Stray thoughts of Dr. Y. V. Rao -2
Dr. Yerneni
Venkateswara Rao
M.Sc., Ph. D
Retired Principal
Akkineni Nageswara Rao College
GUDIVADA- A.P
yernenivrao@gmail.com
B1-131
Conscientious commoners conditioned by the
thinking that they represent no more than themselves and their families at the
most have many scruples in criticising the likes of Mulayam Singh and Laloo Yadav,
who, never given to the habit of allowing themselves to suffer from such qualms
of conscience, freely dole out their diatribes against BJP for its divisive,
communal and revanchist politics. The paradox of the two self styled champions
of Other Backward Classes (OBCs), which form part of the larger Hindu community
stridently criticizing BJP for espousing the cause of the latter which is by
far the bigger of the two constituents of the Indian polity is conveniently
overlooked by the so called secularists and secular parties like the Congress
and the Communists and their fellow-travellers who, particularly the latter
swear by and insist on the scientific approach to the solution of problems
plaguing the society and the nation. They even join them in their tirades
against the communal BJP.
Is
it not this distorted view of things and mixed up priorities that are the root
cause of our present predicament? Is not the selective application of rational
analysis that lacks balance and equity worse than no analysis. It is certainly
a sin to posit one community against another as the BJP is trying to do. But is
it any the lesser sin or evil to set one section of the community against
another.
To
say that both the communal frenzy and the canker of casteism are obscurantist
forces out to tear apart the social fabric and cause untold misery to the
innocent people is to stress the obvious. Is it not because of this that Mr.
Justice DA Desai warned that “caste considerations, caste and communal
consciousness are the anti thesis of secularism”, while Mr. Justice VR Krishna
Iyer pointed out that the most alarming virus inducing communal malignancy in
the national system is casteism?
And
is it not to prevent fragmentation of society rooted in caste based and
religion based exclusivity that Gandhiji laid down his life? Is it not caste
system that has alienated one man from another by raising insurmountable social
walls between them? Is it not caste based stratification and all the prejudices
and hostilities which go with it that make the communal divide and its
associated evils seem so very natural in our society? And again, is it not
casteism that has given this noble land the ugliest face among nations of the
world? Pray, what makes it the lesser evil than communalism? Shouldn’t a
genuine fight against communalism attack casteism as well? Then , why this
cynical disregard for truth and why this rank opportunism? Can there be any
more glaring and grotesque example of double standards than this? If casteism
strikes at the root of social cohesion at the micro level, insidiously
effecting every individual everywhere in the country by constantly emphasizing
his/her clannishness, communalism does so at the macro level fortifying every
moment the invidious ‘us-them’ divide between masses of people by
creating/fomenting occasional conflagrations here and there but both leading to
the same end result: a fractured society.
To ignore one or the other of these perils is simply suicidal.
The
creed of both being thus essentially disunity and national fragmentation, the
choice boils down to one of community based or caste based vivisector of the
Indian polity. It is no different from choosing between tweedledum and
tweedledee, a pointless exercise indeed.
The
nation being virtually an organism, can it survive for long if its various
organs start fighting among themselves? A murder is a murder and a crime a
crime whether committed in the name of community or caste and to pretend
otherwise, reveals / displays a diseased state of mind. (or is symptomatic of a
diseased mind.) Besides , no rational approach worth its salt and least of all
scientific approach can countenance setting man against man. To say the least,
it is nothing but a crime against humanity.
That being so, trying to project the two Yadavs as the saviours of
secularism and the BJP as the satan of communalism as is being done by the
communists and pseudo secularists, who imagine/presume that they have exclusive
copyright on secularism will be nothing other than stretching these terms out
of shape and thwarting truth from making its appearance. Yet, it goes on.
