Muslim Discourse: March 2023

Thursday 30 March 2023

BHARAT BACHAO PERSPECTIVE PAPER

BHARAT BACHAO PERSPECTIVE PAPER

Let's Defeat Fascism.. Let's Achieve Secularism!!

PERSPECTIVE PAPER

(DRAFT FOR APPROVAL)

1. INTRODUCTION

Swadeshi administration was possible after sacrifices made in the 125 years long movement that suffocated the British Imperialists through four pronged protests by Indian people amid slogans of Vande Mataram and Inquilah Zindabad. Pressurised by these struggles aimed against domination and exploitation, many consultancies and negotiations were done on one hand whereas, policies of 'divide and rule to split the struggle on Hindu- Muslim communal lines were continued on the other hand. However, none of this succeeded and the British Imperialists had to bow down to the strong unity of the Indian People. Conspiracy efforts made by many colonialists, lackey businessmen and landed classes did not succeed. Imprisonments, executions gruesome murders as well as deprivation of basic necessities only added fuel to the fire among people of all faiths and last efforts for survival of imperialist exploitation did not last long. Several hundred years old co-existence and religious harmony of the people strengthened the united struggle, thwarting all divisive efforts to sow communal hatred among Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Buddhists etc, to prolong the rule of colonial exploitation. Indian Independence Movement embodying harmony among people of all faiths became a beacon of unity in the whole world. The people wanted an independent India having democratic, economic, cultural, social, and religious rights. From the rich to the poor and deprived masses, the Adivasis, Dalits and Bahujan's, the literate and the illiterate, a strong freedom struggle was built and India was formed.

Many martyrs dreamed of an India with justice, equality, fraternity, freedom and secularism, which would make the Indian people proud. An India, that was to be formed with overthrow of British Imperialism and establishment of a state with equal value of citizens, social equality and economic independence. Laws were supposed to be equal for all and not based on caste, class, religion, race, gender, language, etc.,

2. 75 years onwards independence aspirations unrealised: SHAMEFUL.

Since 1947, the ruling parties have not upheld self-reliant policies and instead prioritized the interests of imperialist countries like America, Britain, France, and Russia. Socialism and secularism enshrined in the constitution, remained lip-service and exploitative policies have been implemented in favour of the capitalists and landlords. Creation of Public Sector Enterprises and Nationalisation of banks have ultimately benefited the rich by monopolising the industries under the pretext of Mixed economy, economy, welfare state, and Garibi-Hatavo. Due to this, economic disparities have increased and majority of the people have been pushed out from the walled development model Parties claiming to implement secular policies have been condoning religious hatred to divide and rule

3. After 1991, country plunged into further crisis, sharpened by neoliberal policies to grant unhindered access to monopolistic multinational corporations to exploit the natural resources and vast labour force of the country in the name of development and employment generation

4. Furthermore, with BJP coming to power in 2014, public sector enterprises like industries, banks, LIC, railways, Air India, BSNL pharma companies. Defence Industries etc. are being sold off in bankruptcy It is neglecting of basic needs of the people like education, healthcare, employment etc, and people's wealth and resources are beings plundered. In the agriculture sector too, it is granting access to Multinational Corporation to take over by encouraging thousands of crores of rupees of foreign investments in budding sectors on one hand, and neglecting small scale industries by not providing them loans and other assistance on the other hand, it is crushing the small scale business of the country. Instead, Adanis and Ambanis, backed by foreign investments, are favoured and national investment is neglected, Make in India, Digital India, De monetization are giving unhindered access to foreign investments, People are drained of their earnings through policies like GST. Gov't overnight, ill conceived, egotistic lockdown decisions that left millions of people jobless and paralysed.

5. Boasting about Patriotism and Constitution, it tries to remove socialism and secularism from wordings of the preamble as well. In the name of economic growth and 'Make in India', abrogated several labour laws and formulated four labour codes that helped the ease of doing business of foreign investments and their lackeys and enacted three anti agricultural laws

6. While honouring Ambedkar in appearance, it is treating the Dalits, Adivasis, and the backward people with intolerance and taking away their constitutional rights Apart from trying to remain in the ruling dispensation by dividing the people on religious lines, it is also making preparations for formations of Brahmanical Hindutva state by targeting other religions. Brahmanical forces have occupied almost all government departments and judiciary is also being rapidly infiltrated. The contractualization of armed forces will take place in the name of Agnipath Scheme; army is also being turned into private army of the Brahmanical forces and the corporates.

7. The people of the country do not have freedom and equality but are being subjected to an undeclared emergency. Apart from the above stated role of BJP government at centre and states, the situation of non-BJP and Congress government is also not very much different. There is opposition from the people because of their undemocratic governance. These governments and parties must democratise and start paying attention to the demands of the people, if they ever want to defeat the RSS-BJP combine.

8. The aim of corruption free governance should be to introduce proper welfare schemes for the people. 90 per cent expenditure for education and healthcare and infrastructure should be undertaken by the government. Security of livelihood should be ensued by government employment. There should be determination to develop the most backward areas of the country, according to the needs of the people and not the corporates. The aspirations of struggle born new states like Telangana, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand and other similar States and areas should be implemented with sincerity. Interests of majority of the people are being subjugated under the interests of minority i.e, Brahmanical ruling class people, who were stooges of British Rulers and traitors of the independence movement

9. These traitors are distorting the idea of social justice and using it in their interest to water down the aspirations of the people of the country. They are distorting the religious beliefs and raising incoherent slogans of Ram Rajya and Hindu Rajya. The Brahmanical ideology of religious hatred is idealising the Italy's fascist Mussolini and German Nazi Hitler and putting forward deceitful theories with the aim to maintain political and economic dominance of the people. They are unleashing fascist attacks on the people and curbing basic democratic and civil rights of the people. Every people's protest be it Kisan Andolan, workers Protests against Labour Codes, Students Protest against privatisation, Adivasis protest for implementation of PESA act, religious minonty protest against communal attacks, the Brahmanical forces are using these deceitful theories to discredit and attack the people's right to protest

10. We are observing, that on the basis of petty differences and contradictions between the people to sow seeds of hatred in order to divide and rule. Different other political parties are using religion, caste and region in a different way, not for the benefit of the majority of the people but for the selfish interest of the few. The identity of India's interfaith brotherhood is being destroyed.

11. We have seen the situation of people in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel Pakistan, etc., that were states on the basis of religion. We have seen how many terrible depravities religious fanaticism has wrought in human society. In the world of ours. religion is used by the ruling groups to shield their exploitation by dividing exploited people, while they loot and plunder. We are seeing how terrible genocide is happening in countries ruled by religion. Similarly, India is also going to be turned into Syria, Iraq, Israel, Afghanistan, Myanmar etc. with religious fanaticism as the norm of the day. When religious fanaticism acquires state power, it becomes disastrous. Any religious fanaticism, therefore, is an axe to democracy and detrimental to peaceful coexistence of people from different faiths.

12. Religious fanaticism can be curbed and the people can continue to be governed with common minunum democratic values only by organising a broad united mass movement against all forms of religious fundamentalism particularly Hindutva Fanaticism in Indian Context. To build a broad mass movement against the BJP RSS CORPORATE combine, we must identify the contradictions in its particularity and see that the BJP itself as a fascist party has both, universal and unique elements. Its particular aspect is the resemblance to the dominant Brahmanical political-social order and Universal aspect is dividing the working classes and intensifying the exploitation of the masses in more prudent form

13. At last celebrating Independence Day' and 'Republic Day without striving to striving for freedom and democratic ethos is not independence. Celebrating the birthdays of our great freedom Fighters like Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqullah Khan etc. is not enough unless we aspire to fulfil the dream for which they laid down their lives. It is important to understand that when situation has been worsened by the power enjoyed rulers, as a citizen of this country, it is our duty to make it correct the wrongs. "Silence is the acceptance for the continuation of oppression by other means" and therefore, when we are faced with the same historic responsibilities as that of German people at the rise of Hitler, let us not repeat the historical mistake and protect the aspirations of our freedom fighters and our people.

