Author: M. V. Kamnath
Publication: Organiser
Date: December 31, 2000
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 realise the enormity of
their intolerance-and crime.
