Long Live Democracy
Long
Live Democracy
Introduction
Democracy is the best
form of government we are aware of and benefitting from. It, presumably, has
adequate space at least to air our opinions on matters and to seek, in the
original spirit, judicial clarification and support. No doubt, progressive
democracies are thriving. India is the world’s largest democracy. M.K. Stalin,
after the recently held assembly elections in Tamilnadu, declared that he would
take on board the opposition members – a healthy sign of democracy.
Amidst all the
positive aspects of democracy, the apprehensions of Socrates and Plato still
resonates some doubts, if democracy misses the purpose and spirit. Their
anxiety was about ‘state that distrusts ability, and reverences number more
than knowledge’ and ‘chaos where there is no thought, and the crowd decides in
haste and ignorance, to repent at leisure and in desolation’. The toughest
question they raised was ‘Is it not shameful that men should be ruled by
orators’.[1]
Plato’s worry was
that “mob-rule is a rough sea for the ship of state to ride; every wind of
oratory stirs up the waters and deflects the course…that at last the wiliest
and most unscrupulous flatterer, calling himself the “protector of the people”
rise to supreme power.”[2]
These intensive
opinions do not out rightly invalidate democracy. However, the concerns that
number is revered rather than facts, crowd decides matters, the powerful
orators take centre stage and declare that they are the protectors of people
are some cautious warning for all the healthy democracies.
When democracies fail
to be inclusive, there is a possibility for these apprehensions to become the
reality. Democracy has not failed us in spite of many exclusive voices.
Nevertheless, these concerns can stain democracy and therefore need careful
scrutiny.
Sita Ram Goel’s
interpretation of past events and his proposals for a future India seem to be
heavily inclined to fuel those fears. Therefore, his writings are analyzed here
to estimate the possible impacts of his views.
Sita Ram Goel
(1921-2003), a strong advocate of Hindutva, presents three past invasions of
India to make his case that these invasions have adversely affected and
continue to influence Indian society, education and politics. For him Indian
society is Hindu society, therefore, it has a square responsibility to set them
right.
Ram Swarup who said
about earlier Arab invasions that the ‘invaders ruled through the sword’,[3]
was considered the mentor of Goel. The later has used the writings and opinions
of the earlier as basis for most of his claims.
For Goel, Hindu
history was triumphal and it ‘suffered a severe setback only with the advent of
the Muslim invaders in the middle of the 7th Century AD’. The Hindus waged a ceaseless war ‘till the
fabric of Muslim rule was destroyed and dispersed by the middle of the 18th
Century’. He, rather intentionally, downplays one of the most emotive election
issues of our times to his prestige that the number of converts Islam ‘could
win during its long spell of seven centuries was rather small’. A reasonable
question that can seek an acceptable clarification is that if the number is so
small, why has it become a sensational political discourse.
However, to keep the
amber simmering, he forcefully maintains that the invasion ‘crystallized one
residue which we shall name as Islamism’.[4]
The progress of ‘Islamism in India was rather slow’ but ‘the use of oil as a
political weapon by Islamic countries and the influx of petro-dollars in plenty
from several Arab countries, particularly Libya and Saudi Arabia, since the
early ‘seventies’, has given Islamism in India a new glow of self-confidence in
one sudden sweep’. It is obvious that
religion is purposely linked to state funding to make the claim more effective.
This is apparent from
the view that ‘Islamism is only another name for Arab imperialism’ and
‘Islamism in India is now busy employing to the maximum advantage the Arab
money which is pouring in through many channels and in increasing quantities’.[5]
The skillful insistence that foreign forces and money influence our internal
affairs is a powerful point for clever orators to provoke crowed to rise
against the assumed opponent and to protect the nation from them.
The second invasion
was the British with ‘unprecedented superiority in the art of warfare’ and ‘a
much subtler weapon of diplomacy’. They also brought with them, ‘in the form of
Christianity, an ideology’ which was ‘altogether alien and intensely inimical
to the basic tenets of the Hindu way of life’. Compared to Islam, Christianity
was slow in progress and influence. It was only after the arrival of
‘Portuguese, that Christianity was able to harass the Hindus for some time and
in some years’.[6]
Goel’s attempt to connect state and religion to make his case strong continues.