Protect the aspirations of independence struggle!

Preserve secularism and religious harmony!

On Hindutva and the “Five Ms” that Pose A Threat To It

RSS should look at the other “Five Ms” that threaten Hindutva.

BySiddharthya Roy02 Dec, 2014 bookmark_add

On Hindutva and the “Five Ms” that Pose A Threat To It

copy

Within the first few months of him taking office, Prime Minister Narendra Modi was ridiculed for his alliterative acronym affliction. The five “Ts” that would salvage India’s economy, the five “Fs” that can push growth, the three “Ds” that are India’s biggest strengths and so on. Thankfully, Modi ji seems to have paid heed to the criticism and we don’t hear him coming up with more alliterations now.

But it seems the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has now jumped on the annoying alliteration bandwagon. As reported, at the recently-concluded World Hindu Congress (WHC) in New Delhi’s uber swanky Ashoka Hotel, the Sangh released a “Thought Paper” that identified five Ms as the biggest threat to Hindutva in India.

The “malicious-5”, or M5, are — Marxism, Macaulayism, Missionaries, Materialism and Muslim extremism.

Before we wince or applaud (as our political affiliation may be) we need to remind ourselves that this isn’t the first time the RSS has blamed the thirteenth alphabet for being the devil’s cue. The Sangh has merely added two more words — Missionaries and Materialism – to its long-time troika of the terrible – Marx, Macaulay and Madrasa.

Now, knowing history in general and that of Hinduism in particular hasn’t really been a strong point of the RSS; but if they took time off from banning books on Hindu theology and instead read a few, they’d see that the threat to their politics comes from an entirely different set of Ms – and they come from within Hinduism.

The other five

Somewhere between 1690 and 1780, Brahmin scholar Bhaskararaya travelled the length and breadth of the Hindu realm and worked on collecting material and writing on subjects spanning grammar, theology, literature and so on.

Funded largely by the Hindu king Serfoji I — whose Maratha-Thanjavur kingdom encompassed much of present day Maharashtra and quite a bit of Tamil Nadu — Bhaskararaya put together a huge body of work detailing the philosophies and practices of Hinduism.

Much of what we know about the Hindu concept of the Mother Goddess or Shakti is based on the voluminous and encyclopaedic work of this one man.

With his works on Sri Vidya (knowledge of the Mother Goddess) and Sakta (worshippers of feminine divinity) theology, tantra and vamachara (left-handed path and other antinomian practices of religion), the kaula and other Upanishads (vedantic philosophy that went beyond just urbane sensibilities), Bhaskararaya’s oeuvres are the encyclopaedia on which generations of historians and religious scholars have built their work worldwide.

In his expansive treatise on sakta tantrism, he enlists the panchamakara that were/are considered the essential rites of enlightenment and liberation. He lists them as: mamsa (meat), matsya (fish), mudra (fermented grains), madira (liquor) and maithuna (sex).

Needless to say, each of these five Ms are severely at odds with the RSS’s version of adarsh Hinduism.

They want to ban non-vegetarian food if possible – so there’s bound to be a conflict with mamsa and matsya.

The Sangh has stated on occasion that it is against alcohol consumption – meaning the intoxicants mudra and madira are not allowed (ganja of the Shaivas is anyway illegal).

As for the last M, people who get all worked up about two people kissing each other, maithuna, which is sex for pleasure not procreation, is beyond taboo. And, of course, salvation through maithuna (orgasm) that was often achieved with the aid of a yogini/dakini (women who are independent worshippers themselves and not legally-wedded wives) is a catastrophe of cosmic proportions!

The biggest tragedy for the RSS is that Bhaskararaya is none of the five Ms, which the RSS would have us believe to be anti-Hindu.

Marx was born over three decades after Bhaskararaya died – so unless, like plastic surgery and airplanes, The Capital and The Communist Manifesto were written in ancient India, there really is no way Bhaskararaya could be a Marxist.

Baron Macaulay came to India in 1834, again, well after Bhaskararaya died, so we can tick that M off as well.

Missionaries? Are you kidding me? Bhaskararaya devoted his entire life to the worship of the Mother Goddess and was a yajna-performing Hindu. He devoted his entire life to the study and propounding of Hindu theology in a country full of Muslim rulers. If anything, he’d probably have cast a spell of everlasting hell on Christian missionaries – sacred thread firmly in hand.

The next M, materialism, doesn’t fit in either. Materialism has come to mean two things in our times. One is the everyday use of the word that implies a materialist person is one who is attached to amassing material wealth and material goods – capitalist/consumerist/great Indian middle class for short.

In philosophy, materialism means one who interprets history and society based on the interaction of tangible and material things (things one can see and feel or mathematically deduce) and rejects intangible things. But even this version doesn’t work for Bhaskararaya.

There was a huge amount of materialist philosophy in India since the dawn of history – in fact, at times we find proto-materialism in Hindu society predating the Greco-Roman schools of materialism.

Bhaskararaya could have chosen to be part of any of those schools of philosophy if he had wanted. But he was, in fact, everything opposed to materialism. He was a faithful and ardent devotee of the Mother Goddess. So much so that texts on him are full of references about how he saw the Goddess with his mortal eyes, and how he was haunted by her. His Tripurasundari Bahya Varivasya was allegedly narrated to him by the Goddess herself!

So, yes, this M too gets struck off. And the last M – Muslim extremism? Well there’s not even an iota of chance for that to be possible (unless of course a photoshopped picture of Bhaskararaya holding an ISIS flag emerges on social media).

So what does that leave us with? A staunch Hindu Brahmin who could quote scriptures even if woken up in the middle of the night, a man who knew his Hinduism so well that political debaters and pundits of his time steered clear of his immensely vast reading and intensely sharp tongue (the Goddess answers through him, they said, petrified).

That, in turn, leaves us with the conclusion that if the RSS is looking for a set of Ms that are the undoing of their three Ms, Maharani Victoria morality, Mein Kampf politics and Mussolini pants, they are looking in the wrong places. The undoing of their Italian fascism plus German Nazism mix, masquerading as Hinduism lies in the isms of the land of Hindus itself.

The riddle that is mainstream

One may argue here that all this tantra and panchamakara are not part of mainstream Hinduism and are therefore something we can ignore and continue with the standard version. But to that I would ask – what is mainstream? What is the standard?

One fact is that wars waged with the pretence of religious identity or the primacy of one myth over another are riddles that refuse to be solved. Another is that we don’t really leave our history behind as much as we are often led to believe. These two facts together keep up a state of perpetual war in the name of religious identities that change all the time.

For example, through its press releases at the WHC, the RSS would have us believe that it’s an all-Hindus versus all non-Hindus war and it’s been like that forever. But that’s not true.

Hindu–Muslim conflict has existed historically – there’s no denying that. But so did Hindu-Buddhist conflict and Hindu-Jain conflict and so on and so forth. Most importantly, alongside these, there have always been conflicts within each religion. “Virat Hinduism”, which the Hindutva brigade keeps harping about in the media, is but a temporary ploy of first dealing with the Muslims and then moving on to others within Hinduism.

The saktas (the worshippers of the Feminine Shakti), the shaivas (the worshippers of the Masculine Shiva) and the vaishnavas (the followers of the urbane and much later day religion organised under the name of Vishnu) have always been ill at ease with each other.

The famous vaishnava evangelist, Chaitanyadev, of Bengal, faced stiff opposition from the saktas and shaivas of his time because it was they who ruled the roost.

