Author: S Gurumurthy
Publication: The New Indian Express
Date: September 12, 2005
URL: http://newindpress.com/column/Column.asp?ID=IE220050527225234&P=old&By=S+Gurumurthy
Telling children to yell 'A' for 'apple',
'B' for 'biscuit', 'C' for 'chocolate', and 'D' for 'daddy' is secular, and
amounts to secular education. This spreads harmony, peace and understanding
between communities and religions. But asking them to say 'A' for 'Arjuna',
'B' for 'Bhima', 'C' for 'Chola', and 'D' for 'Damayanti' is unsecular, divisive
education.
Not just that. These names spread hatred between
religions, Gods, and communities. Apples, biscuits, and chocolates will bring
about understanding between Hindus and Muslims, between Hindus and Christians,
between Christians and Muslims. But Arjuna and Bhima will do the very reverse;
bring about war among Hindus and Muslims and between Hindus and Christians.
This is Arjun Singh's view of what spreads religious harmony and what spreads
religious hate. This is the basis of the UPA government's USP, de-saffronisation.
It is on this logic that the UPA government
has decided to deny funds to the Ekal Vidyalayas, or single teacher schools,
run by many Hindu organisations. The Ekal Vidyalaya is a rapid movement, a
unique experiment, to take education to tribal people living beyond the reach
of the state and the market [read private sector]. In this extraordinary model,
to interface the remote to the modern, a single teacher becomes the centre
of all activities in a tribal village of a few hundred homes. He teaches them
elementary education to begin with, and also basic hygiene, science, and other
tools to handle the modern world which they are frightened to face.
He also tells them about the greatness and
oneness of India. He tells them stories of Rama and Krishna, Lakshmi and Saraswati,
Arjuna and Bhima, Harischandra and Chandragupta. He familiarises them with
modern society, which is otherwise difficult for them to handle. There are
now over 15,000 single teacher schools in different corners of the country,
in the remotest tribal centres. Even their worst detractors have not cited
one instance of these schools engaging in any activity that harmed peace or
harmony. These schools started some 25 years ago and have been running without
any government aid.
The Ekal movement, which is becoming the Indian
model even in Africa and elsewhere, is planning to reach 100,000 single teacher
schools in the next decade. Very respectable persons are associated with the
movement. Those who work in Ekal schools in tribal areas cannot be hired through
employment exchanges or ads in newspapers. It requires more than - actually
less - career orientation to get such workers. A very high level of motivation
to serve the country needs to be generated. Organisations that sponsor these
schools motivate thousands of youngsters to take to this hard form of delivering
social service with nationalist orientation to distant brethren. In contrast,
missionaries from the West who deliver social service in the North East are
also highly motivated, but with a view to divide the Nagas and Mizos from
India!
Why then are the Arjun Singhs inside the government
and Harkishen Surjeets outside the government targetting Ekal Vidyalayas?
Don't go very far in search of reasons. That many of them are run by RSS-trained
social workers is the real, hidden reason. But, Ekal Vidyalayas cannot be
outlawed for their association with the RSS or VHP, which are legal organisations.
Nevertheless, what the law does not allow, de-saffronisation accomplishes.
In secular perspective the names of Arjuna
and Bhima, Rama and Krishna, Lakshmi and Saraswati saffronise, spread hate.
So to de-saffronise, outlaw Rama and Krishna themselves! One ground for denying
aid to the Ekal movement is that students answer the roll call in Ekal Vidyalayas
by saying 'Jai Shri Ram', not 'Yes Sir', when their names are called. Mahatma
Gandhi would have died a thousand deaths were he to be alive today. He died
when he was shot with the name of 'Rama' on his lips, even as he lived by
chanting the name of Rama always. The very Rama's name, says Arjun Singh,
now spreads hate. Arjun Singh brands himself as a secular icon precisely because
he de-saffronises, that is, outlaws Rama.
Why do seculars fear Rama and Krishna? This
is the reason. Secularism fears a living Rama and Krishna and would not be
bothered were they not a living reality in the consciousness of India. The
Bhagwat Gita makes Krishna a living consciousness. Ramayana instills eternal
reverence for Rama. Arjun Singh outlaws Rama and Krishna only because they
are eternally part of the Indian consciousness. This is precisely what communism
did in Russia. It derecognised living churches, that is, churches in which
prayers were on and recognised the dead ones, namely those in which prayers
had ceased!
Like communism, secularism is comfortable
with the dead past and is frightened of living heritage. Should Gita and Ramayana
lose their relevance, the seculars will accept Krishna and Rama. Does it mean
that secularism and de-saffronisation want to achieve this? Yet, Rama and
Krishna will survive this kind of secularism too. But, how long will this
secularism?
Writer's email: comment@gurumurthy.net