According to him, ‘the British ruled
through Indology’. They took over Indian ‘education and taught us to look at
ourselves through their eyes’ and ‘created a class, Indian in blood and colour,
but anti-Hindu in its intellectual and emotional orientation’. He terms this
issue as ‘the problem of self-alienated Hindus, of anti-Hindu Hindu
intellectuals’. [7]
His unhappiness about Hindus accepting British education is more categorical.
Hence, he writes unlike the Arabs, the British invasion ‘gave us two residues
which we have named Christianism and Macaulayism’.[8]
Here too state is purposefully linked
with religion and education.
Goel argues that the
first two invasions have helped communism to penetrate India. Marx ‘fully subscribed
to the theses of colonial scholarship that India was not a nation that it had
no history and it was meant for subjugation’. ‘He also said that India neither
knew freedom nor deserved it’ and this ‘became the faith of his Indian pupils
except that while he himself voted for a British conquest many of them would be
quite happy with the Muslim conquest’.[9] Had Macaulayism ‘not prepared the ideological
ground, Communism could not have made the strides it did in this country’.[10]
Goel has, now linked the Arabs and British with the Communism to underline that
they are all enemies with a purpose.
The view is further
reiterated by saying that the Marxists found British Imperialism “progressive”
and therefore, ‘they opposed the country’s national struggle as reactionary’.
They learnt to work closely with Muslims both during as well as after the
independence. ‘The Communist
contribution towards the creation of Pakistan was next only to that of the
Muslim League’ Marxism was Macaulayism at its most hostile. It blackened Indian
history systematically and ‘saw in Hinduism not a great religion and a great
spiritual civilization but only communalism’.[11]
These thoughts are often echoed in the statements of politicians who promise to
free institutions from leftist ideologies.
Communism comes in
conflict with positive nationalism’, that is ‘a nationalism which draws its
inspiration from its own cultural heritage and socio-political traditions’. The
Communist ‘hostility to positive nationalism
is permanent’.
It was hostile to
Hindu society and culture and was ‘bent upon destroying Sanatana Dharma and Hindu society. It is, therefore, in its
interest to prevent the Muslims and the Christians from moving towards the
main-stream of positive nationalism’. The major accusation is that “the main
strength of Communism in India springs from colossal Soviet finances which pour
into its coffers through many channels and in increasing amounts.”[12]
Foreign funds destabilize India is a catch point for powerful oration, crowd pulling
and promising protection to the nation.
The foreign invasions
and domination grievously affected Hindu religious life (spiritual),
educational (intellectual) institutions and politics. These can be elaborated
further to understand the inherent design of Goel.
The Vedic Sanatana Dharma ‘practiced peace
among their own followers as well as towards the followers of other paths’ and
in it “a seeker can take to (adhikara)
whichever discipline suits his adhara (stage
of moral-spiritual preparation).”[13]
In the past, ‘India rose through sanatana dharma and it is also to rise for it’
now and in future. Of course, uncritical
promotion of adhikara, adhara and Istadevatha is in a way passive acceptance of
prevalent inequality.
Goel further warns, “Hinduism is the
principle of India’s self-renewal. Anything that hurts that principle hurts
India, hurts its civilizational role, therefore hurts future religious
humanity.”[14]
This is a typical example where orators influence the mass that great religious
riches are maligned and it hurts our sentiments. Therefore, rise up to protect
it.
Mahatma Gandhi is accused of raising ‘Jesus to
the status of a spiritual giant, and Christianity itself to the status of a
great religion as good as Sanatana Dharma’.
Gandhi’s ‘mindless slogan of sarva-dharma-samabhava
was proving to be an effective smokescreen for Christian missions to steal a
march against Hindu religion, society and culture’ [15]
Goel used the same argument to suggest that Gandhi startled Christianity.
Ambiguity and paradoxes fail to block powerful orators from reaching out to
large numbers.
After independence “a
new breed of ‘Gandhians’ became busy floating voluntary agencies and looking forward to being funded
by Western Foundations. Some of these Foundations were avowedly dedicated to
promoting only Christian causes.”[16]
Therefore, Gandhians became, in due course, active or passive accomplices of the
Christian missions. The outcome of
this is that “today all religions are regarded as equal and Hindus feel no
special responsibility towards Hinduism.”[17]
This regret shows that the inherently divisive principles like Varna, guna,
adhikara, adhara and istadevatha will never accept attempts towards unity and
equality among religions.
There was time when ‘Sanysins and monks provided leadership
to the Hindu society’. Only, during the final phase of the struggle for
independence, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru who was inspired by the Soviet Union and
Communism, ‘had harboured a deep-seated animosity against Hindu society and
culture’ in the name of secularism.