Things changed for the better when he got the support of the Muslim (yes, Muslim!) Nawab of Bengal, a friendlier space in Nilachal (present day Orissa) than Bengal and its Brahmins and the following of the cash-rich trader community (the Vaishyas).

And we still see that conflict alive when Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a leader of the trader community, gifts the Gita (Hinduism from a Vaishnava perspective) as the de-facto religious book of India and not, say, a Shiva Purana or a Chandi Mangal Kavya.

What remains constant is the rejection of the cultural practices of those who aren’t in power by those who are. Those in power declare themselves “mainstream” and those out of power as “the others”. They hold up the practices of this mainstream as ‘the standard’ and denigrate the practices of others as ‘deviant’. Soon enough, the power of the State is used to outlaw ‘deviant’ cultures and an imposition of ‘the standard’ happens (IITs must not serve non-veg because the Vaishnavas and Jains in power do not eat meat.

Bhaskararaya himself acknowledged the dialectics of being an orthodox casteist Brahmin in public and a liberated adept of the Tantric way, which rejects both the centrality of the Brahman and caste as a denominator, in private.

He lived a dual life and reasoned that the ways of tantra are not for everyone and hence need not be talked about openly. A few hundred years down the line, Bhaskararaya’s sounds a bit hypocritical – or, at best, like a man who is scared of being politically persecuted for his non-conformist, non-brute, liberal opinions. What he was doing is what we see a lot of amongst the elite in India, Pakistan and other countries today – they espouse majoritarian and pro-moral policing ideologies in public, but are very liberal in private. For being on the right side of power and the good books of benefactors they carry on with this Bhaskararayan duality.

But what should deeply worry the RSS is that no matter what is stamped as “mainstream”, “standard” and “compliant”, the others and their deviations do not go away. There is a good chance that the “malicious-5” will outlive the RSS.

The author can be contacted at siddharthyaroy@gmail.com

Thursday 23 March 2023

Godhra case | Supreme Court to hear pleas of Gujarat government, convicts on March 24

The Gujarat government had told the Supreme Court that it will be seeking death penalty to 11 convicts in the 2002 Godhra train burning case

March 17, 2023 07:34 pm | Updated March 18, 2023 07:00 am IST - New Delhi

PTI

COMMENTSSHAREREAD LATER

On February 27, 2002, 59 people were killed when the S6 coach of the Sabarmati Express was burnt at Gujarat’s Godhra, triggering riots in the State.

On February 27, 2002, 59 people were killed when the S6 coach of the Sabarmati Express was burnt at Gujarat’s Godhra, triggering riots in the State. | Photo Credit: AP

The Supreme Court on Friday said it will hear on March 24 the appeal of the Gujarat government and the bail pleas of several accused who are serving life imprisonment in the 2002 Godhra train burning case.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala, meanwhile, directed the counsel for the Gujarat government and the convicts to provide a soft copy of the consolidated chart containing details such as actual sentences awarded to them and the period spent in jail till now.

Also read: A long road to justice

The Bench adjourned the hearing after it was apprised that Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the State government, was then unavailable.

"We will have it on Friday," the Bench said.

On February 20, the State government had told the top court that it will be seeking award of death penalty to 11 convicts whose sentences in the 2002 Godhra train burning case were commuted to life imprisonment by the Gujarat High Court.

"We will be seriously pressing for award of death penalty to the convicts whose death penalties were commuted into life imprisonment (by the Gujarat High Court). This is the rarest of rare cases where 59 people, including women and children, were burnt alive," the solicitor general had said.

"It is consistent everywhere that the bogey was locked from outside. Fifty-nine died, including ladies and children," he had added.

Giving details, the law officer had said 11 convicts were sentenced to death by the trial court and 20 others granted life term in the case.

The High Court upheld total 31 convictions in the case and commuted the death penalties of the 11 convicts to life term, Mehta had said.

On February 27, 2002, 59 people were killed when the S6 coach of the Sabarmati Express was burnt at Gujarat's Godhra, triggering riots in the State.

The State government has come in appeal against the commutation of death penalty into life term for 11 convicts, Mr. Mehta said. Several accused, he added, have filed pleas against the high court upholding their convictions in the case.

The top court has granted bail to two convicts in the case so far. Seven other bail pleas are pending adjudication in the matter.

The Bench noted that a large number of bail applications have been filed before it in the case and said, "It has been agreed that the AORs (advocates-on-record) on behalf of applicants along with advocate Swati Ghildiyal, standing counsel for Gujarat, shall prepare a comprehensive chart with all relevant details. List after three weeks."

The Supreme Court had on January 30 sought the Gujarat government's response on the bail pleas of some of the convicts sentenced to life imprisonment in the case.

The Court issued notice to the State government on the bail pleas of Abdul Raheman Dhantia alias Kankatto and Abdul Sattar Ibrahim Gaddi Asla, among others.

The state government, on the other hand, said it was not "merely a stone pelting" case as the convicts had bolted a bogey of the Sabarmati Express, leading to the death of several passengers on the train.

"Some are saying their role was just stone pelting. But when you lock a bogey from outside, light it on fire and then pelt stones, it is not just stone pelting," the solicitor general had said.

On December 15, last year, the top court granted bail to Faruk, who was serving a life sentence in the case and noted that he had been in jail for 17 years.

Faruk, along with several others, was convicted for pelting stones at a coach of the Sabarmati Express.

The Wire calls Godhra train burning conspiracy ‘a lie’

March 4, 2022

HinduPost Desk

February 27, 2002 was a dark day in the history of our nation. What occurred that day sent a shockwave down our collective spine and invoked a feeling of horror and disgust in the most stoic of hearts. 59 innocent devotees, including 10 children and 27 women, were burnt alive in coach S-6 of Sabarmati Express just a little distance away from Godhra station in Gujarat, as part of a planned conspiracy.

But such is the hate for Hindus coursing through the veins of our elites, that to this day many of them maintain that what happened that day is ‘not clear’. Some claim it was an ‘accident’, others hint it could have been an ‘inside job’ (to vilify Muslims). In an article by Prem Shankar Jha (archive link) that was published in The Wire yesterday, the same claims were regurgitated.

Sharing that article, this is what Siddharth Varadarajan, editor of The Wire, tweeted:

The long and short of Jha’s article:

From the outset, Modi had decided that the Godhra training burning was a Muslim conspiracy and so “facts were tailor made to sustain that claim”

The most plausible cause of the fire was the one arrived at by the UC Banerjee commission appointed by UPA railway minister Lalu Prasad Yadav in 2005, i.e. the fire was ‘accidental’ and likely caused when a “cooking stove got knocked over”. Jha also adds, to strengthen this theory, “cooking or warming one’s own food on long train journeys was, and may still be, a common practice among orthodox Hindus.”

A Forensic Science Laboratory’s finding that at least 60 ltrs of petrol were poured on to the floor of the coach and set alight is ‘absurd’ as “how could hyped-up (sic) kar sewaks allow anyone to board by cutting the vestibule between S-6 and S-7”? Do note the image shared by Varadarajan – that’s his own personal touch (it does not appear in The Wire article) and shows a man calmly splashing petrol from a jerrycan in an almost empty train coach.

For good measure, Jha – a Doon School, St. Stephen’s and Oxford University product who has edited leading newspapers like Hindustan Times, Times of India and is currently associated with Harvard University – also speculates that not more than a dozen kar sewaks died in that ‘accident’, most who perished were passengers who boarded at other stations than Ayodhya. The implication being: Sangh parivar ‘exploited’ deaths of non-kar sewak Hindus to target Muslims.

