WHY I HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH SANGHIS, (ALMOST)

It seems a substantial number amongst us think highly of the Sangh Parivar, its aims and aspirations. It is for these sympathisers and emphasisers that I write this piece for.

The foremost goal of the Parivar was, is and will remain, 'Hindu Rashtra'.

No ‘one’ definition has ever been given to this Phrase. Various wings of the Parivar speak with different tongues, making a cacophony of shrill voices. Their remarks, followed up with actions by a large number of members of the Parivar, however, unequivocally proclaim what they mean by the Term, ‘Hindu Rashtra’. They invariably relate their vision of expectations on customs and culture of the Nation as a whole to conform to the beliefs, customs and traditions of what they call ‘Hindu Religion’.

I have earlier shared my thoughts on the issue, on our fb page and individually too, with a number of my friends outside it. I will request my today's target readers to search it out and read each of them carefully.

History cannot be changed.

Only the ‘Kattar Panthies’ have tried to do so over centuries but, each time, failed miserably. History is replete with examples of such attempts, from the repeated Islamic invasions of the Indian sub-continent, accompanied with mass scale destruction of temples, loot and arson to the long spells of Muslim and Christian rules, to the destruction of priceless heritage in Af-Pak by the Taliban-AlQaida to the ongoing destruction again of priceless heritage in Syria. Amongst all this carnage, Bharat stands out as the lone sentinel of a specially blended cultural ethos, all its own, which has helped its heritage to survive all the depredations of centuries.

History cannot also be distorted and rewritten.

I find the desperate struggle of the Parivar to rewrite History behind the disputable writings of a few authors of recent times to prove that Aryans did not arrive in India from outside the sub-continent. They have labelled all authors who wrote about the arrival of Aryans from outside the sub-continent as lackeys of the British, even though the Brits are not of Aryan race. The Germans are and they have written extensively on the migration of the Aryans. What did they stand to gain by establishing kinship with the Indo-Aryans?

Do they also wish to call Bal Gangadhar Tilak  also as a Brit lackey for writing his magnum opus, ‘The Arctic Home In the Vedas’, tracing the movement of the Aryans all the way from the Arctic?

That the preamble to the Nation's Constitution was amended vide Artcle 42, is history which has stood the test of time for some decades.

Even though I have my personal views on the issue of the 42^nd amendment, I find the Parivar’s all out efforts to remove the word, ‘Secular’ from the Indian jargon to be laughable, in view of the fact that they themselves proclaim ‘Secularism’ to be the very soul of the Indian Ethos.

The Parivar has started calling all opponents as ‘Pseudo Secularists’. I have yet to find anyone who could define me the phrase, 'Pseudo-Secularism', coined by the Parivar and presently being aggressively used as a missile aimed at all those who oppose their communal agenda.

There is a determined effort by the Parivar to redefine 'Secularism', well defined in all English dictionaries, which, without exception explain it as representing independence from religion.

There is another ‘hauwa’, introduced by the Parivar, by starting a new debate on ‘Dharma’ Vs ‘Pantha’, while debating the ‘nirpekshata’, ehshrined in the Constitution. Parivar says ‘Dharma’ means ‘Religion’. Geeta defines ‘Dharma’ as related to ‘Karma’.

The Parivar wants to have their way over even Shree Madbhagwat Geeta!!!

The meaning of religion, as contained in all dictionaries is not what I personally subscribe to. To me, religion is everything Godly. Religion is, therefore, the practise of Godly (Read Goodly), behaviour, (Both in words and action), by each one of us, just as the Gita describes.  It, then, becomes a person’s personal equation with God, our creator, including the Universe. No Pandit, Maulvi or Priest can come in between the two. The religion of all humans, thus, becomes one, which can be defined as : Human's relationship with the Creator.

The religious path, which all of us must traverse, is a very lonely path. We are bound to fall many a time. That is unimportant. What IS important is that each time we fall, we get up brush-off the dust and resume our journey towards Him, till we can, in full consciousness say –

I AM THAT I AM.

Of course, each one of us may have different manner of traversing the same path, but since the exercise is about an inward journey, it does not affect others. In this sense, the religion of every human on this Earth is the same : 'Personal relationship with that one God, creator of this Universe'.

I am a Christian, but that is not my religion.

My friend Rajesh is a Hin du and he thinks it to be his religion, but it is not. Another friend of mine Kabir is a Muslim and he thinks his religion is that but it is not. these are all our respective communities, to which we belong. As I have said before, every living being needs association with a community. One without it, tends to be 'irritable' at the best and a rogue, (just like the lone rogue elephant!), at the worst. Not for nothing did they say, 'No man is an island'; unless of course, one has renounced the World, and become a sanyasi, in search of truth :

"Bala, darp, kamam, lobham, krodham, parigramham,

                            vimucha, nirmamah, shanto, bhuaaye, kalpate"

Once he finds the truth, he too needs to establish association with those still seeking the truth and communicate with them.

What then are the so called 'Religions' of the World?

Every living being, from insects to humans is communal, in the sense that we live in our own communities. White ant does not live with red ants. Crows don't live with pigeons. Lions do not live with tigers. So are we humans. We live in our own communities, but for these to exist cohesively, there must be a common form of going around, a common belief 'System' and certain rules and regulations. There cannot be place for disbelievers in the 'System'. there cannot be a place for independents within the 'System'.

For a Country as diverse as India, the Word, 'Secular' takes added meaning. It must mean that each community is free to practise its 'System' freely and must be free to invite others to join their ‘System’, by own free choice.

The conflict between the Muslims and members of other 'Systems' is as old as Mohammed's propagation of his teachings, often through use of force. There is no Majority Muslim country in this world where rule of law is not governed by the Quran and Sharia. There are a number of countries, which became Muslim majority countries over a period of time and the moment that happened, they were, without exception, declared as Muslim states. That does not mean that India too must follow suit and declare 'Hinduism' as the State religion or the State as a 'Hindu Rashtra'. The Nation has survived over thousands of years, through Muslim/Christian rule and has remained 'Secular'.

I have no doubt in my mind that no one but no one must be allowed to use the 'System' to subvert the 'System'; use the 'Secular' freedom within the Country to subvert the Nation. For that to happen, we have to ensure that the demographic equations are not allowed to be changed drastically. 'Ghar wapsi', Movement against 'Love Jihad' are not the answers.

The 'State' must have the gumption to enact and enforce laws limiting the demographic growth rates of sections of its citizens. It is in this light that the importance of a Common Civil Code can be seen and realised. For every issue that affects the Nation as a whole, we must have a common civil code. The formula of 'Secularism' cannot be misused to oppose a common civil code, because we are Indians first and then members of a 'System', within the Nation.

The word 'Hindu' is non-existant in our Sahshtras. It is a word coined by a Muslim Persia, to denote people living on the other side of River Sindhu, just because of their inability to pronounce a particular letter. Why call for a ‘Hindu Rashtra’? Why not a ‘Bharat Rashtra’?

Our Nation is a nation of ancient Heritage as old as 10,000 years, as per Bal Gangadhar Tilak. Let's preserve that heritage, rather than destroy it. Of all the wonderful things that have been passed on to us from ancient times, the one foremost is :

"Vishwam Kutumbkam".

If the Sangh can spell out the definition of their concept of 'Hindu Rashtra' as above, I will become a 'Sangi' myself. till then, my criticism will remain valid.

Thx for reading it. God bless all of us.