaraya of the Vijayanagar Empire did not send his forces to
Portugal to tear down churches, use force to convert Christians to Hinduism and
indulge in religious terrorism. Prithviraj Chauhan did not invade Afghanistan
nor Central Asia and raise temples.
No Chola, Chera or Pandya ruler sent a fleet to
Saudi Arabia to tear down the Ka’aba and build a temple to Meenakshi on its
ruins or even next to it to demonstrate Hindu might. India and Hinduism have
been ravaged beyond belief. Hindu missionaries did not accompany a conquering
horde to Britain and under their benign rule set to convert Scottish peasants to
Hinduism—or even Buddhism. Whatever their
million faults, Hindus in this matter have their hands clean. When Christian
rulers fought back the Moors in Spain, they destroyed every vestige of Islamic
influence in the country save the Alhambra in Grenada and no one, not even the
most fanatic Hindu, would dream of duplicating Spanish behaviour. All that they
have so far asked is the restoration of the Ramjanmabhoomi site that was—it is
recorded in history—desecrated by an alien ruler. Even presuming that to say
so is historically incorrect—what should count is popular faith, which has
kept that belief alive for decades if not a couple of centuries. In their hatred
of the Bharatiya Janata Party, the secularists have done untold damage to the
Hindu psyche.
The time has come to place the blame for the bloodshed
in India because of the Babri ‘Masjid’ dispute on the hands of the
secularists. These are red with the blood of the innocents. What happened on
December 6, 1992 was not a breakdown of law and order; what happened was a
cataclysmic event which was an outpouring of the anger of five centuries that
nobody could have stopped. Not Atal Behari Vajpayee, not L.K. Advani, not even
God Almighty could have stopped that event. Our secularists with no roots in
Hindu society have just no understanding of the Hindu psyche. The bringing down
of the Babri ‘Masjid’ was not a physical act; it was an emotional necessity.
It has nothing to do with Islam: it has everything to do with a peoples'
self-respect. The gravest damage to Hindu-Muslim unity was done by the
secularists by making it a Hindu-Islam issue. That it is not. It was the cry of
a people whose wound of being ruled first by Muslims and then by a Christian
nation called for healing. The greatest service that Muslims in India can do to
themselves and to their Hindu fellow-countrymen is to understand that angst and
to make amends by voluntarily agreeing to the rebuilding of the Ram Mandir on
the site where the Babri ‘Masjid’ once stood.
Secularism is not a burden to be borne only by
Hindus. The Muslim populace —indeed the
entire ‘minority’ populace— has divine duty to share that burden. And it
is not the Babri ‘Masjid’ issue alone that calls for burden-sharing. There
are several issues over which the majority community—and a long-suffering
community it has been—would appreciate minority understanding. And such
understanding is long due. Sonia Gandhi, as the president of the once-great
Indian National Congress—there are no rival Congress factions of any substance
today—has a great responsibility to bear. She should realise that had not
Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel shied away from tackling the Babri
‘Masjid’ issue way back in the late forties, the dispute would not have
persisted. No matter what the jaundiced eyed secularists may say, Hindus have a
genuine claim on the Ramjanmabhoomi site. That fact was tacitly acknowledged by
the Hindu populace during L.K. Advani's famous rath yatra and it was that
acknowledgement that was reflected in the victory of the Bharatiya Janata Party
at the hustings. Atal Behari Vajpayee owes no apology to anyone—least of all
the Congress—for saying that the building of the Ram Mandir on the site that
rightfully belongs to it, is his party's unfinished business. Unfinished
business it is.
The Muslims must help him in his endeavour, instead of
constantly harping on secularism. Secularism is a burden not for Hindus alone to
bear. The Muslims have a solemn duty to share that burden. It is a point that
cannot be emphasised too strongly. For the Congress and Leftist opposition to
lay the blame for the demolition of the Babri ‘Masjid’ on L.K. Advani, Atal
Behari Vajpayee and Murli Manohar Joshi is the height of impertinence. Factually
it is incorrect. According to Nirmala Deshpande, a Gandhian social activist and
former Rajya Sabha Member [quoted by The Pioneer (December 5)] and secretary to
Acharya Vinobha Bhave who was present at the site when the demolition took
place, “the situation was beyond their control” and she could “see and
hear Advani and other leaders shouting on the mike asking people to come down
from the domes”. But none of the BJP leaders need feel ashamed of the event.
It had to happen because of historical reasons. But how can the burden of
secularism be shared by the minorities? It has been pointed out that Nawab
Shuja-ud-din in his time donated 50 bighas of land to Hindus to build a
temple—the second holy one in Ayodhya—to Hanuman.
According to Mohd Hashim, the Hanuman Garhi always had
a Muslim worker in it till 1932 who used to get a share in its offerings. Hashim
has been quoted as saying: “The practice, if continued, will improve relations
between the two communities.” High-minded though it may be to demand of the
majority community to alone bear the burden of secularism, the minorities must
do some heart-searching on their own to ask whether their expectations are fair
and equitable. It comes easy to damn the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the Bajrang Dal,
the RSS and the BJP and it may warm the cockles of minority—and
secular—hearts to run them down as fascists, fundamentalists or whatever. But
in their turbulent way they reflect the thousand-year agony of Hindus. The
minorities may do well to remember history and give some credit to the majority
community for whatever their tolerance—enforced or otherwise—is worth.
Secularism is a cross to which the minorities and secularists want to nail the
Hindus. It is time they realize the enormity of their intolerance—and crime.
|