Tehelka, Modi, Gujarat Carnage- Hindu response

Tehelka has created quite a stir but it died down eventually. It exposed the people behind the Gujarat carnage in 2002. At that time nearly 750 Muslims were killed in a state sponsored arson in the state in retaliation to Godhara incident in which 55 Kar sevak died in the burning of a bogey of a train. These Kar Sevaks (volunteers) were returning after offering their services at Ayodhya, where a mosque built by Musllim ruler Babar, was demolished by Hindus in 1991.In response to Godhara incident , allegedly Mr. Narendra Modi , Chief Minister of Gujarat, let loose the forces of arson on Muslims in the state holding them responsible for Godhara carnage. The entire Muslim community was held responsible for killing of Hindu kar sevaks in the train. For three days the state administration did not take any strict action and the Hindu goons had their field day. But it is not that simple – 250 Hindus also died in three days, indicating a violent retaliation by Muslims goons and a firing by the police. The army was also called out. After some days reports were lodged with police and cases went on tortuous journeys in Indian court famous for their legendry delays. However not more then 15 convictions have taken place in Gujarat carnage case due to usual lack of evidences and witnesses.

The root cause of this carnage may traced to Ayodhya demolition of Babri Masjid. This also makes holes in the theory that the Hindus and Muslims lived peacefully with each other under Muslim rulers for 600 years. Actually they lived with each other as rulers and subject with hegemony of Muslims. In 1947, India got the independence from British empire with bifurcation of the land between Hindu and Muslim communities. One part was Hindu dominated India and other was Muslim dominated Pakistan. Pakistan was further divided into two part in 1971 – Pakistan and Bangla Desh. The very reason for partition of India was the unwillingness of Muslims to live with Hindus in a democracy where they would be ruled by majority Hindu community. They could not be subordinates to their earlier subordinates!!!! A proof of ever existing general social harmony between Hindus and Muslims!

Both the communities have hidden hatred for each other due to past. And people talk of composite culture!!!!!!

The destruction of Babri Mosque was the result of hidden resentment of Hindus against their former rulers, the Muslims. It was for British to end the rule of Muslims over Hindus and establish India as a colony for themselves. India got independence in 1947 with bifurcation which turned into trifurcation in 1971 with recognition of Bangla Desh as a separate country which was carved out of the then Pakistan.

The resentment against Muslims started to come to surface with the development of theory of Hindutva by Savarkar in 1936 and Guruji Golwalkar who formed RSS (Rastriya SvyamSevak Sangh ) in 1936 also. The RSS was started as non-political party as a social organization but the sole aim was to oppose the Muslims not to oppose the British rule. The Hindutvavadi were ready to cross swords with a community no longer in power but not with the colonizers! It is similar with the case of Tulsidas , the great poet of Avadhi (a dilect of Hindi), who wrote the Hindu epic of Lord Ram in Avadhi. His creation is known as Ramcharit Manas. Tulsidas wrote openly against lower castes with a vengeance but not a single word against the rulers, the Muslims. Both the time powerless communities were targeted !! Nothing was written against the powerful people!!!

Anyway the political branch of RSS kept growing and emerged as BJP ( Bhartiya Janata Party) at national level in 1990s. The forces unleashed by history and exploited by BJP and RSS demolished the Babri Masjid at Ayodhya. This mosque was looked at by the Hindus as symbol of insult and subjugation. It may be noted that the Hindus never gathered the courage to demolish this assumed piece of insult during last 400 years. Only when they came to power in a democratic system they dared to do this. The Muslims came to be a weaker community because they were in a minority in a democratic system.

The central govt looked on in silence and BJP govt in Uttar Pradesh orchestrated the demolition of the mosque turned into an insult symbol for Hindus. The same mosque was a religion and honor symbol for Muslims. This Babri masjid was built by the first Mughal king Babar from Chagtai lineage of Tamerlen and Genghis Khan . Both are known as blood thirsty tyrants with Gengis Khan having no parallel in the world history. He had Tatar blood from maternal side. He came to India at the invitation of Rana Sanga, a Rajput King in Rajasthan, to defeat the then Sultan Ibrahim Lodhi with whom Rana Sanga was having a running enmity. Ibrahim Lodhi, an Afghan, was ruling over the Muslim Kingdom over north India; this kingdom is known in history as Delhi Sultnat. Babar defeated Lodhi in the famous first battle of Panipat and captured Delhi throne. Rana Sanga was under the impression that Babar would leave after defeating Lodhi and that would leave Delhi sultnat free for him with he could capture with ease. But Babar came for good and also defeated Rana Sanga in a subsequent war of Kanhwa. He established a dynasty in India known as Mughal dynasty which was destined to last for full 200 years. The mosque at Ayodhya which is regarded as a holy place by millions of Hindus being the supposed birth place of Lord Ram (an incarnation of Lord Vishnu) was built by Babar.