Hindu society has remained incapable
of defeating secularism, because ‘the society is ‘defensive without
understanding this perversion of Secularism’. Goel seems to suggest that
forceful days are ahead to evict secularism.
It is also bemoaned
that the Hindu society ‘keeps on repeating the slogan of ‘sarva-dharma-samabhava’ – equal regard for all dharmas – with
regard to Islam and Christianity’. To entertain samabhava (equal regard) towards Islam and Christianity ‘is to
extend invitation to doom’.[18]
These exclusive oratories seem to keep the anger swelling.
Other accusations are
that many Hindus cherish the great spiritual traditions of Hinduism and its
scriptures like the Gita and the Upanishads but do not have an equal
enthusiasm for ‘the Hindu society which has honoured and preserved these
traditions and scriptures down the ages’. Similarly there are Hindus who proclaim with great confidence that Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) can never
die, without knowing that Sanatana Dharma
will surely suffer an eclipse and no more ‘if there is no Hindu society to
sustain it’. Further, many Hindus are legitimately proud of ‘Hindu art,
architecture, sculpture, music, painting, dance, drama, literature,
linguistics, lexicography, and so on’ without considering that these ‘will die if Hindu society which created
these are no more there to preserve, protect and perpetuate it’.[19]
Likewise, “Once when Hinduism was strong, castes represented a natural and
healthy diversity, but now in its present state of weakness these are used for
its dismemberment.”[20]
Goel seems to acknowledge that Hindu Society has become weak because of
external influences but implicitly appeals to reinvigorate it with much force.
A more serious
allegation against the Hindus is that ‘the Hindus lost some of their vigour and
vitality and vigilance, and neglected the art of warfare which was acquiring
new dimensions in neighbouring lands’. Therefore, “Let no Hindu worth his salt
remain complacent.”[21]
Appeal to make a religious community militant-like, can potentially instigate
violence towards others and appeal the orator to become their protector. These
notions are implicitly and at times explicitly present in the writings and
speeches of many like Goel.
The wrong and
dangerous premise is that ‘the society which is known as Hindu society at
present is the national society of India’ and ‘the history of the Hindu society
is the history of India’.[22]
India has been asleep for long, ‘but let us hope that the difficulties would be
overcome and Hinduism will come into its own and recover its self-nature and
regain its natural pride’.[23]
These are the narratives that will challenge the spirit of inclusive democracy
and strive to instill exclusive singularities.
For Goel “Hindu
society is the only significant society in the world today which presents a
continuity of cultural existence and functioning since times immemorial.”[24]
It ‘was a revered culture throughout the civilized world’ and was ‘nourished by the Sanatana Dharma’ and it ‘is the national culture of India’.[25] There is a need for a strong ‘Hindu society to sustain it’.[26] This notion has serious repercussions. How can Hindu culture be Indian culture, where there are many cultures? Promoting one particular culture is against the multicultural ethos of our times.
2.1.5 Historians
It is alleged that
historians have falsely described Hindu society. The dominant school of western
historians and their Indian disciples ‘presented this history as a series of
successful foreign invasions to which Hindu India invariably succumbed’. ‘Aryan
invasion of India in the second millennium BC’ too was their invention.
The Aligarh school of
historians are of the view ‘that Hindu society being basically an oppressive
and exploitative society since its very inception, the invaders did not have to
mount much of an effort’ to break its defenses.
Agreeing with the
Aligarh view, the Marxist historians upheld ‘that the invaders were not only
liberators on the social and political plane but also great incentives to
forces of production’. To make events more twisted, Goel writes that ‘inspired
by Mecca and Moscow’ the motive of these Aligarh and Marxist historians ‘are to malign and misrepresent Hindu history
in order to denigrate and destroy Hindu society’.
He credits
‘responsible Western Historians’ for agreeing that ‘whenever the Hindus
suffered a defeat it was largely due to their neglect of and consequent
inferiority in the art of warfare rather than any serious defect or deficiency
in their social system or cultural milieu.”[27]
Here Goel accepts that Hindus were weak in some areas but these narrations
presuppose a new Hindu Indian history.
