Vedanta brain and Islam body is the only hope: Swami Vivekananda

Vedanta brain and Islam body is the only hope: Swami Vivekananda 
Written By: Chennabasaveshwar Updated: Friday, January 12, 2018, 14:56 [IST] 
Subscribe to Oneindia News Today 

India is celebrating the 155th birth anniversary of Swami Vivekananda. Even after a century, his thoughts continue to inspire youngsters all over the world. This is the right time to take a look at Vivekananda's thoughts when religion, caste and nationalism are debated vociferously.  Swami Vivekananda's 'political view'- this proposition is in itself perplexing. Though he did not identify with a particular ideology, his views seem to have ideological manifestations though. Hence, his views pave way for numerous interpretations. Vivekananda, as a disciple of Ramakrishna Paramhansa, was interested in realization of God; nevertheless, he did not confine himself to only spiritual life. He used his profound spiritual knowledge to infuse pride amongst fellow Indians feeling inferiority against the modern outlook western science and ideologies. Swami Vivekananda His first such attempt was the speech on Hinduism he gave at the Parliament of Religions in 1893 in Chicago, USA. As an Indian representative, he did not just spoke on the superiority of Hinduism, but also on its universalism. Also, in the same conference, he maintained that each religion should 'assimilate the spirit of the others and yet preserve his 'individuality' and grow according to his own law of growth' (C.W.S.V., Vol.I, 1992: p.6). Vivekananda's elucidations of Vedantic ideals many times emphasize secular thoughts. By the last quarter of 19th century, Islam and Christianity have had significant inroads in Indian social life. Furthermore, it was essential given the fact that India was not an exclusive mono-cultural land. Hence, he stated, "Wherever it is evil and wherever there are ignorance and want of knowledge, I have found out from experience that all evil comes, as our scriptures say, relying upon differences, and that all good comes from faith inequality, in the underlying sameness and oneness of things. This is the great Vedantic ideal" (C.W.S.V, Vol. III, 1992: p.193-94). His understanding of 'Religion' is not the present day right-wing, conservative communal Hinduism which forms the basis for so-called Hindu nationalism. For him, religion is all encompassing thought. He discovered that 'all of religion is contained in the three phases of the Vedanta philosophy' (CWSV., Vol. V, 1992: p.82). He applied the three phases of growth of philosophy- Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita and Advaita to not only sects and religions emerged in India but also Christianity and Islam, western and Semitic religions, respectively. Thus, these religions were brought in into the fold of Vedantic philosophy. He says, "The first stage, i.e. Dvaita, applied to the ideas of the ethnic groups of Europe, is Christianity; as applied to the Semitic groups Mohohannnedanism. The Advaita as applied in its Yoga-perception form is Buddhism etc. Now by religion is meant the Vedanta, the applications must vary according to the different needs.......other circumstances of different nations." (Ibid. p.82) Swami Vivekananda's pragmatic vision for the country divided over diverse religions comes to the fore when he says, "For our motherland a junction of the two great systems, Hinduism and Islam-Vedanta brain and Islam body is the only hope" (C.W.S.V., Vol. VI 1992, p.415-16), a vision which was relevant in the past and still holds significance at present. His plethora of social and cultural views-with a spiritual base- in India surely makes one sceptical about his place in the frame of the political spectrum. Vivekananda after travelling all around the country felt pity about a socially degenerated state of the country. He criticized the Hindu orthodoxy tooth and nail. We are orthodox Hindus, but we refuse to identify ourselves with 'Don't-touchism'. That is not Hinduism: it is in none of our books; it is an unorthodox superstition which has interfered with national efficiency all along the line. (C.W.S.V.,Vol.V, 1992, p.226). In fact, he had to face two challenges of that time: Firstly, the degenerated social conditions and secondly, the political rule of the British. His contemporaries have had adopted either rationalism or nationalistic ideas. Yet, he did not have any formal connection with nationalist or political movements (Thomas 1969, p. 14). However, foreign scholars find the influence of western ideologies in Vivekananda's thoughts. Swami Vivekananda falls into the category of 'real politic liberalism' (Harilela 1996: 272). Harilela has based his argument on the then political condition of British India. He underestimated the political efficiency of the Indians against the British imperialism. He opines that British Imperialism was the most imposing, encompassing and centralized power that India had witnessed; opposition to it would need to be structured, systemic and unified. Furthermore, he added that India did not understand the power and practical efficacy of a political ideology as a weapon, not having had an experience of it and was not clear about how to create one. He concludes that 'liberalism' was the logical, ideological recourse for Indians fighting against the British rule. However, some of its [liberalism] aspects were alien or unsuited to India, and hence the desperate struggle to Indianize it (Harilela, 1996: 272). But, what he didn't appreciate is the pragmatism of Swami Vivekananda for the successful interpretation of rationalism, nationalism hidden in Vedanta and his forthrightness in combining of Vedanta knowledge with western thought. In addition, Vivekananda has had an appreciation for the humane aspect of Socialism. "I am a socialist not because I think it is a perfect system, but a half a loaf is better than no bread." (C.W.S.V., Vol. VI 1992: p.380-82). Yet, he adhered to the view that "However, I believe that to classify Vivekananda's humanism and thought as socialism' is a grave misinterpretation and it will be my intention to argue against it; if it indeed needs to be categorized, it should be liberal'" (1996:274). On the other hand, other argument shows that Vivekananda's nationalism was based on Vedic spiritualism, nevertheless he is a patriot (Thomas, 1969, p.14-15). But, Vivekananda knew that India was not a 'nation' because he felt that had India been a nation she would not have been invaded by a 'handful of foreigners'. The historians of Hindu renaissance generally agree that Vivekananda was the first to introduce self-consciousness into Hinduism. The modern Hindu Renaissance becomes self-conscious and adolescent (Ibid 1969, p. 17; D. S. Sarma). The lessons of Vedanta and the Bhagavad-Gita as he taught permeated the lives and activities of many a nationalist and thus Indian nationalism took a definite Hindu character to the dismay of some nationalists who wanted to keep religious revival and nationalism separate (Ibid.1969, p. 14-15). We could say that Swami Vivekananda excluded himself from political movements of the time but had considerable influence on national sentiments. It is a formidable task to fix him any one ideology since he neither denounce socialism outrightly nor adhered to the superiority of Hinduism over other religions. But, he was a patriot intended to ignite the Indian consciousness was his priority. Hence, his plethoras of views allow political parties appropriate him according to their convenience. References Baldev Raj (2012) Gujarat CM Narendra Modi Insults Swami Vivekananda four times? Available from: http://www.internationalreporter.com 13 September. Bhatt Sanjiv (2012) Open letter to Narendra Modi will he answer, Available from: http://beyondheadlines.in 19, September. Bhattacharya D. P. (2012) All in the name of Vivekananda: Modi machine bulldozes Congress, Available from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews, 5 October. Bhattacharya D. P. (2013) Modi and Swami Vivekananda: A tale of two Narendras, Available from: http://indiatoday.intoday.in, 23 December. Chawla Anil (2004) Story of development of Indian political thought, Available from: www.samarthabharat.com Dasgupta Swapan (2013) The Poor And Afflicted: Vivekanda's Many Gods Available from: http://www.outlookindia.com/ 28 January. Harilela Aron (1996). The religious and political thought of Swami Vivekananda Dissertation (B.A. (Hons)), University of Hull. Available from: https://hydra.hull.ac.uk/resources/hull:4474 Mishra Dina Nath (1993) Vivekananda and Communist propaganda, Available from: http://arisebharat.com 2-8 May. Tanna Kartikeya (2012) Should Modi drag Swami Vivekananda into his politics? Available from: http://www.firstpost.com, 22 September. The Complete works of Swami Vivekananda (1992), Volume 1 to 8, 5th print of subsidized edition, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata. The Economic Times (2012) Gujarat elections 2012: Narendra Modi campaigns in name of Swami Vivekananda Available from: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com Thomas P. M. (1969) Swami Vivekananda and his Reconstruction of Hinduism as a Universal religion, University of McMaster. Available from: http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6672&context=opendissertations

