Author: Bharat Jhunjhunwala
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: June 4, 2002
Nationalism is characterised principally
by a feeling of community among a people, based upon common descent, language,
and religion," says the Funk and Wagnalls Encyclopedia. The essence of
nationalism is a sense of shared community, a sense of being one people
with a common heritage. Implicit is a sense of respect for each other as
equals or fellow travellers.
We think and feel of India as a
nation because we have that feeling of common descent. Our languages have
mostly evolved from Sanskrit and are similar. All our people share a common
history from the Indus civilisation to Mauryan Empire to Mughal and British
rule. It is this historical continuity - this shared common experience
- that makes us all Indian. Our religions have become different in the
last thousand years but that does not obviate the sense of oneness that
our people feel due to shared common history.
This common history includes that
of Rama, Buddha, Sufi saints of Ajmer, St Thomas, Ramakrishna Paramhamsa
and other national figures. It matters little whether Lord Rama actually
lived in flesh or blood or was a mere figment of the imagination. It also
is of little relevance whether Lord Rama was actually born at the place
where the Babri Mosque stood. The relevance of Lord Rama lies in his giving
us a sense of common heritage. This applies to the Christian and Muslim
people of the country as well. Ninety five per cent of them have been converted
from Hinduism. Even if they follow a different religion, their identity
as Indians is predicated upon their acceptance of Rama, Buddha, Sufi Saints
and St Thomas as national ancestors.
People of countries like Saudi Arabia
and India, who have been home to great religions, face a peculiar difficulty.
Their cultural and religious histories are inseparable. Prophet Muhammad
was as much a national leader of the Saudi People as he is a Prophet of
the Islamic people. A Saudi citizen may or may not believe in the sayings
of the Prophet but he has to acknowledge the Prophet as his historical
ancestor.
So also with Lord Rama. Every citizen
of India has to honour and own Lord Rama as his common heritage. Here the
Christians and Muslims face a peculiar difficulty. The national leader
Rama doubles up as a Hindu deity. The Quranic injunction that salvation
is possible only through Prophet Muhammad, and that Islam must prevail
over all other religions (Ayat 61.9), creates a sense of alienation from
Lord Rama and, therefore, from "India". Jesus Christ said much the same
thing: "He who is not with Me is against Me" (Matthew 12.30). The Christians
and Muslims are, therefore, unable to honour Lord Rama as their god and
that leads to the negation of their common heritage or of their sense of
nationalism as well.
Secularism and nationalism cannot
go together in Saudi Arabia because Prophet Muhammad is simultaneously
the epitome of Saudi nationalism as well as Islamic religion. So also in
India. Lord Rama in India is Hinduism. So secularism and nationalism cannot
go together. To honour Rama becomes tantamount to dishonouring the Holy
Quran and Bible. The situation is different in countries like the United
States where all the religious founders are foreign. It is possible for
them to separate religion from national identity because they have no indigenous
religious leaders who are at the head of both the streams. An American's
national identity flows from Lincoln and Jefferson, not from Rama or Moses
or Christ or Muhammad.
In fact, these injunctions of the
Holy Bible and Holy Quran may run contrary to our Constitution. Article
51A(e) requires all citizens "to promote harmony and the spirit of common
brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious... diversities."
But Holy Bible says that if you are not with Jesus then you are against
Him. The Holy Quran says that Islam must prevail over other non-Semitic
religions like Hinduism. These religious statements run contrary to the
spirit of common brotherhood enshrined in our Constitution.
The Hindus have faced similar difficulties
with their religion. Lord Krishna, for example, says in the Bhagwad Gita
that the four varnas have been created by Him and that He has allotted
different duties to each. But the Constitution says that no discrimination
will be done on the basis of one's caste. The Hindus have ignored this
religious injunction. They have changed their religion with the spirit
of the times.
The Christians and Muslims will
have to similarly scrutinise and sanitise their religious texts to make
them consistent with the Constitution or the spirit of India. A nation,
as was quoted earlier, arises from a "feeling of community among a people".
This feeling is disrupted when one religion says that it alone holds the
path to salvation and that the others are meant to be overcome. That is
a negation of the feeling of community and mutual self-respect. Religious
exclusivity and nationalism are incompatible. So there can be no secular
nationalism in India. Indian nationalism is necessarily rooted in India's
history, in Lord Rama.
The only solution is for the Christians
and Muslims to either ignore or substantially reinterpret those sayings
so as to make the people's psyche compatible with spirit of the Constitution.
They would have to accept Lord Rama as their historical heritage, if not
God.
The Hindus also fall into the same
trap when they attack Muslims in the name of God. Indian philosophy is
replete with the saying that God is only one. His forms are many. If the
Vedas are divine - apaurusheya - then so is the Holy Quran. The Hindus
are the majority in India. We have a historical challenge before us. Our
forefathers failed to make a successful dialogue with the Muslims and Christians.
The result was the creation of many dharma in the country. Let us not forget
that the Shankaracharya solved the Hindu-Buddhist schism through dialogue.
He sought out the Buddhist scholars and even forced them into a discussion.