2. 2 Intellectual Impacts
The second impact of
the invasions was on education or intellectual system. Macaulay, after the
British Government of India had completed a survey of the indigenous system of
education in the Presidencies of Bengal, Bombay and Madras, preferred ‘a new
system’ (Western) of education in India. According to Goel the British
discarded and left this indigenous education to die ‘not because its educational
capacity was inferior but because it was not thought fit for serving the
purpose they had in mind’ that is, ‘to introduce the same system of
administration in India as was obtaining in England’.
Again the ‘new system of education
aimed at promoting and patronizing a new Indian upper class who, in turn, would
hail the blessings of British Raj and cooperate in securing its stability in
India’. Further, it slowly ‘corrodes the soul of a culture and corrupts a
social system’ and its target is every section of Indian society. Moreover, it
‘expresses itself in a whole life-style which goes on rejecting and replacing
Hindu mores and manners indiscriminately in favour of those which the West
recommends as the latest and the best’.[28]
Here, progressive attempts at knowledge have been undermined for the sake of
protecting the past notions in vogue.
In the same line, it
is claimed that the present scholarship of India is not its own, ‘it is
borrowed from the West’. Today, Indian intellectuals ‘look at their country,
its culture, scriptures, religion and history through the eyes of our masters’.
‘Hinduism to us is now only a name for Brahmanism, sati, idol-worship, cow
worship, snake worship, and above all caste and caste oppression.”[29]
It is evident that clever orators do not entertain self-criticism and present
it as destructive in order to galvanize crowed.
The progressive
Hindus are termed as ‘they lack leadership; the Hindu elites have become
illiterate about their spiritual heritage and history and indifferent and even
hostile towards their religion’. This is forcefully presented further as
“India’s higher education, its academia and media are in the hands of
Hindu-hating elite. India’s history is written by people under the influence of
old Imperial schools. They tell you how Muslims and Christians came as
liberators from the shackles if Hinduism.”[30]
Goel laments that
‘there is a widespread impression among “educated” classes in India that this
country had no worthwhile system of education before the advent of the
British’. The appeal that ‘the Hindu may sometimes need to feel some pride in
his ancestral heritage’[31]
is a step forward towards electrifying crowed which ‘decides in haste and
ignorance, to repent at leisure and in desolation’.
The third effect of
the invasion was on the Indian political system. Fear is created that external
influences are affecting Indian political system, with the one possible
exception of BJP because ‘it is not hostile to Hindu India and Hinduism is not
a dirty word to it as it is for the other parties’. Further, the BJP is a
replica of the Hindu society and it represents all its weakness: its lack of
confidence, initiative and fighting spirit’.[32]
Therefore “what India needs is not another party under the same prevailing ideological
influences but Hindus opened to the message of ancient teachers, Hindus who are
also sadhakas.”[33]
This is the complete unveiling of the entire schemes of a political party.
Though it challenges democracy, powerful orators secure necessary number even
if it is against the principles of the constitution and plurality of the
country.
Secularism is a
principle strongly decried in this process. Accordingly, in the modern West,
secularism was ‘a humanist and rationalist revolt against the closed creed of
Christianity and stood for pluralism such as has characterized Hinduism down
the ages’. Pandit Nehru ‘had perverted the word and turned it into a shield for
protecting every closed creed prevailing in India at the dawn of independence in
1947 – Islam, Christianity, Communism’. What is very hard to understand is if
Hinduism had been symbol of pluralism all through, why Christianity and Islam
are anathema to it.
The argument against
secularism is carried further by insisting that Nehru has made it ‘not only the
most fashionable but also the most profitable political term for every enemy of
India’s indigenous society and culture’.
He became ‘the leader of a Muslim-Christian-Communist combine for forcing
Hindus and Hinduism first on the defensive and then on a run for shelter’.[34]
We have ‘invited great trouble for ourselves by importing the alien concept of
secularism from Europe’.[35]
It is more serious that the word was inserted into the Indian constitution
‘arbitrarily by Indira Gandhi during the infamous Emergency (1975-77)’.[36] It is a sad reality that people failed to
appreciate the foresight to protect
India from mere reverence for number.
Of course, for the
orators secularism can be relevant to India only ‘to establish complete
cultural freedom in the Hindu homeland by eliminating the fanaticism which had
survived in the form of Islam and Christianity’. Strange and venomous indeed is
the interpretation and the agenda.
It is also appraised
that now secularism implies, ‘applause for Islam and Christianity’ and
denouncement of Hinduism as ‘a nest of narrow-minded and aggressive
communalism’. Still further, ‘Muslims and Christians were given complete
freedom to propagate and spread their creeds to the best of their capacity’.[37]
This, of course is not a new idea, but the fact remains, that democracy has the
responsibility to be cautious to curb theses notions from taking centre stage.