Read more at: https://www.oneindia.com/india/vedanta-brain-and-islam-body-is-the-only-hope-swami-vivekananda-2618710.html

Dabholkar, Pansare murder cases

Dabholkar, Pansare murder cases: Fresh hope for families after CBI announcement of Rs 5 lakh reward for information on accused
India Prachee Kulkarni Mar 04, 2017 00:45:19 IST
    Tweet   
Almost three and half years after Narendra Dabholkar's murder, the CBI has announced a reward of Rs 5 lakh for the two wanted accused and Sanatan sadhaks — Sarang Akolkar and Vinay Pawar. The duo has been absconding ever since they were named in the 2009 Madgaon blast case. Interpol had even issued a Red-Corner notice against them. Meanwhile, SIT has questioned the founder of Sanatan Sanstha — Jayant Athavale.

Dabholkar was shot dead on 20 August, 2013 by two men on motorcycle on Vitthal Ramji Shinde Bridge in Pune. Activists and family members of Dabholkar had demanded a probe into the role of the Right-wing extremist group — Sanatan Sanstha. The case was initially being investigated by Pune police, but they failed to reach any conclusion. They had released the sketches of two suspects based on information from witnesses and CCTV footages. It was Dabholkar's son Hamid who noticed that the sketch of one of the suspects resembled Akolkar. The family moved the high court and filed a writ petition demanding that the investigation takes place under the supervision of the court. The case was then transferred to the CBI. However, there has been no significant development made in the investigation until now.

File photo of Narendra Dabholkar. PTIFile photo of Narendra Dabholkar. PTI
On 16 February, 2015, Govind Pansare and his wife Uma were shot near their home in Kolhapur when they were coming back from their morning walk. Pansare succumbed to his injuries on 20 February, 2015.

Sameer Gaikwad, a member of the Sanatan Sanstha, was arrested in Sangli by SIT in September. Though this brought the sanstha under scanner, there was no progress made in the case after the arrest. Kannada writer MM Kalburgi was shot dead last year in a similar manner. The families requested the court that all three agencies investigating these cases should work in collaboration. The investigators turned their focus on the Sanatan Sanstha, looking into their call record details, locations of sadhaks, their links etc.

In June last year, the CBI searched the houses of Sanatan sadhaks — Virendra Tawade in Panvel and Akolkar in Pune. They retrieved some data from their emails and hard disks. Following these raids, Tawade who is also a member of the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, was arrested in connection to the Dabholkar murder case. This was the first arrest made in the case. Police soon found his links to the Pansare murder case. He became the prime accused in both the cases. A witness from Kolhapur, also a former member of the sanstha, met CBI officials and revealed the links — it was a breakthrough moment in the case.