Bitter though this may be, the truth is that no political party in this
country is free from the blemish of displaying commitment to secularism on a
selective basis and Orwellian double-think—the faculty of simultaneously
harbouring two conflicting beliefs—when it suits its convenience and cannot
absolve itself of the guilt of undermining India’s age old tradition of
syncretism and eclecticism and tolerance. Without exception, all political
parties are guilty of lapsing into selective amnesia and turning their back on
what needs to be done.
Wreckers of social harmony or national
integrity are wreckers, be they of secular brand or of the communal variety ,
constituting a positive peril to people’s welfare and the country’s future.
Hence, they should not only be shunned but also fought against by all right
thinking Indians.
Is
it not the height of absurdity to expect people to believe that fragmentation
of society on communal lines is somehow more sinful or heinous than that on
casteist considerations , a thesis propounded by those whose raison d’etre is
the historical schism based on economic disparities between different sections
of the society and who cannot see anything except through the prism of class
conflict and endorsed by those who would have no compunctions about fielding
candidates in elections, and appealing to the electorate strictly on religious
and caste lines as if the real point is not fragmentation per se but its basis,
that too the one the self styled secularists perceive as more detestable or
obnoxious than others at that point of time? Thus, the fight is not so much
between the secularists and the communalists as between vivisectors of
different brands out to fragment society in the name of this or that issue or
cause. When we should be fiercely battling the canker of fragmentation,
whipping up anti-this or anti-that rhetoric adding to the already existing
cancer of divisiveness rather than solving the problem by bringing the
necessary will and vision to the task seems to be their pre-eminent concern.
The sort of schism politics that has of late taken centre stage in our country
has not only given rise to pseudo secularism but is about to usher in an ugly
phase of pseudo democracy also. Is it any way to build bridges of understanding
between different communities and castes, and sects and groups, which is the
crying need of the hour, and promote and strengthen democracy?
Our
secularism has thus been reduced to Orwellian double-speak –it says one thing
and means exactly the opposite! Some secularism it is!
Thanks to our crafty politicians, it is hard
to think of any other word in the entire lexicon that has suffered such
grotesque distortion and massive abuse and undergone such verbal stretching as
secularism, which today has no more than a vague and wondering definition with
uncertain connotations and shifting meanings depending upon who uses it. The
elastic flexibility with which the term is used these days would put a rubber
band to shame.
What
is even worse is that they have converted it into a mischievous slogan and
presented it as a force contrary to moral principles and spiritual values. In
short, it has become the loosest label of its kind.
Can
anything be more ludicrous and nauseating than this parade of hypocrisy and
cynicism? Will the political parties ever realize that the true mark of
secularism is the willingness to deal with each individual on his/her own terms
irrespective of caste, creed or community? Will they ever commit themselves to
secularism as a matter of political decency, constitutional concord and
national obligation rather than as a tool of electoral expediency or a weapon
for settling scores against one another/among themselves? Will they recognize that the need of the hour
is for the philosophy of inclusiveness, incorporation and assimilation to
replace that of exclusivity, insularity, segregation and alienation?