More serious is the attempt to twist
secularism and call it ‘high treason to the Indian nation’ and instigate the
crowed that ‘Hindu society will have to tell the secularist that a Hindu cannot
be a communalist in his own homeland’. For Goel an honest Secularism ‘would
have held up Hindu society as the model of a secular society’ and. ‘been a
defender of Hindu society’ [38] Bizarre indeed is the aggression and communal
scheme.
We live in a secular country and
celebrate freedom of religion granted in the Indian constitution. The scheme of
Goel against Christianity is extremely impolite. This he does with his own
sense of history and inference.
It is a fact that St.
Thomas, one of the apostles of Jesus Christ brought the gospel/Christianity to
India. Therefore, Christianity in India is an indigenous religion and is as old
as Christianity itself. To thwart the fact, Goel argues that the earliest
Christians in Kerala were known as Syrian Christians and now they ‘take pride
in calling themselves St. Thomas Christians’.[39]
It is a fact that captivating oratories are entertaining rather than real
facts.
According to Goel,
the Syrian Christians were ‘mostly
refugees from persecution in Syria and later on in Iran’. Most of them were also ‘heretics in the eyes
of Christian orthodoxy’. ‘Later on, they
were joined by refugees from Armenia flying from Christian
heresy-hunters’. For the refugees the
Hindu Rajas gave ‘land and money grants for building houses and churches’. The
local “Hindus in general made things so pleasant for them that they decided to
stay permanently in Malabar.”[40] These refugees came to be known as Syrian
Christians in the course of time.
The Christians of
Malabar whether Syrian or St.Thomas Christians ‘kept their counsels to
themselves’ in early days and “they came out in the open only when the Portuguese
provided protection and saw to it that Hinduism kept mum.”[41]
Here Goel, connects religion and state to make his case severe against
Christians. To make it well poised for a specific audience in mind, early
Christians in India are pictured as unwanted refugees from other countries.
Orators and writers who seek to establish the prestige and honor of their own
religious traditions unfortunately fail to credit the same to people of other
faith traditions. Is it not a deplorable condition that healthy democracies
should work tirelessly to overcome?
3.2
Presumed Change in Attitude
To vent his
antagonism against Christianity, Goel presents it as a religion which is
against the state and Hindus. He refuses
to admit St. Thomas and continue to state that the Syrian Christians changed
their attitude when the Portuguese (pirates) arrived on the scene in the
sixteenth century. According to him “they immediately rallied round the
Portuguese and against their Hindu neighbors’.[42]
Their language became ‘as crude as in its homeland in Europe, and its methods
as cruel’. Francis Xavier was the ‘patron Saint of those pirates’.[43]
Even Goel called, Francis Xavier ‘a rapacious pirate dressed up as a priest’.[44]
His belittling and aggressive language is obvious as he writes that ‘the
Catholic church hails an arch criminal like Francis Xavier as the Patron Saint
of the East’.[45]
He also condemns that Christianity was silent about the atrocities of
Portuguese dispensation against others.
It is accused that
Francis Xavier ‘made forcible conversions, demolished Hindu temples, smashed
Hindu idols, and inaugurated that anti-Brahmanism which has by now become the
sine qua non of all progressive thought and politics in India’.[46] Goel seems to accept the past as it is and
wish to remain uncritical about it.
Robert Di Nobili, a
Jesuit, ‘decided that he would disguise himself as a Brahmana and preach the
gospel by other means’. Goel calls him ‘a desperate and despicable scoundrel’[47]
and declares that his followers believe that Hindus could be reached by fraud.
The German Lutheran missionary,
Bartholomaeus Ziegenbalg, thought the Hindus belief system is surrounded in ‘a
cocoon of foolish beliefs, in a multiplicity of gods, other celestial beings
and demons, and a system of abstract philosophies concerning man and the soul’.
[48]
Although he had taken help from the Brahmans, to understand subjects, he did
not consider their views in matters of religious questions.
Goel’s disregard for
the services of the early missionaries and his failure to notice anything good
from them are intentional attempts to deliberately present Christianity with
utmost contempt to his audience.