The truth

In 2011, a trial court found 31 Muslim men guilty of a planned conspiracy to attack the train returning with kar sewaks from Ayodhya, and sentenced 11 to death and 20 to life terms. The main conspirators were found to be Haji Bilal, Faruk Bhana, Abdul Rajak and Salim Panwala. Bhana was secretary of the district Congress committee and an elected member of Godhra municipality, and Bilal was a known Congress worker in Godhra. The man who allegedly inspired this gruesome carnage, Tablighi Jamaat preacher Maulana Umarji was acquitted due to lack of ‘concrete evidence’. Tablighi Jamaat had a network of seminaries in Godhra. In 2017, the Gujarat HC upheld the convictions but commuted death penalty to life imprisonment.

This is what the prosecution lawyer proved in court, based on which the accused were convicted –

“The petrol Cans which were stored at Aman Guest House were taken in a loading rickshaw, near the “A” Cabin and the bogey was set on fire by putting burning rags inside the compartment and through broken windows by the miscreants. Few culprits had forcibly entered into the compartment by cutting open the vestibule and petrol was emptied in that compartment. The passengers were terrorized by beating them and pelting of stones and were prevented from coming out from the burning compartment, provocative slogans were shouted from the loudspeaker from a nearby mosque (“Pakistan Zindabad”, “Hindustan Murdabad” and “Hindu Kafiro ko Jala dalo”, i.e. burn the Hindu unbelievers) to arouse passions in the violent mob. Fire tankers were prevented from going near the place of the incident.”

This is what the court judgement convicting 31 accused for the Godhra train carnage said –

“[26] Conspiracy came to be hatched on the previous day i.e. 26-2-2002 during the meeting held in Aman Guest House between the conspirators Haji Bilal, Faruk Bhana, Abdul Rajak and Salim Panwala.

[27] As per the plan, Abdul Rajak Kurkur and Salim Panwala both had gone to Kalabhai Petrol Pump on moped scooty on 26-2-2002 at about 10.00 p.m. taking with them other conspirators Salim Jarda, Shaukat Ahmed Charkha @ Lalu, Imran Ahmed Bhatuk @ Sheru, Hasan Ahmed Charkha, Mehbub Khalid Chanda and Jabir Binyamin Behra in a Three Wheeler Tempo No. GJ-6 U- 8074, and purchased 140 litres loose petrol in 7 different Carboys and then, stored it behind Aman Guest House, in the house of Abdul Rajak Kurkur. Thereafter, a meeting of these conspirators was again held in the Room No. 8 of the said Aman Guest House.

[29] As per the said instruction the assailants by turning disk of ACP situated on the outside of the Coaches, stopped the train near ‘A‘ Cabin.

[30] Then immediately, Abdul Rajak Kurkur and absconding accused Salim Panwala taking with them a Carboy containing petrol proceeded towards ‘A‘ Cabin on a Red coloured M-80 Bajaj moped scooty.

[32] Mehbub Yakub Mitha @ Popa, Mehbub Khalid Chanda, Ayub Abdulgani Patliya, Yunus Abdulhaq Ghadiyali etc. went near Coach S-2 with weapons and started breaking window glasses ect. and also thrown a burning rag inside the said Coach S-2.

[33] Abdul Rajak Kurkur and absconding accused Salim Panwala went near Coach S-6 and poured petrol from the broken window, just near the closed door (towards engine/front side) of the Coach S-6.

[34] Mehbub Ahmed Yusuf Hasan @ Latiko who had with him a big knife (Chharo for cutting meat) first made holes on the upper part of the Carboys and then, cut the canvas vestibule of Coach S-7, situated between the Coaches S-6 and S-7 (corridor).

[35] Mehbub Ahmed Hasan and Jabir Binyamin Behra climbed up the said corridor place and by use of force with kicks etc, opened the eastern side sliding door of Coach S-6.

[36] Mehbub Ahmed Hasan @ Latiko, Jabir Binyamin Behra and Saukat Ahmed Charkha @ Lalu then entered into Coach S-6 from the said sliding door with Carboys containing petrol.

[37] Absconding accused Saukat Lalu opened the East-South corner door of the Coach S-6, from where the remaining three i.e. Imran Sheru, Irfan Bhobha, Rafiq Bhatuk entered in the Coach with Carboys and poured petrol.

[38] Ramjani Binyamin Behra and Hasan Lalu were throwing petrol from the outside of the Coach, towards windows.

[39] Hasan Ahmed Charkha @ Hasan Lalu put on fire coach S-6 by through burning rag (kakdo).

[42] If there was no plan at all, it would have not been possible to gather muslim persons with deadly weapons within five to six minutes and to and to reach near ‘A‘Cabin on the railway tracks.

[47] Godhra is known for its past history of communal riots.

[48] For Godhra, this is not the first incident of burning alive innocent persons belonged to Hindu community.”

Gayatri Panchal, a teenage survivor, who saw two of her sisters and parents being burnt alive and somehow managed to jump out a broken window and crawled under the burning train to survive, recollected the horror –

“People were carrying weapons like Gupti, Spears, Swords and such other deadly weapons in their hands and were throwing stones at the train. We all got frightened and somehow closed the windows and the doors of the compartment. People outside were shouting loudly, saying ‘Maro, Kato’ and were attacking the train. A loudspeaker from the Masjid close by was also very loudly shouting ‘Maro, Kato, Laden na dushmano ne Maro.’ (“Cut, kill, kill the enemies of Laden”) These attackers were so fierce that they managed to break the windows and close the doors from outside before pouring petrol inside and setting the compartment on fire so that nobody could escape alive.”

Does this answer your questions after all these years, Prem Shankar Jha and Siddharth Varadarajan? The carboys (jerrycans) were cut from the top so that they became like buckets using which petrol could be easily poured. Rags soaked in petrol were also thrown. Weapon-carrying men whipped into a frenzy by sloganeering from a mosque loudspeaker, with a blood-thirsty mob to support them, could easily have overpowered anyone who tried to stop them at the vestibule/door connecting coach S-7 and S-6.

The court has named the exact people who entered S-6 with carboys and poured petrol. They did this based on witness testimony and confessions. Hypothetically, let’s for a moment accept your central argument that “not a single passenger saw the petrol being poured”. People were taking cover from the stones raining down on them, trying to protect their loved ones, fighting off smoke which had already started filling the coach from the burning rags and petrol thrown from outside – can they be blamed if none who survived was able to witness the actual act of petrol being poured inside the coach?

And if the fire indeed was accidental, how did it manage to engulf the entire coach so quickly and why couldn’t passengers save their lives by getting off the stationary train? You know why? Because there was a 1000-strong mob waiting to kill them if they got off the coach. The train driver, ticket examiner, several passengers have testified to the presence of this mob and to the blood-curdling slogans they were shouting. If these were ‘innocent bystanders’ why didn’t they help people escape the fire? How come petrol residue was found on burnt clothes, and not kerosene, which is cooking stove fuel?

But you know what, Messrs. Jha and Varadarajan? It’s futile arguing facts with you lot. You are so consumed by hatred for everything Hindu, and so convinced about the infallibility of your ideological dogma, that nothing will convince you. There is no dialogue possible between people like you and us Hindus. And we know you are not alone.

Every English-language media outlet, every HINO (Hindu In Name Only) elite has at some point or the other, to some degree or the other, cast doubt on what happened in Godhra that day. Sample this Quint article, or this article in an American liberal portal, or this one by Mohan Guruswamy in Hindustan Times where the writer believes the person who poured petrol in the coach must have been ‘someone well-known to the karsevaks’. Guruswamy, a Harvard and Stanford product, was financial adviser to the NDA-1 govt for a brief period and is now associated with a Chennai-based defence think tank.

Those who cannot understand the pain of what the entire Hindu community suffered at Godhra on February 27, 2002 are beyond redemption. There is no difference between people like Jha, Varadarajan, Guruswamy et al and Hafeez Saeed. In fact, Saeed is at least more ‘honorable’ in the sense that he is open about his hate and actions.