Though the advocates of harmony between Hindus and Muslims harp on its ever existence the destruction of Hindu temples belies this. Following the law of the land under the coercive powers of state can not really be called a socially harmonious state. The Hindus compromised and got accustomed to their second class citizen status. But underlying antagonism was always there. And this underlying current of antagonism based on insults heaped upon Hindus erupted in 1991 in Ayodhya under the state govt. headed by BJP, the Hindu party. The philosophy of Hindutva grants second class citizenship to Muslim population. This can be stated to be direct confrontation to Indian Constitution which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion.

The opposition to demolition of Babri mosque from Hindus was by and large limited. It was limited to so called secular mainstream media consisting a few television channels and five –six major English newspapers. By and large the Hindu majority remained neutral or remained silent supporter of cause of Hindutva.

The absence of any opposition to demolition of this ancient relic (or cultural heritage) by Hindus, points towards clash of civilization in terms of Samuel P. Hutington. And this happened before Mr. Samuel P. Hutington could formulate his famous thesis about such confrontations.

In India the clash is not between Western Civilization and Muslim Civilization but between latter and Hindu civilization. The Hindu religious opposition to Muslim religion is now open and just not buried under the surface. The demolishers of cultural heritage (Babri mosque) have their own silent supporters which is clear in the absence of any outburst against this act of vandalism. The vandalism is actually supported by Hindus though nobody goes on record to say so, except very few. The Muslims on their side are not able to come out of their cocoon of holy Koran. They vehemently oppose the vandalism like all right minded people should do but their opposition is based on religious feeling which brings out the existence of fault lines along the religious frontiers. This also indicates absence of any general social harmony between these two religious communities. It is already said before that following the law of land under state’s coercive powers does not constitute a mutually harmonious way of living. The Hindu side refers it to as a demolition of disputed structure not an act of vandalism. This is in direct contravention to the concept of common culture.

One thing to be noted here is that generally the English media in India was anti-Hindutva and opposed the demolition of mosque. In doing so it opposed the Hindu thought of underlying current. Here we see Hindus against Hindus. Shall we call it an internal clash of civilization which is internal to Hindu society? We might as well do so.

Again with the sting operation by Tehelka led to repeat of the earlier sequences . Some supposedly vehement opposition by the secular media and secular forces and a feeble voice of protests by right minded people. And everything soon died out. The culprits or foot soldiers are, by and large, safe. There is no really effective demand for justice. Indeed this demolition and subsequent violence eruptions are not seen as a crime by Hindus. The state sponsored violence in Gujarat in aftermath of Godhara train buring incident is called as reaction to action. Thus any violence action by Muslims (planned or unplanned) will have a similar reaction. And the justice system has to look on as a bystander. The culprit/hero of the Gujarat carnage Modi is again likely to win the Gujarat election. His popularity among Gujarati Hindus has not gone down which indicates that his supporters look at the violent incidence against Muslims with vindication. The fault lines are complete along the religious lines. All the Muslims can do is to follow the law of land and give out an illusion of social harmony! No political party like Congress (ruling at the center) or any other party has come openly and vehemently in support of Tehelka sting, the Supreme Court is not interested in pursuing the case. The isolation of Muslims has come above the surface instead of lurking under it. All are like minded people!!!

Another thing which is to be seen that casteist Indian media is apparently taking sides of Muslim under the cover of secularism, anti-communalism and justice etc. The same casteist media does not provide any support to people suffering due to castesim. It blatantly denies the existence of caste discrimination but practices it nevertheless. When Mr. Kanshiram , the most notable leader of untouchables after B.R. Ambedkar died, it did not deserve a mention in the media. The political party he established , BSP bahujan Samaj Party, now hold the power in the larges state of India, Uttar Pradesh having a population of 160 millions. This man was supported by at lease 10 millions untouchables alone in Uttar Pradesh. And such a man gets one line mention on Television and Radio! And one line mention in newspapers on 9^th or 14^th page! And people of high castes get ream and reams of newspaper length and hour and hour on Television!

It is a strange case where a society does not like one of its members and flaunts the principles of secularism, equality and justice etc.

What shall we call it a case of clash of civilizations (Hindu and Muslim), along with a case of internal clash of civilization (traditional Hindus and secular Hindus) and a case of internal fractures of civilization (caste Hindus against untouchables.) ! Hindu response has such a convoluted structure!