An open letter to RSS Sarsanghchalak, Shri Mohan Bhagwat on why a Hindutvadi should not be the Prime Minister of India.
To,
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Sarsanghchalak, Shri Mohan Bhagwat ji,
Namaskar.
I was
not surprised to read your comments in newspapers that it was not
necessary to be a secular person to occupy the office of Prime Minister
in a Democratic-Secular India. As per the press reports you wondered why
a Hinduwadi could not become PM of India.[i] I
am sure you understand better than me that being a Hinduwadi is not the
same as professing Hindu religion. Our national leaders like Mahatma
Gandhi, Sardar Patel, Jawaharlal Nehru, Subhashchander Bose, Rammanohar
Lohia, Rajguru, Sukhdev and many-many more were Hindu by faith but not
Hinduwadi. In fact, Mahatma Gandhi, a great practitioner of Hind
religion, was brutally assassinated for not being a Hinduwadi by a gang
having allegiance to Hindu Mahasabha and RSS. Surely, by Hinduwadi you
mean a believer in Hindutva, a kind of political Hinduism, outlined by
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar ji in his book Hindutva[ii] and
later developed by RSS ideologues like M. S. Golwalkar. You will agree
with me that RSS, under your command currently, has been a prominent
flag-bearer of Hindutva since its inception in 1925.
I
feel before arriving at the conclusion that there is no harm in
allowing person/s who believes in Hindutva to become PM of India we will
have to understand what Hindutva is. You will agree with me that we
need to understand whether Hindutva is compatible with principles of
Democracy, Justice, Egalitarianism &Secularism. In this connection,
please, allow me to scrutinize some of the original documents and
sources which legitimately belong to the RSS or its brother
organizations like Hindu Mahasabha. If you find that I am dishonest in
referring to these or misrepresenting facts, you will be at liberty to
initiate defamation process against me.
DOES HINDUTVA STAND FOR A TWO-NATION THEORY?
Bhagwat
ji! I would like to refresh your memory that both the originator of
Hindutva, V. D. Savarkar ji and its flag-bearer, RSS earlier and under
your command too had and have unequivocal faith in in Two-nation theory;
that Hindus and Muslims are two different nations. While Muslim League
under the leadership of Mohammed Ali Jinnah resolved to have a separate
homeland for Muslims of India in the form of Pakistan in 1940, Savarkar
propagated as early as 1937 that Hindus and Muslims were two different
nations. While delivering presidential address to the 19th Hindu
Mahasabha session at Ahmedabad Savarkar ji unequivocally declared:
“As
it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India,
several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing
that India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could
be welded thus for the mere wish to do so. These were well meaning but
unthinking friends take their dreams for realities. That is why they are
impatient of communal tangles and attribute them to communal
organizations. But the solid fact is that the so-called communal
questions are but a legacy handed down to us by centuries of cultural,
religious and national antagonism between the Hindus and Moslems...Let
us bravely face unpleasant facts as they are. India cannot be assumed
today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation, but on the contrary there
are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Moslems, in India.”[iii]
Sir!
Has it not been the cardinal principle of your organization also? The
RSS following into the foot-steps of Savarkar ji, always rejected the
idea that Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians together constituted a
nation. Your English organ,Organizer, on the very eve of Independence, (August 14, 1947) editorially (titledWhither) underlined its belief in Two-Nation theory once again in the following words:
0
“Let
us no longer allow ourselves to be influenced by false notions of
nationhood. Much of the mental confusion and the present and future
troubles can be removed by the ready recognition of the simple fact that
in Hindusthan only the Hindus form the nation and the national
structure must be built on that safe and sound foundation…the nation
itself must be built up of Hindus, on Hindu traditions, culture, ideas
and aspirations.”
Bhagwat
ji! Please, help our country to understand how the believers in
Hindutva are different from pre-partition Muslim Leaguers who once
played prominent role in dismembering India.
DOES HINDUTVA RESPECT NATIONAL FLAG AND DEMOCRACY?
Sir,
it may not be out of context to know your attitude towards National
Flag which represents a Democratic-Secular India. It is important to
know it from the head of organizations which swears by Hindutva. I would
like to draw your attention to the following statement which appeared
in the English organOrganizer, again on the eve of Independence:
“The people who have come to power by the kick of fate may give in our hands the Tricolour but it never [sic]
be respected and owned by Hindus. The word three is in itself an evil,
and a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad
psychological effect and is injurious to a country.” [iv]
Can those who denigrate the National Flag in such foul language be allowed to rule this country?
Sarsanghchalak
ji! Lay persons like me need to know from practitioners of Hindutva
like you what you think of Democracy. I would like to draw your
attention to a statement made by second Sarsanghchalak of the RSS and
its most prominent ideologue till date, M. S. Golwalkar. As per the RSS
archives Golwalkar ji while addressing a group of 1350 top level cadres
of the RSS in 1940 declared:
“RSS
inspired by one flag, one leader and one ideology is lighting the flame
of Hindutva in each and every corner of this great land.”[v]
Learned
Bhagwat ji! This slogan of one flag, one leader and one ideology was
also the battle cry of Fascist and Nazi parties of Europe in the first
half of 20thcentury. What they did to democracy is well-known
to this world. Can those who believe in such totalitarian designs be
allowed to rule our country?
