India is passing through a baptism by fire as the Muslims, other minorities and large sections of Hindus castigate the present government for ‘intolerance’ in the Indian state. The situation turned turtle when the Bharatiya Janta Party( BJP) came to power in the Indian parliament with a splendid majority. This had never happened for the last 67 years when the Congress party in the main ruled India.
Even when Atal Vajpayee was the prime minister he ran the government with a fractured mandate. Thus, to so- called secularists the victory of the BJP, which espoused Hindu thoughts and dreams was like a red rag to a bull and a great orchestrated campaign of “intolerance” was started by these groups. The target was the BJP and it’s leader Narendra Modi: the aim being to somehow overthrow the elected government or at least make things so bad for them that they are defeated in the next election and presently cannot give effective government.
In a debate in parliament the CPI leader Mohammed Salim accused the Home Minister Rajnath Singh of making a statement that India now had a Hindu prime minister. Mohammed Salim was very theatrical in making his accusations and it was sad to know that Rajnath Singh denied the statements One got a feeling that to talk of Hindu Rashtra was a sin. Why should it be so?
A look back at history is essential for a further discussion. Till the 10th century when the Hindus ruled India, the only type of government in India was a Hindu Rashtra as the Indian kings upheld the supremacy of Hinduism and governed as per the rule of “dharma”. History records that despite being a Hindu Rashtra, there was freedom of worship and Jains, Buddhists and Muslims were free to worship their gods and idols. During this period the Parsi, the followers of Zoroaster also came and settled in India, to escape persecution by Muslims in Iran.
From the 10th century the Muslims conquered India. It started with the north and a few centuries later the South was also conquered and Muslim dynasties began to rule there. William Duff the eminent historian has brought out that this was the dark age of India and upward of 80 million Hindus were killed as a Islamic state was imposed over India. Hindus had to pay Jizziya ( tax on non Muslims) in their own land and were reduced to second class status. Hindu girls were abducted and made part of large harems.These are facts of history.
The sad part in all this, was the collaboration of many Hindu’s with the Muslims. Thus the army of Aurangzeb had a large number of Hindus and his finest general Raja Jai Singh was a Hindu. He was the man who even defeated Shivaji and made him sue for peace. Yet these privileged Hindus did nothing for the Hindu masses who toiled in a Muslim state. Even in deep South, Tippu Sultan destroyed thousands of temples and churches and forcibly circumcised and made Hindus eat beef. These are facts that cannot be denied.
The sum total is that Muslim rule was a nightmare and apart from some constructions of mosques and tombs, one cannot see what Muslim rule contributed. On the contrary French and Catholic Jesuits during this period in their journals have pointed out that Muslim rulers were in the habit of making large pyramids of Hindu skulls. Even the so called “great” Akbar is guilty of this nefarious practice.
From the 19th century, the British entered the scenario. Despite all the bad points of British rule which the Congress government is in the habit of pointing out, the English rule was a benevolent period. The population began to grow and Hindus got their rights back after 900 years. There was spread of education and the country was linked for the first time in 4000 years of history as a single entity. The Muslims who had been defeated by the English, obviously sulked as the Hindus marched ahead. But again the British at no time had more than 100,000 of their clansmen in India and these governed a population of 300 million. How was this possible?
The reason was that many Indians ( both Muslims and Hindus) collaborated with the English. Indian rulers( Maharajahs and Nawabs) also sided with the English. The bigger factor was a large mercenary army that consisted of 95% so called martial races, recruited from Indians that helped English rule. These are facts of history which are difficult to digest and one wonders what was the reason for the Hindus ( who were in majority) to accept this dispensation. Perhaps as VS Naipaul has pointed out now and earlier by Frank Moraes, lies in the genes of the Hindus which believe in acts of almighty and a passive approach to life. Frank Moraes coined the word ” meek and mild Hindu”.
Nirad C Choudhry, India’s most famous writer in English in his famous book ” Continent of Circe” has also touched on this aspect. The fact is the Hindus were at a loss psychologically as to what to do after 900 years of Muslim rule, where they had been numbed into submission. When power was transferred to India, the Hindus in the main charted a path of so called secularism, in reality appeasement of the Muslim minority to ‘ placate’ them. This has been commented upon by many writers.
In 1947, Gandhi accepted the two nation theory of Hindus and Muslims being separate nations and the state of Pakistan was created. Logically India should have been declared a Hindu rashtra. Somehow the Congress led by Nehru and Gandhi negated this aspect of a historical truth and agreed for a ‘ secular’ state. Unfortunately this secular state in real terms meant a policy of appeasement and building of vote banks. It was a devilish scheme. I have on authority of a leading politician who is my friend stating that this policy had a deep background. The idea was to win 99% of the minority vote and with even a 30-32 % Hindu vote the Congress would always win. But sometimes the best of plots go awry and it happened that splinter parties came up with regional bias and this plan failed in 2014.
The question is what is wrong if India is a Hindu rashtra? There was Hindu rashtra till 10th century and having a Hindu Rashtra now does not mean the minorities will have no rights. It will however correct the historical imbalance, where Hindus have suffered for 1100 years. I may be out on a limb, but many agree with me. The biggest bulwark is the Congress and their allies like the left parties and casteist parties like JD. I wonder how these can be defeated as they have ganged up and are propagating the canard of intolerance.