According to the chargesheet, Tawade — an ENT specialist — was associated with the sanstha since 2000. Tawade first worked as the district coordinator in 2000 and was later appointed as the district head. He went on to work as the state head of the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti from 2005. He had organised demonstrations against programmes organised by Dabholkar and Pansare. According to a witness account mentioned in the chargesheet, Tawade had asked Akolkar to show him firearms. He also asked the witness if he can produce similar firearms. He also ordered Akolkar and Pawar to conduct a recce and allegedly conspired the murder of Dabholkar and Pansare. The witness account further said that Akolkar and Pawar (who according to the NIA have been absconding since 2010) were residing in Kolhapur for almost one and half months. The chargesheet also revealed that Tawade has been communicating with the duo via emails and used code words like chocolate for bullets and books for firearms. He had also contacted Gaikwad on the day of Pansare's murder. The chargesheet also mentioned a list compiled by the suspects that included names of people doing 'anti-religious' work and whom they planned to murder. They have been charged under IPC 120(b) and 302.

Akolkar and Pawar were both residing at the santha's Goa ashram before the Madgaon blasts and have been absconding since their names came up in the investigation. According to the chargesheet, they are the ones who fired the shots at Dabholkar and Pansare. Dabholkar's picture with a cross mark on it was published in the Sanatan Sanstha's publication Sanatan Prabhat. A week after the killing, an article applauding the murder was published.

"We are probing into the whereabouts of the absconding accused. We have also questioned the sanstha chief and probed into the operations of the organisation," said Sanjay Kumar who is leading the special investigation team.

It has been a long wait for Dabholkar and Pansare's family. The CBI announcement has given them fresh hope. "We have been demanding that the CBI collaborate with the NIA and expand their search for Akolkar and Pawar. The authorities have finally published a notice. If they had expedited the investigation after murder, then Pansare and Kalburgi might have been alive today," Dabholkar's son Hamid told Firstpost. "We hope the investigating agencies nab them soon. It is an important development and the CBI should act fast. As long as they are roaming free, they remain a threat to the rational thinkers of the country," he added.

Pansare's daughter-in-law Medha said, "We have been constantly following up the case and things are moving because of the pressure from the court. They have finally declared Akolkar and Pawar as absconding in Dabholkar case. But SIT has still not done this in the Pansare case, though both of them have been named as the prime accused in the chargesheet. We hope that they do it soon now." She also expressed concern about the constantly changing investigating officers. " If a dedicated team is appointed, they will be able to concentrate on the investigation," she added.

Sanatan Sanstha has denied these allegations. Abhay Vartak, their spokesperson, said, "The SIT came to the sanstha ashram in Ramnathi (Goa). They held discussions with Virendra Marathe, a trustee of the sanstha. The sanstha has always cooperated with the investigations and will continue to do so."

The sanstha claims to be a non-profit organisation and their main objective is to present spirituality in scientific language and guide the seekers.

The next hearing of the case is scheduled for 17 March. Investigating agencies are likely to submit the details of the probe to the court. But will this lead to any conclusion? Not till these two absconding accused are arrested, say the family members.


Published Date: Mar 03, 2017 21:32 PM | Updated Date: Mar 04, 2017 00:45 AM

MM Kalburgi

Another rationalist killed: All you need to know about Kannada author MM Kalburgi
India FP Staff Aug 31, 2015 16:11:01 IST
    Tweet   
The shocking murder of 77-year-old Kannada writer, scholar and rationalist Dr MM Kalburgi on Sunday morning sent ripples through the Indian literary community, particularly since this is the third instance in two years where a rationalist author has been killed, ostensibly for his views.

In February this year, CPI leader Govind Pansare — whose biography of Shivaji titled Shivaji Kon Hota riled a handful of groups in Maharashtra — was killed after two unknown assailants fired at him and his wife in front of their house in Kolhapur district.

Dr MM Kalburgi. PTI Dr MM Kalburgi. PTI
Narendra Dabholkar, the founder-president of Maharashtra-based Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti — an organisation set up to eradicate superstition, was killed in August 2013, but his killers remain at large.

Kalburgi’s daughter, Roopadarshi, was quoted by Hindustan Times as saying, “There was a threat to my father from groups that couldn’t digest his views on caste and communalism”.

So who was Kalburgi?

The former vice-chancellor of Hampi University, Kalburgi is credited with having authored over 100 books and 400 articles.

He has also been the recipient of numerous national and state-level awards for his works, as DNA reports, including the Karnataka Sahitya Academy Award, Kendra Sahitya Akademi Award, Janapada Award, and Basava Puraskara.

A regular target of his writing was the Lingayat community, which is the single largest group in Karnataka and the BJP’s largest support base in the state, of which Dr Kalburgi himself was a member. He received threats to his life in 1989 after Marga One, a compendium of his research articles on Kannada folklore, religion and culture was published.

According to The Indian Express, “(h)is exploration of the life and relationships of patron saint of the Lingayat community Basavanna had attracted the ire of radicals in the community”.