DOES HINDUTVA STAND FOR CASTEISM?
Sarsanghchalak
ji! You will agree with me that RSS and its brother organizations who
want to have a Hindutva rule in India hated the Constitution of India
which was drafted under the guidance of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar. When the
Constituent Assembly of India had finalized the Constitution of India
RSS was not happy. Its organ, Organizer in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained:
“But
in our constitution there is no mention of the unique constitutional
development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before
Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as
enunciated in theManusmriti excite
the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and
conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.”
Bhagwat ji! It may not be a secret to you that Savarkar ji remained a great protagonist of Casteism and worshipper of Manusmriti throughout
his life. The institutions of Casteism and Untouchability were the
outcome of Manu’s thought about which Savarkar said the following:
“Manusmriti is
that scripture which is most worshipable after Vedas for our Hindu
Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our
culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has
codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the
rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice
are based on Manusmriti. TodayManusmriti is Hindu Law.”[vi]
Sir!
What kind of civilization the RSS under your command and under Hindutva
ideology wants to build by enforcing the laws of Manu, can be known by
having a glimpse of the laws prescribed by Manu for the
Dalits/Untouchables and women. Some of these dehumanizing and degenerate
laws, which are presented here, are self-explanatory.
LAWS OF MANU CONCERNING DALITS/UNTOUCHABLES.
(1) For
the sake of the prosperity of the worlds (the divine one) caused the
Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Sudra to proceed from his
mouth, his arm, his thighs and his feet.
(2) One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sudras, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes.
(3) Once-born
man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall
have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin.
(4) If
he mentions the names and castes (gati) of the (twice-born) with
contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into
his mouth.
(5) If he arrogantly teaches Brahmanas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears.
(6) With
whatever limb a man of a low caste does hurt to (a man of the three)
highest (castes), even that limb shall be cut off; that is the teaching
of Manu.
(7) He
who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in
anger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off.
(8) A
low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of
a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the
king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed.
(9) Let
him never slay a Brahmana, though he have committed all (possible)
crimes; let him banish such an (offender), leaving all his property (to
him) and (his body) unhurt.
LAWS OF MANU CONCRNING WOMEN
1. Day
and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their
(families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they
must be kept under one’s control.
2. Her
father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in
youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for
independence.
3. Women
must particularly be guarded against evil inclinations, however
trifling (they may appear); for, if they are not guarded, they will
bring sorrow on two families.
4. Considering that the highest duty of all castes, even weak husbands (must) strive to guard their wives.
5. No man can completely guard women by force; but they can be guarded by the employment of the (following) expedients:
6. Let
the (husband) employ his (wife) in the collection and expenditure of
his wealth, in keeping (everything) clean, in (the fulfillment of)
religious duties, in the preparation of his food, and in looking after
the household utensils.
7. Women,
confined in the house under trustworthy and obedient servants, are not
(well) guarded; but those who of their own accord keep guard over
themselves, are well guarded.
8. Women
do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age;
(thinking), ‘(It is enough that) he is a man,’ they give themselves to
the handsome and to the ugly.
9. Through
their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their
natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands,
however carefully they may be guarded in this (world).
10. (When
creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their)
seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and
bad conduct.
11. For
women no (sacramental) rite (is performed) with sacred texts, thus the
law is settled; women (whoare) destitute of strength and destitute of
(the knowledge of) Vedic texts, (are as impure as) falsehood (itself),
that is a fixed rule.
I would like to remind you that a copy of Manusmriti was burnt as a protest in the presence of Dr. BR Ambedkar during historic Mahad agitation in December, 1927.
Sir!
You will agree with me that Golwalkar ji was the most prominent
theorist of the RSS and he like Savarkar ji, believed that Casteism was a
natural integral part of Hinduism. In fact, Golwalkar went to the
extent of declaring that Casteism was synonymous with the Hindu nation.
According to him, the Hindu people are none else but
The Virat Purusha, the Almighty manifesting himself […] [according to purusha sukta] sun and moon are his eyes, the stars and the skies are created from hisnabhi [navel]
and Brahmin is the head, Kshatriya the hands, Vaishya the thighs and
Shudra the feet. This means that the people who have this fourfold
arrangement, i.e., the Hindu People, is [sic] our God. This
supreme vision of Godhead is the very core of our concept of ‘nation’
and has permeated our thinking and given rise to various unique concepts
of our cultural heritage.[vii]
Sarsanghchalak
ji! The truth is that Hindutva is nothing but an ideology which stands
for totalitarianism, Casteism and injustice. I would conclude with the
words of Dr. B. R. Ambedkar who said:
“If
Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest
calamity for this country…It is a menace to liberty, equality and
fraternity. On that account it is incompatible with democracy. Hindu Raj
must be prevented at any cost.”[viii]
Bhagwat
ji! Reality is that Hindutva is not dangerous for minorities only but
also for vast majority of Hindus, specially, Dalits and women.
I would be eagerly looking forward to receive your kind response to issues raised in this letter.
Thanking you.
Yours,
Shamsul Islam
Delhi, 25-06-2012