Hindus now understand the strategy adopted by HINO elites: never accept anything that Hindus say, ignore Hindu lived experience with contempt; cast aspersions on govt, law enforcement and courts the moment they step even a fraction away from the script Hinduphobes want them to follow; advocate and celebrate every thing that divides Hindus; promote the most extremist elements among minorities; occupy the high moral ground as protectors of the Republic and join hands with your foreign friends to berate and shame Hindus at every turn.

And you know what? Even right-thinking non-Hindu citizens of Bharat are catching on to this ongoing fraud. This is what Khalid Baig, a Kashmiri Muslim, had to say on Varadarajan’s tweet and Jha’s article.

Godhra Train Burning Case Convicts Not Eligible For Premature Release As Per State's Policy : Gujarat Govt Tells Supreme Court Padmakshi Sharma 20 Feb

The Supreme Court on Monday considered the bail applications filed by the convicts in the 2002 Godhra train burning case. The matter was listed before

Gujarat Seeks Death Penalty For 11 Godhra Train Burning Convicts

A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and J B Pardiwala also fixed the bail pleas of several accused in the case for hearing after three weeks.

India NewsPress Trust of IndiaUpdated: February 20, 2023 12:49 pm IST

Gujarat Seeks Death Penalty For 11 Godhra Train Burning Convicts

On February 27, 2002, 59 people were killed when the S-6 coach of a train was burnt at Godhra.

New Delhi: The Gujarat government on Monday told the Supreme Court that it will press for the death penalty to 11 convicts whose sentences in the 2002 Godhra train burning case were commuted to life imprisonment by the state's high court.

A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala also fixed the bail pleas of several accused in the case for hearing after three weeks. It asked counsel for both sides to file a consolidated chart giving details such as actual sentences awarded to them and the period spent in jail till now.

"It is consistent everywhere that the bogey was locked from outside. Fifty-nine died, including ladies and children," he added.

Giving details, the law officer said 11 convicts were sentenced to death by the trial court and 20 others were granted life terms in the case.

The high court upheld total of 31 convictions in the case and commuted the death penalties of the 11 convicts to life term, Mr Mehta said.

On February 27, 2002, 59 people were killed when the S-6 coach of the train was burnt at Gujarat's Godhra, triggering riots in the state.

The state government has come in appeal against the commutation of death penalty into life term for 11 convicts, Mehta said. Several accused, he added, have filed pleas against the high court upholding their convictions in the case.

The top court has granted bail to two convicts in the case so far. Seven other bail pleas are pending adjudication in the matter.

The bench noted that a large number of bail applications have been filed before it in the case and said, "It has been agreed that the AORs (advocate-on records) on behalf of applicants along with advocate Swati Ghildiyal, standing counsel for Gujarat, shall prepare a comprehensive chart with all relevant details. List after three weeks." On January 30, the Supreme Court sought the Gujarat government's response on the bail pleas of some convicts sentenced to life imprisonment in the case.

The court issued notice to the state government on the bail pleas of Abdul Raheman Dhantia alias Kankatto, Abdul Sattar Ibrahim Gaddi Asla and others.

"Some are saying their role was just stone pelting. But when you lock a bogey from outside, light it on fire and then pelt stones, it is not just stone pelting," the solicitor general had said.

On December 15, last year, the top court granted bail to Faruk, who was serving a life sentence in the case and noted that he had been in jail for 17 years.

Faruk, along with several others, was convicted for pelting stones at a coach of the Sabarmati Express.

Friday 17 March 2023

Ways of worship cannot be a reason for conflict between communities, says Mohan Bhagwat

Ways of worship cannot be a reason for conflict between communities, says Mohan Bhagwat during launch of Urdu translation of Samaveda

Mughal ruler Aurangzeb lost while PM Modi has won when it comes to saving the humanity, says Bollywood scriptwriter and filmmaker Iqbal Durrani, who has translated the religious text

March 17, 2023 10:02 pm | Updated March 18, 2023 07:17 am IST - New Delhi

Ishita MishraISHITA MISHRA

COMMENTSSHAREREAD LATER

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat launches the first Urdu translation of the Samaveda at Red Fort in New Delhi on March 17, 2023. Filmmaker Iqbal Durrani (right) translated it from Vedic Sanskrit to Urdu.

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat launches the first Urdu translation of the Samaveda at Red Fort in New Delhi on March 17, 2023. Filmmaker Iqbal Durrani (right) translated it from Vedic Sanskrit to Urdu. | Photo Credit: PTI

Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat launched the first Urdu translation of Samaveda, one of the four Vedas of Hinduism, by Bollywood scriptwriter and filmmaker Iqbal Durrani at New Delhi on Friday. Mr Bhagwat, while praising the efforts of Mr. Durrani, stated that “different ways of worship cannot be a reason for conflict between communities”.

“We must understand that there are several paths that are being taken by different people. Some worship land, some water and some fire. But the destination of every human being is one and the same,” Mr. Bhagwat said while quoting a story from Vedic texts.

Monday 13 March 2023

ముస్లిం ఆలోచనాపరుల వేదిక (MTF) భారత్ బచావోతో కలిసి పనిచేస్తుంది

*ముస్లిం ఆలోచనాపరుల వేదిక (MTF) భారత్ బచావోతో కలిసి పనిచేస్తుంది*

భారత్ బచావో జాతీయ సదస్సు ఢిల్లీలో రెండు రోజులపాటు విజయవంతంగా జరిగింది. దాదాపు వెయ్యిమంది ప్రతినిధులు పాల్గొన్నారు. సిపియం కేంద్ర కార్యాలయమైన హరికిషన్ సింగ్ సూర్జిత్ భవన్ లోని మూడు సమావేశ మందిరాలు నిండిపోయాయి. ప్రతినిధుల్లో ఆంధ్రా, తెలంగాణకు చెందిన వారే 70-80 శాతంవున్నారు. ఇతర రాష్ట్రాలకు చెందిన వారు 20-30 శాతం వుంటారు.

ఉపన్యాసకుల్లో మొదటిరోజు, ప్రొఫెసర్ అపూర్వానంద చాలా గొప్పగా ఆకట్టుకున్నారు. దంతేవాడకు చెందిన హిమాంశు కుమార్ ప్రసంగం ఉద్వేగంగా సాగింది. రచయిత్రి సీమా ఆనంద్ ప్రసంగం ఆలోచించదగ్గట్టుగా వుంది. రెండో రోజు దీపాంకర్ భట్టాచార్య, ప్రొఫెసర్ అరుణ్ కుమార్ ప్రసంగాలు బాగున్నాయి.

జాతీయ సదస్సుకు కీలకమైన ‘భారత్ బచావో అవగాహనా పత్రం’ చాలా నిరుత్సాహ పరచింది. ఇక్కడ ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్ లో ‘కాషాయ కార్పొరేట్ ఫాసిజం’ అంటూ సభలు పెట్టిన మాడ్క్సిస్టు-లెనిస్టు పార్టీలు భారత్ బచావోలో భాగస్వామ్య పక్షాలుగా వున్నట్టు ప్రింటు పరంగా ప్రకటించారు. అలాంటి అవగాహన భారత్ బచావో అవగాహనా పత్రంలో కనీసంగానూ కనిపించలేదు.

ఈ కీలక పత్రం 1983కు ముందు భారత సమాజం మీద వివిధ కమ్యూనిస్టు పార్టిలకున్న అవగాహనను ప్రతిబింబించింది. భారత సమాజాన్ని అర్ధం చేసుకోవడంలో గత నలభై ఏళ్ళుగా సాగుతున్న పరిశోధనల అభివృధ్ధిని సాధించిన అవగాహనని భారత్ బచావో అవగాహన పత్రం నిరాకరించింది. అంటే, భారత్ బచావో అవగాహన పత్రం దాదాపు నలభై యేళ్ళు నెగటివ్ విలువలో వుంది.