So much for the opportunism and hypocrisy
of the cynical, mendacious and manipulative politicians and their schism
politics. Now shifting the focus to the other players in the frightening drama
of fratricide, one feels obliged to say that it is time that the Hindu zealots
and extremists must realize that religious tolerance has been the basic tenet
of our perennial philosophy and the bedrock of India’s ancient civilization,
and that it is not the sign of wisdom to go against it by dwelling on the
divisions of the past or getting mired in the past and its animosities, and
wilfully indulging in negative acts like opening up the forgotten wounds of the
past and taking revenge for what are perceived as historical injustices. To
entertain and propagate the thought that the survival of the Hindu community is
possible only through the annihilation of everything antithetical to its
culture , religion and social norms is nothing short of a deliberate distortion
of truth as well as contemporary reality and a sinister and diabolical design
to drive innocent people into primitive and atavistic modes of conduct and
behaviour verging on inhumanity which deserves to be condemned with utmost
contempt and outright disgust. Further, such a view flies in the face of the
incontrovertible, historical fact that India is a veteran survivor,
civilization that has blossomed in the tradition of openness and dynamism
repeatedly, disproved all Cassandras. Being the single largest community in the
country, it is the bounden duty of the Hindus to eschew minority baiting and
communal chauvinism and do everything possible to make others feel at home and
ensure that all Indians work together with mutual trust and cooperation for a
better tomorrow, and live in peace and prosperity as citizens of the Indian
republic and as true democrats. Likewise , the self styled secularists, secular
activists and left liberals should bear in mind that while our constitution has
been based on secularism or Dharmanirapekshata, meaning neutrality towards all
religions. Our society is steeped in religion and our modes of thinking are
governed by religious feelings; temples, mosques, churches and gurudwaras
continue to maintain their hold on Indian imagination, and celebration of
religious festivals and observation of rights and rituals is part and parcel of
our day to day life. In short, there is no aspect of life in India that is
not inextricably intertwined with religion; the intertwining of sacred and
social values and of society and religion is an inalienable part of everyday
experience. None can ignore this contemporary fact as well as the historical
and cultural realities of India
ostrich like, nor wish it away nor can make it bow out. So shedding some of
their hypocrisy, they should stop tilting at self created phantoms of a
particular brand and start promoting secular reconciliation, understanding and
tolerance, amity and friendship and coherence and concord among different
religious groups, castes and communities in the country.
Another group that needs must find a place here is the section of the
human rights fraternity and civil liberties advocates with “a libidinous
fascination with the pathologies of state power”(Upendra Baxi) who do not see
any contradiction in their jumping on to any perceived excess of state power on
the one hand and their joining the self styled secularists in demanding that
the state employ coercive force against those they brand as ‘fascist’, for
instance, Hindutva groups , on the other. Those who rouse people’s passions by
appealing to their baser instincts in the name of religion not only offend
others but also alienate all right thinking people among their co religionists
and harm their own cause. Need they be reminded that reasoned debate rather
than irrational posturing strengthens the causes of human rights and civil
liberties as well as secularism and help meet the situation better by
illumining our path and guiding us to more civilized forms, processes and
institutional structures and arrangements.
Galling though this may be to the Hindus, it’s a fact that many of them
who were hardly conscious of their religious affiliation till as recently as a
few years ago are nowadays finding themselves reflecting more and more on it ,
thanks largely to the pseudo secularists’ highly provocative and blatantly
partisan posturing as evidenced by the full throated fulminations ,
self-righteous indignation and vehement denunciations against one brand of
fundamentalism and a deafening silence with a total lack of so much as a feigned
frown and a muted murmur , leave alone a
murmur of a fight at others, and their ignorant diktats and arrogant fatwas as
to who are secularists and who are not. (It is enough if others vouch for their
secular credentials and declare themselves as secularists but the Hindus must
in addition, demonstrate that they actually despise Hinduism before being
allowed to join their ranks) as also their pontifical pronouncements on what
constitutes Indian culture, history and civilization and what have you and what
determines their contours, content and character as if they own this country
and everything about it, and those with other persuasions especially they
Hindus are here on sufferance, a stance no less ludicrous and disgusting than
the Hindu fundamentalist’s pretense to authority to dictate to others as if
they were the soul defenders and custodians , nay, owners of Hinduism and
everything Hindu including Hindustan, and others are here again on sufferance.
Through their several omissions and commissions, they have irritated and
offended decent people hurting the feelings of some and shocking the
sensibilities of others, and drove even some middle of the road Hindus into the
fundamentalist fringes of the community. Admittedly, this is not their
objective but an intended consequence of their immature attitude of mind and
ham handed / sledge hammer approach to a delicate problem highlighting once
again the high cost of thoughtless, hasty and haughty actions .
