RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat made a big statement on Thursday. The statement was about Gyanvapi and the many controversies that followed. The occasion was the closing ceremony of the Sangh Shiksha Varg (training camps).
The RSS organises Shiksha Varg every year, in which the volunteers are trained about the topics and procedures related to the Sangh. In this course, the classes for the first and the second year are organised in many small and big cities of the country, but the third-year training is always held at the organisation’s headquarters in Nagpur. On this occasion, the RSS chief himself attends the ceremony and at the end, he also delivers a speech, in which the RSS’s views on several national and international issues are put forward in front of the volunteers, and these views then become available to the common and not-so-common people sitting at home in the age of social media.
The RSS chief touched upon a number of issues in his speech, including the Russia-Ukraine war. He said that Russia attacked Ukraine because of its power and that no country has directly opposed Russia and come to Ukraine’s aid, because everyone fears Russia’s nuclear capability, as Putin has declared that he will not hesitate to use it if the need arises. Bhagwat also raised questions on the motives of Western countries, saying that those helping Ukraine also do not have good intentions. According to the Sangh chief, the situation in Ukraine is enough to explain why India needs to become more powerful as countries like China can be more devious in the future if compared to the attitude of Russia.
But the statement of the Sangh chief that caught everyone’s attention was about the controversy related to many other mosques and buildings that reared up after the Gyanvapi row. Bhagwat said, “We have certain beliefs about Gyanvapi, it has been carried on through tradition, that is fine. But why see Shivlings in every mosque? That too is a faith, no matter if it has come from outside. But those who have adopted this practice of worship, those Muslims do not come from outside, they should also understand this. Although the method of worship belongs there, they want to continue following it, it is a good thing, we don’t oppose any mode of worship here. There is a belief and feeling of purity towards everyone’s religious symbols, but even after following their method of worship, they are the descendants of sages, kings, and kshatriyas, our common ancestors from ancient times. We have got the same heritage.”
This section of Bhagwat’s statement is being interpreted by the media and the common folks as the Sangh does not want the issue of those temples to be raised over which mosques have been built or materials of which have been used to erect mosques. have been done. It is also being speculated that the Sangh does not support those people who have taken up the campaign to restore the sites where mosques were built by demolishing Hindu shrines to their original form or at least shed light on the kind of atrocities perpetrated against Hindus in medieval times through such actions.
Actually, the Sangh chief’s statement needs to be seen in its entirety. The central theme of his whole speech is Indianness. He says that India has its own age-old traditions, cultures, and conducts, which should be followed by everyone, irrespective of the faith they belong to. He also says about Muslims in India that foreign Islamic invaders with a jihadi mindset converted them using the sword or force, and they were compelled to leave their Hindu religion due to forced conversions. In such circumstances, temples were demolished to demoralise the Hindus, belittle them, and make the newly converted Muslims more passionate about their faith, and dissuade them from Hinduism.
What the Sangh chief is saying has a historical basis. In 1669, when many Hindu temples including Kashi Vishwanath were demolished during the reign of Aurangzeb, the key reason was that the faith of newly converted Muslims in Hindu religious symbols, methods, rituals, learning, and worship had not diminished. Such Muslims were also going to Gurukuls for education, studying Sanskrit, bathing in holy lakes, and praying to goddess Sheetala to ward off smallpox. A fanatical ruler like Aurangzeb felt that if this situation prevailed, then because of not being able to pay the sword or jizya tax, these newly converted Muslims could revert to Hinduism or would remain Muslims only in name. In such a situation, how would Aurangzeb’s dream of bringing the whole of India under Islam be fulfilled. Under this fanatical thinking, he demolished many temples, demolished schools, and made the collection of jizya stricter, so that it would become difficult to remain a Hindu, and the newly converted Muslims would see the advantages of adopting Islam and the disadvantages of reverting to Hinduism.
Bhagwat also held up the option of “ghar wapasi” (homecoming) for those who became Muslims out of compulsion and appealed to Hindus to adopt such people with an open heart. He also advised those who want to remain in Islam, to hold on to the basic element of Indianness; after all that has been the identity of India for thousands of years. In this context, he emphasised on maintaining the old customs and clothing, rather than feeling compelled to follow the customs and clothing imposed by foreign invaders. The fundamentalist Maulanas or Muslim leaders may see what Bhagwat is saying as a threat to their trade, but the world’s largest Muslim country is a great example of this. Despite accepting Islam, the people of Indonesia did not shun their heritage and culture. Their names are still Hindu-like, Ramayana ballets are held all over Indonesia, Hindu temples are built in various parts including Bali, the name of their national airlines is still Garuda, and key leaders have names like Megawati and Sukarno. It is not that after accepting Islam, they turned Arabic in their names and clothing. Wearing the pyjamas above the ankles or insisting on the hijab are indicators of this mentality, that too when a country like Saudi Arabia itself promotes pictures of women-only aircraft crews to the whole world to improve its image, and that too of young women without hijab.
As far as Gyanvapi is concerned, the entire Sangh Parivar, including Bhagwat, believes that it is a sacred centre of Hindu faith, just like Ayodhya or Mathura. These issues should be resolved through negotiations or legal processes. As far as the Sangh itself being directly involved in this is concerned, the RSS has already clarified that the movement of Ram Janmabhoomi had started historically, in which the Sangh had joined in through the VHP, keeping in mind the public sentiments. There is no need for the Sangh to be involved in the movement for Gyanvapi and Mathura Krishna temple, because Hindu society can take care of it itself, and has become quite more aware of everything.
On the matter of raising questions about the existence of various mosques, the Sangh’s thinking is that it will not be of any use to create a dispute about every religious place. Those that are important, big centres of faith, must be given due attention, but it is not proper to quarrel just for the sake of creating a controversy. This does not mean that the Sangh has no interest in the issue of Gyanvapi and Mathura, or that it criticises those who are pursuing this. The Sangh’s view is only that it is fine to contest on important issues, and places, but unnecessary disputes cannot be created everywhere.
At the same time, the doors of the courts are open for every person, and apart from Gyanvapi and Mathura, if there is evidence for other religious places and the courts admit them, then people will take the judicial route, and the Sangh will not oppose them. The only issue is that by raising thousands of cases simultaneously, the disputes are not going to get resolved smoothly. India’s path to becoming Vishwaguru should not be impeded by these controversies that are being noticed by the rest of the world. India will be strong only when there will be internal peace, people of all sects will work together to take it forward with the basic value system of the country. This is the thinking of the Sangh, to which Bhagwat is giving voice; there is no need to read anything more in his statement than this. There is also a need for religious organisations like Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and intellectuals like Shashi Tharoor to take lessons from this, as they seem to care only for Islam and Muslim interests, not inclusiveness like Bhagwat.
Read all the Latest India News here
Comments
0 comment