The report goes on to quote senior journalist Subash Hugar who highlighted that “(in) one of the articles, he wrote that Channabasava, who is also a Lingayat seer, was born from a relationship between Basavanna’s sister and a cobbler. In another, he raised questions over Basavanna’s relationship with his wife”.

As a result of the death threats, he reportedly conducted his lectures at Karnatak University under police protection. And even as a group of 43 Kannada writers and academics formed a committee in support of the book, as pointed out by the People's Union for Civil Liberties, he scrapped — albeit defiantly; dubbing it ‘intellectual suicide’ — controversial sections from his book.

In June last year, Dr Kalburgi courted controversy and invited the wrath of the right-wing once again. Fellow Kannada author UR Ananthamurthy had alluded to urinating on stone idols as a child. A few days later, Dr Kalburgi, himself a staunch opponent of idol worship, had said at a function that “(t)here was nothing wrong in urinating on idols”. The police filed cases under sections 295A and 298 of the Indian Penal Code against both writers.

The Indian Express quotes a senior police official in Dharwad as saying, “Stones were pelted at Dr Kalburgi’s residence and he was provided police protection. The protection was withdrawn a few months later at the request of Dr Kalburgi, who said he was unable to interact freely with his research students.”

Fifteen days after the police withdrew its protection, Dr Kalburgi was shot at point blank range at his Dharwad residence.

IBNLive reports that he was in the process of editing a volume of ‘over 2,500 selected vachana poems to be published in 20 different languages’.

Following his murder, the Bajrang Dal’s Bantwal co-convenor Bhuvith Shetty took to Twitter to weigh in with his comments:

How Rajiv Gandhi obeying Deoraha Baba opened the floodgate of trouble

Ram Mandir in Ayodhya: How Rajiv Gandhi obeying Deoraha Baba opened the floodgate of trouble
Politics Ajay Singh Dec 25, 2015 05:21:57 IST
    Tweet   
A day after the controversial foundation-laying of Ram temple at Ayodhya on 10 November 1989, I walked into the official residence of the then director general of police of Uttar Pradesh RP Joshi. Winter had set in and the attendant took me to the lush lawns of the house where chairs and tables were laid out on a bright sunny day.

Former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. AFP
Former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. AFP
“Just want to know if the foundation-laying was done at a disputed site?” I asked without demur. Joshi, a seasoned officer and a man of few words, looked straight at me and replied “yes”. “Did you know it beforehand that the site was disputed?” I persisted. He answered “yes” again and added “We all know it but that was the decision of the government.”

After offering me a cup of tea, Joshi closed the conversation by revealing little except that he had no option but to follow the diktats of his top bosses in Delhi and Lucknow. Rajiv Gandhi was the prime minister of the country then with Buta Singh as his home minister. ND Tiwari was the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh. Subsequently, Rajiv launched his campaign from Ayodhya promising ‘Ram Rajya’ across the country.

For a long time it remained a mystery how the stone-laying at Ayodhya was accomplished. It was in defiance of the court’s order which restrained the VHP and other organisations from doing anything on the disputed site. Was Rajiv personally involved in the matter with ND Tiwari’s concurrence? Many versions of the answer had been doing the rounds and none seemed complete.

But the cookie crumbled in 1995 when Tiwari, in a fit of rebellious rage, recounted his version. At that point, he had raised the banner of revolt against PV Narasimha Rao and was desperately trying to regain his political eminence. In the course of the conversation with me, he recalled the situation that had led to the foundation being laid in 1989 and the subsequent demolition of mosque on 6 December 1992.

The story is worth recounting now as the Congress has once again raked up the Ram Mandir issue and is busy venting righteous indignation over its construction. Buta Singh, the then home minister, was the interface between the Centre and the state government. At Lucknow secretariat, he used to run the administration along with certain bureaucrats with close association with the VHP. The Chief Minister’s Office was practically rendered effete on the Ayodhya issue and worked only as a post office. But what appeared critical was the manner in which Rajiv Gandhi was persuaded to allow the foundation-laying stealthily.

Just a week before the foundation was laid, he was taken to a spiritual saint, Deoraha Baba, near Gorakhpur by Buta Singh. Apparently the prime minister’s rendezvous with Deoraha Baba was arranged by an IPS officer who was a great disciple of the saint. The Baba was a highly revered figure across the Hindi heartland and was known for blessing his devotees by touching their heads with his feet. He was usually perched on a thatched platform from where his antics could easily be performed.

Rajiv Gandhi went to seek the Baba’s blessing and also his guidance on the contentious Ayodhya issue. Deoraha Baba looked at him and commented, “Bachcha ho jane do (child let it happen)”. The saint’s words were taken to mean that let the foundation-laying happen on 9 November 1989. Tiwari, who accompanied Gandhi and Buta Singh to the Baba’s ashram, was instructed facilitate it. “Bachcha ne ho jane diya (the child has allowed it to happen),” he pointed out while narrating the sequence of events. He was trying to absolve himself from being complicit in illegal action.

Apparently, the story of Ayodhya is replete with stealth illegality and abdication of responsibility by successive Congress regimes not only at the Centre but also in the state. India’s first prime minister Jawahar Lal Nehru had gauged its sinister potential and was in favour of removing the idols stealthily placed in the mosque on 22 December 1949. However, the idea was resisted by the then chief minister GB Pant. In sharp contrast to Nehru who steadfastly opposed use of religion in politics, Rajiv unlocked the temple to play the religious card to consolidate his support base following the revolt by VP Singh. Too clever by half, the Congress found itself losing support bases all across the country.