The continued
victories of the British in India made the missionaries to think that the
victories were not the results of superior warfare but the superiority of the
Christian creed by which the British generals and soldiers swore. Therefore,
‘they immediately started pouring venom on Hindu religion, culture and
society.”[49]
And, the missionaries employed various methods ‘to harangue and/or hoodwink the
unsuspecting Hindus’. More intriguingly Goel develops his plot that, “what
looms large at the back of all these methods is the mammoth finance which flows
in freely from the coffers of the Christian churches and communities in Europe
and America.”[50]
This assumption is the cause for the careful monitoring of funds flowing in to
India, particularly to Christians. This is done with the notion that
Christianity will suffer or disappear if foreign resources are curtailed.
In the opinion of
Goel, Christianity was thriving in India under the British rule. The phase
ended with the ‘rise of Hindu reforms movements, particularly the clarion call
given by Maharishi Dayananda and Swami Vivekananda’.[51]
This is intended to suggest continuous pressure on Christianity from different
angles.
Independence of India
became ‘boon for Christianity’. ‘right to convert Hindus was incorporated in
the Constitution’. Jawaharlal Nehru ‘promoted every anti-Hindu ideology and
movement’ under the cover of secularism. Those followed Nehru continued to
raise the issue of ‘Hindu communalism’ as the most frightening phenomenon.
Christian missionaries could now denounce as a
Hindu communalist and chauvinist, even as a Hindu Nazi, anyone who raised the
slightest objection to their means and methods. All sorts of ‘secularists’ came
forward to join the chorus. ‘New theologies of Fulfillment, Indigenization,
Liberation, and Dialogue were evolved and put into action. The missionary apparatus
multiplied fast and became pervasive’.
This was the best
period of Christianity in India. It now stood recognized as ‘an ancient Indian
religion’ with every right to extend its field of operation and expand its
flock. The seeming setback for Christianity during this period were ‘K.M.
Panikkar’s book, Asia and Western
Dominance, published from London in 1953, The Niyogi Committee Report
published by the Government of Madhya Pradesh in 1956, and OM Prakash Tyagi’s
Bill on Freedom of Religion introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 1978’.[52] They highlighted the Western dominance
through Christianity (the imperialist character of the Christian doctrine),
unfair means adopted by missionaries and need to curtail freedom of religion,
respectively. Consequently, sporadic reaction to Christianity was emerging from
different quarters.
Brahmo Samaj and the
Arya Samaj ‘were the earliest expressions of this Hindu spirit of resistance’.
Raja Ram Mohan Roy had ‘demolished the most important Christian dogmas’
although he had kept Jesus on a high pedestal. Perhaps he was convinced that
Jesus was a great moral teacher. Brahmo Samaj had to pay a high price for his
praise of Jesus. ‘Keshub Chunder Sen who took over the Brahmo Samaj at a later
stage, became infatuated with Jesus, so much so that he got alienated more or
less completely from the Hindu society at large’.[53]
We have to be grateful to Goel for uncovering the real intensions of Brahma
Samj. It applies to Arya Samaj as well. Often these movements are uncritically
studied in theological seminaries in India.
Madame Blavatsky, the founder of Theosophical
Society ‘exposed the spiritual and moral claims of Christianity’. The chief
apostle of Theosophical Society in India, Mrs. Annie Besant, ‘inspired no small
pride in the Hindu heritage’. The Ramakrishna Mission also came to the rescue
at a later stage. Mahatma Gandhi ‘gave no quarters to Christian theology or to
Jesus Christ as the only Son of God and Saviour of mankind’.[54]
Though ambiguous in interpreting the movements, the fact remains that
Christianity is viewed with much scone.
Goel’s view on Gandhi
was unsteady. Earlier, his sarva-dharma-samabhava
was abused for treating Christianity and Islam on par with Hinduism. Now, the
same principle is used to pull down Christians.
According to Goel, Gandhi’s
slogan of sarva-dharma-samabhava threw Christian missionaries ‘on the
defensive and forced to change their language. The foulmouthed miscreants
become sweet-tongued vipers. Now they are out to “share their spiritual riches”
with Hindus, reminding us of a beggar in dirty rags promising to donate his
wardrobe to wealthy persons’.[55]
This change of attitude was reflected in the Tambaram Conference of the International
Missionary Council (IMC) in 1938, which decided to reformulate Christian
theology in the Indian context.