The greatest service that our misguided ,
overzealous and hyperactive Hindu brethren would do to Hinduism in particular
and the country in general is to shed their majoritarian world view by
replacing their narrowly defined Hindutva with the broad based concept of
Bharateeyata. And make themselves good Hindus, for then, they according to
Mahatma Gandhi will be good muslims, good Christians , good Buddhists , Jains ,
Sikhs and Parsis too thereby putting an end to the religious strife that raises
its ugly head every now and then , forcing every Indian to bow/lower his head
in humiliation before others. And what our hypersensitive , highly biased and
over enthusiastic secular brothers could do, by way of an equally exalted
service to our mother land, is to clear up the cobwebs in their mind about the
definition of secularism, disabuse themselves of the notion that it is negation
of religion or prohibition of the study of different religions and admit that
it is neutrality towards all religions in the narrow sense and equal treatment
and respect for all religions and non-discrimination on the basis of faith in
its broader connotation and act according to either definition , preferably the
latter, instead of tilting too far towards one or the other side as they tend
to do today—Hindu bashing and minority appeasement as a routine—thereby
depriving themselves of their democratic right to be heard, let alone getting
approval of what they say from their fellow country men. The sooner we are rid
of this dual embarrassment of hanging our heads in shame before others and withholding
the courtesy of paying attention to what one of us is trying to tell us , the
better it is for everyone concerned and the nation at large.
The
truth is that neither the fundamentalist fanatics can make a dent on the age
old tradition of ‘Sarva Dharma samabhava’(equal treatment and respect for all
faiths and religions) nor is there need for the pseudo secularists , often
given to fanatical fervor to do anything to repair it. “It (Secularism) has
been the signature tune of India’s civilization and culture”, as rightly
asserted by our prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee , in his address to the 57th
session of the UN general Assembly. As far as it is concerned, the acrobatics
of either can neither set the clock back nor push it forward ; it will be the
same for it is firmly rooted in the hearts and minds of the people. Secularism
is integral to the Hindu religion and the Hindu way of life with eclecticism
and pacifism rooted in a culture of harmony amidst diversity as its
cornerstone. Multiplicity or plurality is its governing principle and
syncretism and eclecticism are its defining/core elements. Like the majestic Himalayas it has weathered many a gale and storm,
hurricane and blizzard and withstood other such upheavals and onslaughts with
no trace of damage suffered nor any scars left. In fact, our composite
culture with a capacity to assimilate
and integrate thoughts of different religions has been the real strength of
this nation with its unparalleled diversity and enormous differentials.
They both should realize sooner rather than later that their
hypersensitivity and hyperactivity , besides being pointless , result only in
strengthening the hands of anti-social and anti-national elements as also the
fanatic fringes of the different communities whom they think they are fighting
against , thereby weakening the country by jeopardising its interests and
undermining its pluralistic stature and ethos, and presenting it in a poor
light to others abroad. The need of the hour is a vision with inter faith unity
, inter caste amity, social harmony and national integrity as its shining
lights and the glittering jewels like the stars in a constellation and the
lobes in a corolla. Neither has showed it, not even an inclination towards it,
as yet.
Perverted and ignorant as they are, neither qualify for being the
upholders of the shining values like Satyam(truth), Shivam(goodness),
Sundaram(beauty), Ahimsa(non-violence), karuna(Compassion), Abhayam
(fearlessness), Arjivam(straightforwardness) of our lofty culture in its
pristine purity and highest glory although they think otherwise. Be that as it
may, these values enshrined as they are in the hearts of millions upon millions
of Indians have moulded their minds and lives and guide them still, albeit
unbeknownst to most. Nevertheless, they serve as beacon lights illuminating
their paths and steer them clear of the snares and traps set by those that are
only too keen to don the mantle of a protector or people’s rights and interests
and masquerade as the guardians of this community or that, the saviours of this
or that caste or caste group or champions of one or the other of the several
competing isms, contesting theories and conflicting ideologies for their own
selfish ends.