Those who are aware of the developments in Ayodhya would vouch that the carving of stones for the temple has been continuing for the past 25 years. That a huge quantity of marbles has been ferried from Rajasthan and sculpted at a workshop, a stone’s throw away from the disputed site, is hardly a secret.

The indignation shown by the Congress in Parliament over Ayodhya appears to be a smokescreen for its own complicity and criminality in this political enterprise.


Published Date: Dec 25, 2015 05:00 AM | Updated Date: Dec 25, 2015 05:21 AM

How Rajiv Gandhi blundered on Ayodhya

How Rajiv Gandhi blundered on Ayodhya: Baba said ‘bachcha’ let it happen, and ‘bachcha’ did
Politics Ajay Singh Jan 29, 2016 16:14:37 IST
    Tweet   
President Pranab Mukherjee has written in The Turbulent Years: 1980-96, the second volume of his memoir, released on Thursday, that the opening of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple in Ayodhya was an “error of judgment” by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. Mukherjee has also termed the act as one of “absolute perfidy”.

The Prime Minister – having won an overwhelming mandate in 1984 primarily owing to consolidation on communal lines in aftermath of his mother Indira Gandhi’s assassination – and his prime strategist Arun Nehru found Hindu consolidation as a readymade recipe for electoral victory. And they made a series of mistakes:

1. Rajiv Gandhi and Arun Nehru persuaded UP chief minister Bir Bahadur Singh to open the lock in 1986 and allowed religious rites to take place inside the disputed structure.

2. This triggered a mass movement by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) which launched an agitation to break free the idols of Lord Rama and Sita from “captivity”.

3. “Sacred stones” were carried from all over the country to lay foundation of the temple, and in light of this, massive riots occurred all across north India, particularly Bihar and Uttar Pradesh (UP).

4. This coincided with VP Singh raising the banner of revolt against Gandhi’s alleged involvement in the Bofors scandal. What appears to have given fillip to the VHP’s “garv se kaho hum Hindu hain” (say it with pride, we are Hindu) was the impression that Gandhi bent over backwards to appease Muslims. The Shah Bano case and the government’s capitulation before Muslim fundamentalists provided a context. A beleaguered Gandhi now tried to win over Hindus by playing the temple card at Ayodhya.

And then the story went completely haywire. As a firsthand witness to the events that unfolded in Ayodhya, I have recounted instances that should serve to provide perspective on the issue.

A day after the controversial foundation laying of the Ram temple at Ayodhya on November 10 1989, I walked into the official residence of the then director general of police of UP, RP Joshi. A seasoned police officer, Joshi was a man of few words. As the winter set in, the attendant took me to the lush lawns of the house where chairs and tables were laid out. It was a sunny day.

“I want to know if the foundation laying was done at a disputed site,” I asked without delay. Joshi looked at me and said, “Yes”. “Did you know it beforehand that the site was disputed?” I persisted. Joshi said, “Yes, we all know it but that was the decision of the government.”

Reuters
Reuters
After offering me a cup of tea, Joshi closed the conversation. He had revealed little except that there was no option but to follow the diktats of his bosses in Delhi and Lucknow. At that point of time, Gandhi was the prime minister with Buta Singh as his home minister and ND Tiwari as UP chief minister. Subsequently Gandhi launched his campaign from Ayodhya promising “Ram Rajya” across the country.

For a long time, it remained a mystery how the foundation laying at Ayodhya was accomplished by defying the court’s order, which retrained the VHP and other organisations to do anything on disputed site. Was Gandhi personally involved in that with the concurrence of Tiwari? There had been many versions about the story doing rounds but none of them seemed complete.

But the cookie crumbled in 1995 when, in a fit of his customary rebelliousness, Tiwari recounted the story that proved to be undoing for the Congress. In fact, Tiwari had raised a banner of revolt against PV Narasimha Rao and was desperately trying to regain his political eminence. And in the course of the conversation, he recalled the situations that led to foundation-laying during his tenure as chief minister in 1989 and demolition of mosque on December 6, 1992.

In the present context when the issue is once again taken up by the Congress to express its indignation over the construction of the temple, the story is worth recounting. Buta Singh was the interface between the centre and the state government. At Lucknow secretariat, he used to run the administration along with certain bureaucrats with close ties to the VHP. The chief minister’s office was practically rendered effete on the Ayodhya issue and worked only as the post office.

But what appeared critical is the manner in which Gandhi was persuaded to allow the foundation-laying stealthily, in contravention of the court’s order. Just a week before the foundation-laying, he was taken to a saint, Devrahwa Baba, near Gorakhpur by Buta Singh. Apparently the sojourn of the PM with the Baba was arranged by an IPS officer who was a disciple of the saint. The Baba was revered among his considerable following across the Hindi heartland and was known for blessing his devotees by touching their heads with his feet. He was usually perched on a thatched platform from where such antics could easily be performed.