*ఎవరు మితృలు ? ఎవరు శతృవులు ?* అని RSS వారు 1990 లలోనే వారి అంతరంగిక సర్క్యులర్ లో రాసుకున్నారు. ముస్లింలు, క్రిష్టియన్లు, అంబేద్కర్ వాదులయిన దళితులు, వామపక్ష సంస్తలు తమ శతృవులుగా అందులో వారు రాసుకున్నారు. ఎవరయితే వారి శతృవులని రాసుకున్నారో వారందరు ఐక్యమై ఇతర బహుజనులను, శ్రమ జీవులను ఐక్య పరచి పోరాడి సంఘ పరివార్ ఫాసిస్టు శక్తులను ఓడించాలి” అంటూ భారత్ బచావో వాట్సప్ గ్రూపులో కనీసం పదిసార్లు పోస్టులు పెట్టిన అడ్మిన్ లు ఢిల్లీలో మైనారిటీలు మా మిత్రులు అని ప్రకటించడానికి భయపడ్డారు. సంఘపరివారానికి ప్రధాన శతృవులైనవారు తమకు చివరి మిత్రులు కూడ కారని దేశ రాజధానిలో వివరించడానికి చాలా తాపత్రయపడ్డారు.

ప్రొఫెసర్ అపూర్వానంద దేశంల్లో ముస్లింలను లక్ష్యాంగా పెట్టుకుని ఎంతటి క్రూరమైన దాడులు జరుగుతున్నాయో సుదీర్ఘంగా వివరించారు. హీమాంశు కుమార్ మనసమాజానికి కుల వర్గ మత తెగ స్వభావాలున్నాయని విశ్లేషించారు. వాళ్ళిద్దరి ప్రసంగ సారాన్ని అభావం చేయడం కోసం భారత్ బచావో అవగాహన పత్రం చాలా కష్టపడింది.

అంతేగాక మైనారిటీల్లో బోలెడు హిందూత్వ వుందని నిరూపించడానికి నిర్వాహకులు గట్టి కసరత్తు చేశారు. “గుజరాత్ అల్లర్ల సందర్భంగా భారత రాష్ట్రపతి ఎవరూ? ఏపిజే కలాం కాదా? ఆయన ముస్లిం కాదా?” అని సాక్షాత్తు భారత్ బచావో వ్యవస్థాపకులు ముస్లిం ప్రతినిధుల్ని సభలో నిలదీశారు. గోడీ మీడియా, వాట్సప్ యూనివర్శిటీ గ్రాడ్యుయేట్లను మించిన పరిజ్ఞానాన్ని వారు ఎంతో గొప్పగా ప్రదర్శించారు. కేసు గెలవడానికి ఎంతకైనా తెగించే రామ్ జెఠ్ మలానీ వంటి వివాదాస్పద అడ్వకేట్ కూడ ఈ స్థాయి అబధ్ధాలను చెప్పి వుండరు. ఇంతటి నైపుణ్యాన్ని సాధించినందుకు భారత్ బచావో అడ్మిన్ లకు అభినందనలు.

సత్యాన్వేషన మార్గాల గురించి కొందరు ప్రవచనకారులు భారత్ బచావో వాట్సప్ గ్రూపులో తరచూ ఉపదేశాలు చేస్తుంటారు. ఆ సత్యాన్వేషణ మార్గాల్ని ఢిల్లీ జాతీయ వేదిక మీద వాళ్ళు డిజిటల్ డిస్ ప్లే చేసి చూపించారు.

ఫాసిజానికి ప్రధాన బాధితులు మత అల్పసంఖ్యాకవర్గాలనే ప్రాధమిక వాస్తవాన్ని అవగాహనా పత్రం గుర్తించ నిరాకరించింది. కార్పొరేట్ సాంస్కృతిక జాతీయవాద నియంతృత్వం మీద తాను పోరాడడం లేదంటూ భారత్ బచావో సంస్థ ముందుగానే అస్త్రసన్యాసం చేసింది. భారత్ బచావో అవగాహనా పత్రంవల్ల ముస్లిం. క్రైస్తవ, శిక్కు మత అల్ప సంఖ్యాక వర్గాలకు ఏమాత్రం ఉపయోగంలేదు.

‘మేము 80 శాతం వాళ్లు 20 శాతం’ అంటూ కేంద్ర హోంమంత్రి అమిత్ షా తరచుగా ప్రకటిస్తుంటారు. తాము సహితం ముస్లింలకు దూరం అని భారత్ బచావో జాతీయ సదస్సు చెప్పకనే చెప్పింది. ముస్లింలను దరిచేర్చుకుని అమిత్ షా ఆగ్రహానికి గురికావడంకన్నా ముస్లింలను దూరంగా పెట్టి అమిత్ షా అనుగ్రహానికి పాత్రులు కావడం గొప్ప తెలివైన ఆలోచనే.

భారత్ బచావో జాతీయ సదస్సు ఆహ్వాన కమిటీలో సిపిఐ (ఎంఎల్) ప్రజాపంథా, లిబరేషన్. క్లాస్ స్ట్రగుల, న్యూ డెమోక్రసీ, రెడ్ స్టార్, రివల్యూషనరీ ఇనీషియేటివ్ ల పేర్లు ముద్రించారు. అమిత్ షా దూరంగా పెట్టాలనుకున్న 20 శాతాన్ని ఈ ఎంఎల్ పార్టీలు కూడ దూరంగా పెట్టాలనుకుంటున్నాయా? తేల్చుకోవాల్సిన అంశమే.

భారత దేశాన్ని కుల మత తెగ లింగ ప్రాంత భాషా వర్గ సమాజంగా గుర్తించనివాళ్ళు ఈ సమాజంలో ఎలాంటి మార్పులూ తేలేరు. ఏనుగును గుర్తించని నలుగురు గుడ్డివాళ్ళుగా మిగిలిపోతారు. వారు దివ్యాంగులు కనుక కొంచెం జాలిపడుదాం.

భారత ఫాసిజానికి ప్రధానంగా బలి అయ్యేది ముస్లింలు, ఆదివాసులు అనేది *ముస్లిం ఆలోచనాపరుల వేదిక (MTF)* అవగాహన. భారత్ బచావో అవగాహన పత్రంతో ఆదివాసులకు ఏ మేరకు మేలు జరుగుతుందీ ఇప్పుడే అంచనా వేయడం కష్టం. ఈ అవగాహన పత్రంతో కొనసాగే భారత్ బచావో ఉద్యమంవల్ల హిందూ సమాజంలోని అణగారిన కులాలకు ఏ మాత్రం మేలు జరిగినా అది గొప్ప విషయమే. అలాంటి అణగారిన కులాల శ్రేయస్సు కొరకు భారత్ బచావోకు *ముస్లిం ఆలోచనాపరుల వేదిక (MTF)* సంఘీభావాన్ని తెలుపుతోంది. ప్రజా సమస్యల పరిష్కారం ప్రాతిపదికగా ఆయా సందర్భాల్లో తప్పక కలిసిపనిచేస్తుంది.

ఏయం ఖాన్ యజ్దానీ (డానీ)

కన్వీనర్, *ముస్లిం ఆలోచనాపరుల వేదిక (MTF)*

Tuesday 7 March 2023

‘A great son of Mother India’?: Here’s what RSS founder KB Hedgewar said about Muslims

It’s difficult to imagine that ex-president Pranab Mukherjee could not have been aware of the Hindutva ideologue’s views when he praised him on Thursday.

Scroll Staff

Jun 08, 2018 · 04:52 pm

‘A great son of Mother India’?: Here’s what RSS founder KB Hedgewar said about Muslims

Pranab Mukherjee pays respects to RSS founder KB Hedgewar in Nagpur. | RSS/Facebook

“Today I came here to pay my respect and homage to a great son of Mother India,” wrote former President Pranab Mukherjee in the visitor’s book at the birthplace of Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, the founder of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, on Thursday.

