Secularism slaughtered across seven seas - Organiser
Posted By ashok (ashokvc@giasbm01.vsnl.net.in)
8 September 1996
Title : Secularism slaughtered across seven seas
Author :
Publication : Organiser
Date : September 8, 1996
Satiricus is happy to see that one more larger-than-life
liberal intellectual, namely', Shri Amulya Ganguli, has
started using his freedom to Express secular sentiments
with such commendable vigour in his jehad on Hinduism
-communalism. Satiricus can quite appreciate Babu
Moshoy's alarm at the fell fact that the VHP has gone to
the communal extent of installing a deity called
Trinidadeshwar in Trinidad. But did Babu Moshoy know
that this alarming situation had been developing over the
years? Satiricus had visited Trinidad a couple of
decades ago and had himself been ,alarmed to see the
ignoble enthusiasm with which Hindus in Trinidad were
even then trying to Preserve their Hindu roots. There
were temples galore, there were Hindi classes, there were
Sanskrit prayers, and when Satiricus visited a school he
was greeted by the children with a namaste. Naturally,
Satiricus' secular heart sank. At that very moment he
knew that the distance between Trinidad and
Trinidadeshwar was diminishing and would one day vanish.
That, alas, has happened, and both Satiricus and Amulya
Ganguli are grief stricken. For it signals a serious
setback for secularism. Since aye the citizens of Bharat
that is India converted ourselves from the religion of
Hinduism to the religion of secularism we have always
taken a firm stand against temples, whether it is the
Rama temple in Ayodhya or the Swaminarayan temple in
London. Our tooth-and-nail opposition to the Rama temple
is of course the very life-breath of our secularism but
we even tried to serve secularism with our disdainful
dismissal of the London temple. The London papers were
all admiration for its magnificence, but A,hat did we
secular scribes write about it'? Appropriately enough,
our appreciation of it was conspicuous by its absence.
So it stands to secular reason that what is not good in
London is positively bad in Trinidad. In London Muslims
can ask for a separate parliament; in London Muslim
terrorists can actually propose an international
conference for discussing the destruction of Darul Harab,
but that it OK with Amulyada for Islamic fundamentalism
and Indian secularism are only as different as tweedledum
and tweedledee. From this point of view Satiricus can
understand the secular sadness with which Shri Ganguli
has exposed "VHP's sectarian agenda in his Indian Express
column titled "From Ram to Trinidadeshwar". He opens on
a sombre note- "A recent report in the Organiser, the
Sangh Parivar's mouthpiece, referred to the efforts being
made by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad towards the "awakening
of Hindus" in the Caribbean. Well, now, fifty years ago,
when the Organiser began, there was no Parivar, only the
Sangh, but of course a sterling secularist like Amulya
Ganguli cannot be bothered' with such trifling
inexactitudes. What is important here is that the report
appeared in the Organiser and nowhere else. Why was
that? In the considered opinion of Satiricus the very
fact that it was reported in Organiser could mean that it
was not a fact. Or perhaps for us secularists "all the
news that's fit to print" does not include the opening of
a Hindu pilgrimage centre twelve thousand miles away from
what the Indian-in-the-street still foolishly calls
Hindusthan. In any case there cannot be anything more
reprehensible than the VHP awakening Hindus anywhere in
the world including India. When the Hindu is awake the
secularism of Amulya Ganguli, Tavleen Singh & Co. cannot
be safe. Fortunately the Government, whether of
Narasimha Rao or of Deve Gowda, is aware of this danger
and constantly does everything in its power to combat
communalism-from certifying that the Muslim League is
secular to appointing a Muslim rapist and
attempted murderer and nine-times -jail bird as a Central
Minister. But is that enough to counter the. VHP's
misdeeds? Alas, no. The VHP was banned twice, thrice,
and this was a matter of rejoicing for every scribe worth
his (or her) secular salt, but the fact stands that the
VHP continues on its nefarious course. Amulya Ganguli has
called the VHP "this new member of the Sangh Parivar",
and of course whatever a secularist says about anything
Hindu must be right. Otherwise Satiricus would have
remembered that the VHP was founded decades ago-again
when there was no Parivar, only the Sangh-and its
founders included Master Tara Singh. He would also
remember a certain Caribbean Indian friend, now a
minister in his country, who had proudly told Satiricus
he was a founder member of the VHP there decades ago.
But again Shri Ganguli cannot be bothered with such
chronological trifles. What is germane to the secular
issue is the sorry a is clearly the failure of the
genuine culture and religious organisations that has
enabled the Sangh Parivar to usurp their roles". Now
Satiricus is sure Babu Moshoy must be right, but he is
not sure how a "genuine" religious organisation can be
spotted. What is genuine in this synthetic age or real
in this age of "virtual" reality? Satiricus does not
know, he only knows that the VHP has spread not only all
over secular India but all over the world from Hong Kong
and Singapore to UK and USA simply because it is a huge
worldwide sham. Only some rare secular souls like Amulya
Ganguli are not taken in by it. Finally, the very word
Trinidadeshwar seems to have shocked the secular
sensibilities of Shri Ganguli, so he better stay away
from the word "Makkeshwara " (Meccaeswar?) found in olden
Sanskrit tantra texts and ancient Tamil poetry.