Gandhi went to seek the Baba’s blessing and guidance on the contentious Ayodhya issue. The saint looked at Gandhi and said, “Bachcha, ho jane do” (Child, let it happen). The saint’s words were taken to mean that the foundation-laying ceremony should take place on November 9. Tiwari, who accompanied Gandhi and Buta Singh to the Baba’s ashram, was instructed to facilitate the foundation-laying. “Bachcha ne ho jane diya” (The child has allowed it to happen), he pointed out while narrating the sequence in an attempt to absolve himself from being complicit in illegal action.

The story of Ayodhya is replete with stealth illegality and abdication of responsibility by successive Congress regimes, not only at the centre, but at the state level as well. India’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru was able to gauge its sinister potential and was in favour of removing the idols stealthily placed in the mosque on December 22, 1949. However he was thwarted by the then chief minister GB Pant. In sharp contrast to Nehru, who steadfastly opposed use of religion in politics, Gandhi unlocked the temple to play the religious card to consolidate his support base following the revolt by VP Singh. Too clever by half, the Congress found itself decimated by losing support bases all across the country.

Those who are aware of developments in Ayodhya will vouch that the carving of stones for the temple is an activity which has been continuing in Ayodhya for the past 25 years. Sufficient quantity of marble has been ferried from Rajasthan and sculpted at a workshop, nearly a stone’s throw away from the disputed site; it is hardly a secretive affair. Yet the indignation shown by the opposition in Parliament over Ayodhya appears to be a perfect smokescreen to hide the history of their complicity and criminality in this political enterprise.


Published Date: Jan 29, 2016 16:10 PM | Updated Date: Jan 29, 2016 16:14 PM

Rajiv Gandhi, Congress are also partially responsible for the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute

Babri Masjid demolition: Rajiv Gandhi, Congress are also partially responsible for the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute
Politics Raghav Pandey Dec 08, 2017 08:59:47 IST
    Tweet   
On 23 April 1985, the Supreme Court of India pronounced one of its most landmark decisions in its history, in the case of Mohd Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano Begum. Through the operation of the verdict, the Supreme Court made it mandatory for a Muslim man to give maintenance to his divorced wife, under the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), even when it was not allowed by the Muslim Personal Law.

The verdict was certainly very progressive in terms of women's rights jurisprudence, which had just started taking shape in the country. However, the then Rajiv Gandhi-led government gave into the pressure of Muslim orthodoxy and enacted Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. This law was misleading by its title as it did nothing in terms of ‘protection of rights on divorce’ for a Muslim woman. On the contrary, it reversed the effect of the Shah Bano verdict.

The sequence of events above is the start of communal politics in contemporary India. When Rajiv Gandhi had opted to appease the Muslim orthodoxy, the population at the other end of the spectrum was naturally not very happy about it. Instead of correcting his wrongs in a socially coherent way, Rajiv Gandhi chose to do it the political way.

Representational image. AFPRepresentational image. AFP
Rajiv Gandhi, ill-advised or otherwise, in 1986, persuaded the then Uttar Pradesh chief minister Bir Bahadur Singh to open the locks of Babri Masjid and allowed religious rites inside the disputed structure.

It is pertinent to point out that he did this in furtherance of the kind of communal politics he had initiated, but found himself trapped inside. He also lacked the political acumen to resolve it.

Subsequently, the series of events which unfolded is for everyone to see. The unfair part of this whole incident is that there is hardly a narrative which fixes the responsibility on the Rajiv Gandhi government of that time.

We can, and we should, trust the conscience of the people of the country, that the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute could have been resolved by dialogue between Hindus and Muslims, if not for Rajiv Gandhi.

If not dialogue, then certainly through courts. Parties on both the sides have agreed that they will accept the verdict of the Supreme Court in the present case. Almost certainly, this would have happened back then too, had this option been there.

It is important to note that the initial demands of even the Vishwa Hindu Parishad included building a temple near the disputed structure and not over it. In fact, the first foundation stone was laid for a future temple adjacent to the claimed Ram Janmabhoomi site.

A fact less known is that at the time of laying of the foundation stone, in 1989, two senior Congress leaders — Buta Singh, the then Home Minister of India and ND Tiwari, the then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh — were also present at the site, to ‘grace’ the occasion. The Congress leadership explicitly endorsed the cause of a future Ram temple.

Congress was in power in both the Centre and in UP, such endorsement was more important and catastrophic, at the same time, as is seen by the series of events that unfolded. It was for acts of these kind by the Congress that an image of a future Ram temple started to seem realistic in the collective imagination of a huge section of Hindu population. The voice of VHP and even the BJP would not have mattered much because of the sheer fact that they were not in power and had almost no possibility of attaining it in the near future. It was only Congress’ patronage of the cause which proved to be decisive.

It is indeed ironic that today, there is no accountability for the Congress and the whole responsibility is fixed on the BJP-RSS ecosystem. The BJP, and Jana Sangh as its predecessor, had always advocated the cause of cultural nationalism and resurgence of India’s cultural history, in that context. It was only natural for the BJP to support the movement.

However, keeping in mind the kind of politics which the Congress supposedly professed and practised since its heydays of Nehru, it was unimaginable that it espoused and endorsed the politics of post-Shah Bano era and pre-Babri Masjid demolition period.

Communalism as a phenomenon is something which, when it goes out of control, can’t be restrained by anyone. The Janmabhoomi movement was already brewing and it will be unfair to say that it started by the ill-fated decisions of Rajiv Gandhi. However, his decisions did give the impetus to the movement, and it gathered the requisite steam to become a huge one, where it transgressed the manageable limits.