While Mukherjee’s speech after days of controversy over his decision to accept an invitation to be the guest of honour at the annual graduation event for RSS workers has been greeted with prolific commentary, not much is widely known about Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, the man he called “a great son of Mother India”.

When talking about the RSS, the focus generally is on Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, the second sarsanghchalak or supreme leader of the organisation, whose views on the Muslims have often been put under the scanner, more recently in a three-part series on this website.

But Golwalkar took over as the head of the organisation only after Hedgewar’s death in 1940. Hedgewar, the man who founded the organisation in 1925, was much influenced by the views of another much-talked-about figure, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar.

Savarkar was the first to spell out his idea of Hindutva in 1923, when he declared that only those who thought of India as the Holy Land as well as the fatherland could be true patriots, thus ruling out the Muslims, suggesting that their patriotism should always be suspect.

Balakrishna Shivram Moonje, a Congressman who later played a leading role in the Hindu Mahasabha, was responsible for sending Hedgewar to study medicine in Calcutta in 1910. He had an important part in Hedgewar’s decision to join both the Congress and the Mahasabha.

This was also the time when some of the Muslim leaders in India were putting pressure on the British government to preserve the authority of the Ottoman Sultan as Caliph of Islam following the breakup of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War. The period also saw the rise of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi in the Congress party, who supported the Muslim demand and launched his non-cooperation movement with Khilafat, as it had come to be called, as its major plank. This was deeply resented by Hedgewar, as many others in the Congress also questioned loyalty to religion over motherland.

Around the same time, in the words of Oxford historian Tapan Raychaudhuri, northern India saw “extensive communal riots on a scale without precedent”. It was in their wake, in 1925, that Hedgewar “established the RSS in direct response to the new quest for disciplined cadres of Hindu communalism”.

The founder’s analysis of the political situation that necessitated the new organisation is illuminating, wrote Raychaudhari, quoting a part from what Hedgewar wrote himself, as cited in his biography by CP Bhishikar, titled Keshav Sanghnirmata:

“As a result of the Non-Cooperation Movement of Mahatma Gandhi the enthusiasm [for nationalism] in the country was cooling down and all evils in social life which that movement generated were menacingly raising their head. As the tide of national struggle came to ebb mutual ill-will and jealousies came on the surface. Personal quarrels raged all round. Conflicts between various communities had started. Brahmin-non-Brahmin conflict was nakedly on view. No organisation was integrated or united. The yavan-snakes reared on the milk of Non-Cooperation were provoking riots in the nation with their poisonous hissing.”

— CP Bhishikar, Keshav Sanghnirmata. English translation taken from the chapter 'A Sketch of RSS History' in 'Khaki Shorts, Saffron Flags' by Tapan Basu, Pradip Datta, Sumit Sarkar, Tanika Sarkar, Sambuddha Sen, Tracts for the Times, Orient Longman

As Raychoudhury was to note, quoting Hedgewar, the riots were Muslim riots because in every single case “it is they who start them”. Thus “it became evident that Hindutva was Rashtriyatva”, that is, Hinduness was the same as nationalism.

Bhishikar’s biography goes on to provide the following account of the origins of the RSS, quoting from one of its own publications.

“A change was coming over the country. The aftermath of the 1921 movement had come to Doctorji [Hedgewar] as a shock. Indian Muslims had proved themselves Muslims first and Indians only secondarily so that when the Khilafat was given up in Turkey, they withdrew from the allied movement for national independence.

The whole atmosphere was charged with Muslim fanaticism. ‘Allah ho akbar’ and not ‘Bharat mata ki jai’ was heard everywhere. Soon there were Muslim riots in Bannu, Kohat, Multan, Nagpur, Kanpur and elsewhere.

‘These are not Hindu-Muslim riots,’ he would say. ‘These are Muslim riots because in every single case it is they who start them and go on the offensive.’

These riots culminated in the Moplah atrocity, completed with arson, loot, murder, rape and forced conversion. The nation was dazed. And Doctorji wondered: ‘Is it Khilafat (restoration of Khalif) or Akhilafat (catastrophe for all)?...’

It became evident that the Hindus were the nation in Bharat and that Hindutva was Rashtriyatva. While wishful thinkers pretended not to see the writing across the national political firmament, the realist in Dr Hedgewar refused to dream up wishy-washy dreams. The truth was out. Only Hindus would free Hindustan and they alone could save Hindu culture. Only Hindu strength could save the country. There was no escape from the logic of facts. Hindu youth had to be organised on the basis of personal character and absolute love of the motherland. There was no other way.

The agony of the great soul expressed itself in the formation of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. With five friends he started the day-to-clay programme of RSS. The great day was the auspicious Vijaya Dashami day of 1925.”

Writing in Khakhi Shorts, Saffron Flags, historians Tapan Basu, Pradip Datta, Sumit Sarkar, Tanika Sarkar and Sambuddha Sarkar deconstruct these two quotes from Bhishikar’s biography of Hedgewar.

“The accounts are revealing in a number of different ways. The Non-Cooperation upsurge, highest point in anti-British unity in the entire history of modern Indian nationalism, is unequivocally condemned. The ‘yavan snakes’, it seems, are at their most dangerous when they are fighting foreign rule side by side with the Hindus, when they cease behaving in the expected ‘anti-national’ manner. Hindu-Muslim fraternity is dangerous because the ideal, evidently is not a united, free India but a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ – only Hindus could constitute ‘the nation in Bharat’. This is hard-headed ‘realism’ – a style of argument much favoured throughout by Hindu communalists. Yet the stereotype of the Muslim as anti-national has to be preserved, and so history must be doctored. Khilafatists are blamed for withdrawing from the ‘allied movement’, though it was Gandhi and the Congress leadership which had unilaterally called off that movement in 1922. The catalogue of riots is similarly twisted, to present the Moplah rebellion– actually far more of a peasant rising against landlords than a straightforward communal disturbance– as a culmination (it had in reality preceded the other riots that had been listed by several years. And Hedgewar’s account clearly reveals the centrality for him of the Brahmin-non-Brahmin conflict. Organised Hindutva emerges right from the beginning as an upper caste reaction to efforts at self-assertion by downtrodden groups within the Hindu fold.”

— 'A Sketch of RSS History' in 'Khaki Shorts, Saffron Flags' by Tapan Basu, Pradip Datta, Sumit Sarkar, Tanika Sarkar, Sambuddha Sen, Tracts for the Times, Orient Longman

For more on Hedgewar, there is additional material by Tapan Raychaudhuri, writing in Hindu Nationalism or Proto-Fascism: the Nature of Hindu Communal Politics in India:

“The animosity to the national movement and its vision of unity transcending ethnic boundaries, so prominent in Hedgewar’s statements, was intensified when the All India Congress Committee announced in 1931 that free India would be a secular democratic republic. The RSS was virtually absent from the mass movements of the 1920s and ’30s. These movements for the achievement of national independence under Gandhi’s leadership were unacceptable, because they were unlikely to lead to the establishment of a Hindu Rashtra, their central objective. As already noted, Hedgewar unequivocally condemned the Non-co-operation-Khilafat movement because it had encouraged ‘the yavana-snake’. The enemy of the nation, as perceived by the RSS, was not colonial rule, but the Muslims of India. Absent from the Quit India movement, the RSS cadres were very prominent in the riots of 1946-47.”

— Tapan Raychaudhuri, ‘Hindu Nationalism or Proto-Fascism: the Nature of Hindu Communal Politics in India’

It is difficult to imagine that Pranab Mukherjee was not aware of this history when he signed the guest book at the Hedgewar memorial.