3.6 Reaction to Action
The simmering Hindu
reactions toward Islam (and Christianity) gradually developed in to an action
plan after the famous historical 1981 ‘mass conversion of Harijans to Islam at
Meenakshipuram in Tamil Nadu’. Hindus synchronized the conversion event with a ‘renewed
Muslim aggression’ and ‘Pakistan-backed terrorism in Punjab and Kashmir’. The
Sangh parivar ‘was startled by the rout of the Bharatiya Janata Party in the
1984 elections to the Lok Sabha, and decided to renew its Hindu character’. The
shocking fact is ‘the Raamajanmabhumi Movement was the result’ of these
reactions converging into action. In the words of Goel ‘the Movement was aimed
at arresting Islamic aggression’.[56]
It is an eye opener to the fact that democracy can be misused on the basis of
number and oratory skills. And the powerful orators can claim protectors of a
numerically huge group.
This is only one
scheme, which was successful and unveiled to us. In democratic system there is
still large space for numerically strong to exploit. Therefore, the criticism
of Greek philosophers are still relevant to make our democracy grow healthy.
The people like Goel
in India still think that the ‘native Indian rulers have proved far more
helpful to the Christian missions’. This includes ‘constitutional protection to
Christian propaganda’ and free access ‘for the missions to enter into areas
from where the British had kept them out’. After ‘independence, ‘Christianity
has come to acquire a prestige which it had enjoyed never before in the
country’. It is ‘financed almost
entirely from abroad’.
‘Converts to
Christianity in the North East and Central India have constantly evinced
separatist and secessionist tendencies’. Christianity’s ‘mischief to the
country and its culture, has yet to be learnt’. [57]
This is the way the crowed is kept guessing for more.
Christianity has
never been a religion; its long history tells us that it has always been a
predatory imperialism par excellence. Therefore, the encounters, if any,
between Christianity and Hinduism should not be treated as dialogue rather
should be viewed as a battle between two totally opposed and mutually exclusive
ways of thought and behahaviour.[58]
Peace is not an option for skilled orators. They prefer heightened tension.
The narrative
declares that the Arab and British invasions have left a powerful legacy behind
in the form of Islam and Christianity. This legacy continues because after
independence in 1947 India is ruled by anti-Hindu Hindus i.e. people who
reason.
Therefore, Hindu
society is now faced with imperialist ideologies in the form of Christianity
and Islam. The ideologies which came
with those armies should now find no place in India. They, too, have to be
defeated and dispersed. Hindu society has to recover the ground that was lost
to these ideologies during periods of Islamic and Christian expansion and
domination. Those sections of Hindu society which were forced or lured into the
folds of these ideologies have to be brought back into their ancestral fold.
This is the minimum task which Hindu society has to set before itself. The
maximum task is to carry the campaign against these ideologies into their own
homelands, and to free large sections of mankind from the abominable
superstitions which breed intolerance and aggression. Whether the many God-men
who started centers in different countries are carriers of these schemes is a
sincere question.
Hindu society is also
‘making a serious almost a fatal mistake in appealing to these ideologies in
the name of reason and morality’. Most intimidating sermon is that ‘the menace
has to be met by methods and means which are suited to the nature and magnitude
of the menace’. The “Hindu society has yet to proclaim that India has always
been and will always remain a Hindu homeland, and that people who fail to come
to terms with Hindu society and culture have no place in this country.” [59] unfortunately, this is what is influencing
democratic discourses in the resent times.
Goel finds that
positive nationalism is the solution for all the enlisted problems. The base
and source for positive nationalism is Sanatana
Dharma and the long saga of Hindu history, respectively. Hence, positive
nationalism draws its inspiration from its own cultural heritage and
socio-political traditions. The Muslim
and the Christian communities can share in positive nationalism if they revise
‘the premise of their exclusive creeds in favour of the universal principles
laid down by Sanatana Dharma’.[60] There is little chance that Hindu society
will ever be able to contain Christianity or Islam if it ‘continues to regard
these aggressive and imperialist ideologies as religions, and extend tolerance
to them’.[61]
Reverence for number undermines cooperation and tolerance. Rather, it dives
into intimidation and super sensational sentimentalism.
That is why it is
asserted by great orators that ‘India is entering into the second phase of its
freedom struggle: the struggle for regaining its Hindu identity’.[62]
The orators hesitate to accept the identity of others.
Fears about democracy that in it there is a
possibility that ‘number is revered rather than facts’, ‘crowd decides
matters’, ‘the powerful orators take centre stage and declare that they are the
protectors of people’ are not uncommon.