As Atal Bihari Vajpayee remarked in the aftermath of the demolition of Babri Masjid, whatever happened was unfortunate and unintended. It is safe to say that whatever happened was not envisioned by even the leadership of the BJP at that time. Probably no politician would have imagined it, but the responsibility for it is surely shared.

Raghav Pandey is a Research Fellow with the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT Bombay, Mumbai. He can be reached at raghav10089@gmail.com, Twitter: @raghavwrong


Published Date: Dec 08, 2017 08:59 AM | Updated Date: Dec 08, 2017 08:59 AM

పాక్ సెనేట్‌కు హిందూ మహిళ ఎన్నిక

పాక్ సెనేట్‌కు హిందూ మహిళ ఎన్నిక
04-03-2018 14:43:37

కరాచీ: ముస్లిం మెజారిటీ దేశమైన పాకిస్థాన్‍లో సింధ్ ప్రావిన్స్‌కు చెందిన హిందూ మహిళ చరిత్ర సృష్టించింది. పాకిస్థాన్‌ సెనేట్‌కు హిందూ దళిత మహిళ కృష్ణకుమారి కోల్హి ఎన్నికైనట్టు పాకిస్థాన్ పీపుల్స్ పార్టీ తెలిపింది. 39 ఏళ్ల కోల్హి పీపీపీ సభ్యురాలిగా ఉంది. ఆమెకు సింధ్‌లోని మైనారిటీ సీటుకు పీపీపీ సెనేట్ టిక్కెట్ ఇచ్చింది. ఇది పాకిస్థాన్‌లో మహిళలు, మైనారిటీ హక్కులకు లభించిన అరుదైన గౌరవంగా పీపీపీ పేర్కొంది. గతంలో రత్న భగవాన్‌దాస్ చావ్లాను తొలి హిందూ మహిళా సెనేటర్‌గా పీపీపీ ఎన్నుకుంది. సింధ్ ప్రావిన్స్‌లోని ధర్ జిల్లా నాగర్‌పర్కర్ శివారు గ్రామానికి చెందిన కోల్హి పేద వ్యవసాయ కుటుంబంలో 1979లో జన్మించారు. 9వ తరగతిలో ఉండగా 16 ఏళ్ల ప్రాయంలోనే లాల్‌చంద్ అనే వ్యక్తిని పెళ్లాడింది. ఆ తర్వాత కూడా విద్యాభ్యాసం కొనసాగించిన కోల్హి 2013లో సింధు యూనివర్శిటీలో సోషియాలజీలో మాస్టర్స్ చేసింది. సామాజిక కార్యకర్తగా పీపీపీలో చేరి ఇప్పుడు సెనేటర్‌ వరకూ ఎదిగింది.

Ending takfirism key to getting rid of radicalism

Indian Muslims must heed Jordan's King Abdullah's message: Ending takfirism key to getting rid of radicalism
Firstpost   • Mar 02, 2018 21:10 IST
 
By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi



"Muslim youth should have Quran (tradition) in one hand and computer (modernity) in the other," said Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He was addressing the conference on ‘Islamic Heritage: Promoting understanding and moderation’ at Vigyan Bhawan on Thursday. This appeared as one of the well-spirited and concrete suggestions of the prime minister that a large section of Indian Muslims is likely to welcome with an open mind. For India’s mainstream Muslims — imbued with an age-old inclusive tradition — modernity and tradition go hand in hand.

The emblem that India has a large role in establishing an inclusivist Islamic identity was evident throughout Modi's talk that stressed on Islamic moderation in the context of Indian composite nationalism. He highlighted India as a country of the divine message (khuda ka paigam) where all religions have been nurtured while calling the Indian democracy a ‘celebration of age-old pluralism’.

"Whether it's Buddha or Mahatma Gandhi, the message of peace was spread from here, India has created an identity while considering the whole world as one family," he said.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Jordanian King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein. PTI
Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Jordanian King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein. PTI

Thus, in this conference, Modi surprisingly seemed not only as the prime minister speaking on behalf of every Indian citizen, but also as a well-wisher of the world’s second-largest Muslim population. No wonder, it was organised by Delhi’s India Islamic Cultural Centre, known for promoting religious pluralism, multiculturalism and social cohesion exhibited by Indian Muslim leaders since the independence of the country.

Notably, Modi's clichés on Indian heritage of syncretic culture (Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb), philosophy of the confluence of different religions and the Vedic view of world as one (Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam) reverberated in the following talk of King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein. He reciprocated Modi: "It was wisely said that 'the world is one family'. We have a shared responsibility to each other and the world”.

Just as Modi averred that counter-terror was not a fight against any particular religion but rather against a mindset that misguides the younger generation, Abdullah also termed the global war against terror as a 'fight by moderates of all communities against extremists'.

"We need to take back the airwaves and internet from voices of hatred," he said.

Historically, India is the only country which laid the foundation of its composite culture (or Ganga-Jamuni sanskriti) with a fusion of the Vedic tradition, the Eightfold Path (Ashtanga) of Gautam Buddha, ahimsa (non-violence) of Mahavir Jain, the Sikh and Sufi focus on the Unity of the Divine (wahdat) as well as the monotheistic belief of the Semitic religions (tawheed).