These luminous values that India traditionally nurtured and
that still light the paths of many symbolize all that is great and good in
humanity. To say that these high values constitute the core content of value
based education is to stress the obvious. But what is not so obvious is that
without the knowledge of moral sanction behind them and the underlying
spiritual foundation these values can scarcely be achieved in actual practise,
much less lived. Hence arises the need for the study and teaching of religious
philosophies in a genuinely secular environment in which all faiths and
religions are treated as equals and all accorded the same regard and respect
with none discriminated against or stigmatized on the basis of his/her
religion. Knowledge of different religions and their basic tenets not only help
one realize that the essence of every religion is the same and that there is no
room for ill will and hatred among various communities but also provide the
much needed moral sanction and spiritual basis for the system of values we
cherish thereby enabling us to live those noble values and principles more
willingly and with greater ease and felicity.
It
should however, be not forgotten here that those who see their God in the
details might vehemently dispute the claim , especially the bit about religions
being fundamentally the same, by pooh-poohing it as a wholly unwarranted and totally ill founded
conclusion and brand it as blatant lie
and dismiss it as a dangerous illusion, which is both insulting to human
intellect and offending to human dignity, but when seen through the
lens/glasses of toleration one cannot but notice a huge chunk of truth in it.
After all, is it ever possible for us to keep our sanity intact and carry on
our existence meaningfully and purposefully sans such glasses in this complex
world with all its jagged edges and jarring noted? Differences have to be
understood and respected, and true tolerance requires living with difference.
It is the capacity not to overlook or ignore the existing differences but to
harmonize them as integral parts of a bigger picture that is life, or atleast
accept them as consequences of others’ right to be different. It is somewhat
akin to the dexterity of an accomplished artist to coherently mix and match the
contrasting shades and complementary colours and hues in a
beautiful(pulchritudinous) painting in moments of heightened awareness and
creative exuberance.
As
inheritors of that noble culture and great /vibrant civilization, well known
for its dynamism, reliance and capacity to bounce back in the face of adverse
circumstances, it should not be difficult for us to discern the need of the
hour and rise to the occasion. What the nation needs now is that toleration,
that incorporation and integration that lead to harmonious co existence and not
religious bigotry nor dogmatic approach in matters of faith nor denial or
negation of religion as such which tear apart the social fabric into shreds.
Even a moment of honest introspection with the right attitude of mind,
imbued with truth, love , tolerance, understanding, goodness, compassion and
empathy will at once demolish the us-them divide in us that separates others
from us and reveal our essential oneness and identity with them, and if only we
care enough, we can convert that insight into a living truth that modifies our
world view and outlook on life in a wholesome way under the benign influence of
such a new awareness abjuring what impedes inter-group solidarity and espousing
what promotes understanding and harmony among communities , in short, nourishing
what unites us and eschewing what separates us, and ensuring that truth and
love prevails over lies and hatred will be the guiding principles of everyday
conduct of each of us, irrespective of our religious, social and political
affiliations , and as an inevitable corollary weaving a strong durable secular
fabric will be that much easier.
That way, we would be both good human beings and true Indians besides
being genuine Hindus and authentic secularists.
B1-132
Between the loud lunged demagogue leaning
on flaming rhetoric and fiery rigmarole on populist and factious issues to
rouse raw passions in the unthinking masses by appealing to their baser
instincts and the quiet intellectual relying on argumentative skills and
cogency of presentation of facts about issues concerning today and better
tomorrow to guide them towards harmony, peace and prosperity by appealing to
their finer instincts. The former always has the edge on the latter in an
immature democracy; while the latter’s supremacy is the natural outcome in and
a sure sign of a mature democracy.
B1-133
An honest but ineffective communicator
through speech and/or writing may or may not be good either to himself or to
the society whereas a dishonest but effective communicator through either/both
media is a positive menace to the society, for the latter, through his
self-promoting bonhomie, feel-good rhetoric and ability to turn on the taps of
extempore oratorical flourishes or prolific literary flashes or both can easily
seduce/mislead and dominate it to the point of enslavement by telling each of
his divergent constituencies exactly what they want to hear.
<<<<<< >>>>>>>