The process is
operative in narratives/oratories that are deliberately interlinking religion,
state and finance in order to create fear among people that there is a
systematic external attempt to destabilize our religion, culture, politics and
nation as a whole.
A very dangerous portrayal that
ignites crowed is that imperial forces have left our country but they continue
to influence us through their ideologies, education and funding mainly for
religious causes.
Creative and progressive political and
religious principles are misinterpreted to hurt the sentiments of the people
and provoke them to be aggressive in their approach to other communities than
their own. Added to this is molding of a false ego to pride one group greater
than others and therefore by any means others have to be forced out. This ego
becomes dynamic when connected with the obligation of restoring the past glory.
In the process, a
violent attitude is stirred against our own neighbors who follow different cultures,
religion, language and life style. Once the ground is prepared, other
dimensions are included to the ego, like there is a need for corrections in the
course of events in the country because they are falsely presented to belittle
our heritage. This drives us to give erroneous and strange interpretations to
education, history, politics, religion, culture and nation.
The worst form of the
narrative is that, even our independence struggle is not successful; we need
another freedom struggle to instill our past glory, if necessary by force.
Of course, these
narratives are helpful for orators to stimulate sentiments. They exist, side by
side but not with the possibility that they will not thrive always. That is the
promise and possibility of democracy given to all of us. We cannot be idle and
ignorant to allow powerful oratory to decide everything, because that will go
against progress in every aspect of life be it, religion, culture, politics,
education, lifestyle and freedom to name a few. Brighter and progressive
aspects of democracy remain to be fully appropriated and realized for the
growth and fertility of democracy.
[1]
Will Durant, The story of Philosophy (New York:
Pocket Books, 2006), 10.
[2] Will Durant, The story of Philosophy (New York: Pocket Books, 2006), 17.
[3] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 45.
[4] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 5 - 7.
[5] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 13 - 14.
[6] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 5-6.
[7] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 45.
[8] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 7.
[9] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 46.
[10] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 16.
[11] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 46.
[12] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 40-47.
[13] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 2.
[14] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 46-47.
[15] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 6.
[16] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 10.
[17] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 49.
[18] Sita Ram Goel, India’s Secularism: New Name for National Subversion, reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 27 - 28.
[19] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 1-2.
[20] Ram Swarup, Hindu View of Christianity and Islam, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 113.
[21] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 2.
[22] Sita Ram Goel, India’s Secularism: New Name for National Subversion, reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 29.
[23] Ram Swarup, Hindu View of Christianity and Islam, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 114.
[24] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice
of India, 2019), 1- 3.
[25] Sita Ram Goel, India’s Secularism: New Name for National Subversion, reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 29.
[26] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 1.
[27] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 3-4.
[28] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 25-30.
[29] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 51.
[30] Ram Swarup, Hindu View of Christianity and Islam, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 113.
[31] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 31.
[32] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 51.
[33] Ram Swarup, Hinduism and Monotheistic Religions, 2nd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 59 .
[34] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 6 - 7.
[35] Sita Ram Goel, India’s Secularism: New Name for National Subversion, reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 21.
[36] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 7.
[37] Sita Ram Goel, India’s Secularism: New Name for National Subversion, reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 24-26.
[38] Sita Ram Goel, Defence of Hindu Society, 3rd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2018), 99-100.
[39] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 1.
[40] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 4.
[41] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 17.
[42] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 6.
[43] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 3.
[44] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 11.
[45] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 16.
[46] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 18.
[47] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 14-15.
[48] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 21.
[49] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 18-19.
[50] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 22.
[51] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 4.
[52] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 4-5.
[53] Sita Ram Goel, History of Hindu-Christian Encounters (AD 304to 1996), 5th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 55.
[54] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 20.
[55] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 4.
[56] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 5.
[57] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 24 - 29.
[58] Sita Ram Goel, Pseudo-Secularism: Christian Missions and Hindu Resistance, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 1 - 2.
[59] Sita Ram Goel, Defence of Hindu Society, 3rd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2018), 8.
[60] Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Society under Siege, 8th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2019), 40 - 42.
[61] Sita Ram Goel, Defence of Hindu Society, 3rd reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2018), 85 - 86.
[62] Ram Swarup, Hindu View of Christianity and Islam, 6th reprint (New Delhi: Voice of India, 2020), 112.
Nice Article Sir
ReplyDeleteNice Article Sir
ReplyDelete