Remarkably, as historically recorded, Islam arrived in India in the lifetime of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). The first mosque was built in South India in the Keralite architectural style. All this gave great impetus to Islam’s convergence with the country’s age-old inclusive ethos, syncretism and moderation. This motif also resonated in the words of Jordan’s King Abdullah, when he said: "Inclusion is the path to the coexistence we need. We need to build strong successful countries.... It is for everyone in how we deal with each other and the hand of friendship we extend to one another."

Clearly, these significant remarks of both Modi and Abdullah on Islamic heritage of moderation will strengthen the inclusivist narrative of Islam which is upheld in India and Jordan, but is drowned in the aggressive posturing of hardliners in different parts of the world. Since the leaders of all Muslim denominations assembled in this gathering, it will help in advancing a strong narrative to mitigate the internal security threats posed by foreign or home-grown extremists.


Tellingly, this event reminds us of the prime minister’s participation and keynote address in the World Sufi Forum held in 2016 at the same Vigyan Bhavan, where he issued similar remarkable statements like "among the 99 names of Allah, none stands for violence". Quoting India’s greatest Sufis, the prime minister had stated that “Islam rejected violence and the idea of division on the basis of religion” and that Sufism in India is the voice of co-existence, altruistic service to mankind and unconditional love for the nation.

But what is interesting to note that many ulema and Muslim leaders, who openly or tacitly opposed the World Sufi Forum as NDA’s bid to woo Muslims, were surprisingly seen together in this event. Be it Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind or Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadis, Sufi-Sunni leaders or Shia clerics, leaders of all Islamic denominations in India were under one roof. Thus, it marked a historic moment in the Indian Muslim community’s collective resilience against radicalism. They now seem united in their bid to build a better image of Islam and protect the new Muslim generation from the misguiding ideologies. In fact, most anti-terror fatwas, in the recent memory, emanated from India’s Islamic jurists (muftis). This proves that the gigantic task of reclaiming Islam from the radical Islamists can be best accomplished only in India.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi interacts with Islamic scholar Akhtarul Wasey, Maulana Mahmood Madani and Shahi Imam Mufti Mukarram (right) of Fatehpuri Mosque at the conference on "Islamic Heritage: Promoting Understanding and Moderation". PTI

Jordan’s importance for Indian Muslims lies in an inclusivist non-takfiri (not accusing other Muslims of apostasy) interpretation of Islam which King Abdullah championed through the Amman Message. It assumed global significance against the backdrop of increasing Islamist radicalisation.

Syed Ata Hasnain opines that Abdullah has progressively transformed his rule of Jordan to a more effective constitutional monarchy, through the march of the Arab Spring eight years ago.

He writes: “With the other major threat looming over the Middle East, that of radical Islam and in the midst of the growing sectarian discord between Iran and Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah held one of the best-attended conclaves to address the issue of the hijacking of the moderate Islamic street by the Islamic radical elements. The culmination of this conclave of Islamic clergy and scholars across the sectarian divide in 2004 was the Amman Message of which enough has not been written nor spoken. Among many of the sub-messages gloved in the folds of the Amman delcaration was the acceptance by the Islamic clergy of the need to do away with the self-assumed practice of ‘takfirism’."

However, the Muslims’ quandary in India is that while several counter-radicalisation conferences have successfully garnered attention, they still fail to fight the takfirist thoughts in an ideological battle. Winning this war on takfirism is what they can mainly learn from King Abdullah’s robust Islamic leadership. For the first time in the Muslim history, the Amman Message developed a global Islamic consensus on 'inadmissibility of declaring others apostate or infidel (takfir)'. It validated the diverse schools of Islamic theology, ensuring the inviolability of their followers' blood, dignity, and property and thus putting at rest the sectarian discords. Indian Muslims must adhere to the cogent points of the Amman declaration, rather than issuing merely attention-grabbing anti-terror fatwas of little use.

Significantly, several Indian ulema and scholars were participants and signatories of this declaration including Maulana Mahmood Madani, Kerala’s Shaikh Abu Bakr Musliyar, and Professor Akhtarul Wasey, who were among the chief guests of the conference at Vigyan Bhawan. They stated that if the Amman declaration is adopted in India, it would put an end to the pernicious spate of takfirism.

In his welcoming address, Professor Wasey said: “As an eyewitness of the Amman declaration against takfirism, I have the full conviction to say that if it was acted upon in its entirety in the Muslim societies, they would not have been put to different tabulations they have faced so far."

It was only under the Jordan King’s leadership that the Pope of Catholic Christians, even after a controversial statement on Islam, agreed to hold a fresh dialogue and exchanged mutual respect with Muslims, bridging the gaps between Islam and other religions on the common grounds (kalima al-sawa), Professor Wasey told this writer.

A salient aspect of this event was the launch of Urdu translation of the book written by Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, A Thinking Person's Guide to Islam, at the hands of Modi. Easy to read and understand, the book is an authoritative work on the essence of Islamic moderation. Prince Ghazi, who is world-renowned for his intellectual peace activism has reportedly removed many misconceptions particularly among non-Muslims in the West, through this book. It holds great significance also because the book’s foreword has been written by the King of Jordan.

Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi is a scholar of classical Arabic and Islamic studies, cultural analyst and researcher in Media and Communication Studies. He tweets at @GRDehlvi and can be reached at grdehlavi@gmail.com