How former RSS head M.S. Golwalkar saw India and wanted to treat minorities

SHASHI THAROOR

27 January, 2018 03:32 pm IST

Text Size:

In this excerpt from his new book, ‘Why I Am a Hindu’, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor explains nationalism as RSS leader M.S. Golwalkar saw it.

Golwalkar made it clear in his writings that India was the holy land of the Hindus. He writes: ‘Hindusthan is the land of the Hindus and is the terra firma for the Hindu nation alone to flourish upon…’ According to him, India was a pristine Hindu country in ancient times, a place of unparalleled glory destroyed in successive assaults by foreign invaders. He felt that a ‘national regeneration’ was necessary. Throughout his writings, he expresses the view that the national regeneration of this ‘Hindu nation’ (the ‘motherland’ for which the ‘Hindu people’ shed their blood) could only come about through the revival of its Hinduness. Golwalkar rejected the concept of what he called ‘territorial nationalism’ the modern variant of nationalism which identified a state with its territory and bestowed equal rights of citizenship on all those who lived within it. That, to Golwalkar, made no sense: a territory was not a nation, a people constituted a nation. Who were this people? In the Indian case, Hindus. Golwalkar and the RSS became passionate advocates of ‘cultural nationalism’. This, of course, is directly opposed to the civic nationalism enshrined in the Constitution of India.

India’s independence from colonial rule in 1947, Golwalkar argued, did not constitute real freedom because the new leaders held on to the ‘perverted concept of nationalism’ that located all who lived on India’s territory as equal constituents of the nation. ‘The concept of territorial nationalism,’ he wrote, ‘has verily emasculated our nation and what more can we expect of a body deprived of its vital energy? …[and] so it is that we see today the germs of corruption, disintegration and dissipation eating into the vitals of our nation for having given up the natural living nationalism in the pursuit of an unnatural, unscientific and lifeless hybrid concept of territorial nationalism.’

Golwalkar’s Bunch Of Thoughts argues that territorial nationalism is a barbarism, since a nation is ‘not a mere bundle of political and economic rights’ but an embodiment of national culture—in India, ‘ancient and sublime’ Hinduism. In the book, Golwalkar sneers at democracy—which he sees as alien to Hindu culture. He also writes approvingly of Manu as a ‘great soul’; he talks of the high regard in which Manu is held around the world by giving the example of a marble statue in the Philippines with the inscription: ‘The first, the greatest and wisest lawgiver of mankind’. (That Manu’s legal prescription is condemned by many for its elitism and casteism, its gender prejudice, its implicitly authoritarian ethos and its disparagement of the lower castes never crosses Golwalkar’s mind.) But in all fairness, Golwalkar was only echoing Nietzsche, who wrote of the Manu Smriti: ‘This absolutely Aryan testimony, a priestly codex of morality based on the Vedas, of a presentation of caste and of ancient provenance not pessimistic even though priestly—completes my conceptions of religion in the most remarkable manner.’ For Golwalkar, therefore, salvation lies not in Indian democracy, but in the historian Manu S. Pillai’s words, ‘in embracing Hindu dharmocracy’.

Pillai’s phrase is not entirely tongue-in-cheek: Golwakar intends traditional Hindu practices to prevail in his Hindu Rashtra, including caste discrimination. ‘We know as a matter of history,’ he writes, ‘that our north-western and north-eastern areas, where the influence of Buddhism had disrupted the caste system, fell an easy prey to the onslaught of Muslims…. But the areas of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh, which were considered to be very orthodox and rigid in caste restrictions, remained predominantly Hindu even after remaining the very citadels of Muslim power and fanaticism.’ So the more caste-ridden society was, the more robustly it was able to resist the encroachments of the foreign faiths that sought to erode it: to Golwalkar, ‘the so-called “caste-ridden” Hindu Society has remained undying and inconquerable…(while) casteless societies crumbled to dust’.

The alternative to territorial nationalism, to Golwalkar, was a nationalism based on race. In We, or Our Nationhood Defined, at the height of Hitler’s rise, Golwalkar wrote: ‘To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by.’

This marked an evolution from Savarkar’s notion that saw Hindutva as principally a cultural identity and the Hindu religion as a part of a national Hindu culture. In an important respect, Golwalkar reversed Savarkar’s logic: ‘With us,’ he wrote, ‘culture is but a product of our all-comprehensive religion, a part of its body and not distinguishable from it.’77 From Golwalkar onwards, Hindutva was seen as an ideology seeking to establish the hegemony of Hindus, Hindu values and the Hindu way of life in the political arrangements of India. In this he was building on Savarkar’s derisive rejection of Gandhian ‘universalism’ and ‘non-violence’ which he considered delusionary opiates; instead of Gandhi’s moral lessons in favour of peace, Savarkar advocated the ‘political virility’ of Hindutva, an idea which found full flower in Golwalkar.

Golwalkar made no bones about the principal targets of his race-hatred: ‘Ever since that evil day, when Moslems first landed in Hindustan, right up to the present moment, the Hindu Nation has been gallantly fighting on to shake off the despoilers. The Race Spirit has been awakening’.79 The association of Hindutva with an explicitly anti-Muslim agenda can be traced to its unambiguous avowal by Golwalkar. But ‘race’ fashionable though the term was when Golwakar wrote in the 1930s, especially in the context of Nazi ideology was not a totally accurate word for what he meant, not least since many, indeed most, of India’s Muslims were descended from Hindu ancestors themselves and therefore were of the same race or ethnicity as the Hindus for whom Golwalkar was speaking.

According to the proponents of Hindutva, despite that common descent, Muslims had cut themselves off from Hindu culture: they prayed in Arabic, rather than the Sanskrit born on Indian soil, turned to a foreign city (Mecca) as their holiest of holies, and owed allegiance to a holy book, and beliefs spawned by it, that had no roots in the sacred land of India. Naipaul echoes this thought in his Among the Believers: ‘It turns out now that the Arabs were the most successful imperialists of all time; since to be conquered by them (and then to be like them) is still, in the minds of the faithful, to be saved.’

Golwalkar’s answer was to seek the assimilation of Muslims and other minorities into the Hindu nationalist mainstream by forcing them to abandon these external allegiances (rather as the Jews were forced to adopt outward signs of adherence to Christianity during the Spanish Inquisition four and a half centuries earlier). The German notion of a volksgeist, a ‘race spirit’ to which everyone would have to conform, appealed strongly to Golwalkar. To remain in India, Muslims would have to submit themselves to Hindus. Recalling the parable of Muhammad going to the mountain, Golwalkar wrote: ‘In the Indian situation, the Hindu is the mountain, and the Muslim population, Mohammed. I need not elaborate.’ A few paragraphs earlier I have quoted his approving words about Nazi theories of race. There is more in his writing that is even more chilling.

Golwalkar’s hatred for non-Hindus was especially virulent when it came to Muslims and Christians; he regarded Parsis and Jews in India as model minorities who knew their place and did not ruffle any Hindu feathers. In his pungent view: ‘[H]ere was already a full-fledged ancient nation of the Hindus and the various communities which were living in the country were here either as guests, the Jews and Parsis, or as invaders, the Muslims and Christians.’ He added: ‘They never faced the question how all such heterogenous groups could be called as children of the soil merely because, by an accident, they happened to reside in a common territory under the rule of a common enemy.’

Golwalkar strongly opposed any talk of a secular Indian state. As he wrote in We, or Our Nationhood Defined: ‘There are only two courses open to these foreign elements’, Golwalkar went on, ‘either to merge themselves in the national race and adopt its culture or to live at its mercy so long as the national race may allow them to do so and quit the country at the sweet will of the national race. That is the only sound view on the minorities’ problem… [The] foreign races in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment—not even citizen’s rights.’

Shashi Tharoor’s latest book ‘Why I Am A Hindu’ has been published by Aleph Book Company. Excerpted with permission from Aleph.