Can intellectuals ever give hope to hopeless Hindus?

V SUNDARAM
newstodaynet.com

Ever since the Islam-embracing, Christianity-coveting and Hindu-hating Sonia-Catholic directed (taking her hourly instructions from the Pope in Rome) UPA Government came to power in New Delhi, every Hindu in India has been forced into a state of turbulent unrest and sleeplessness. The UPA Government has daily functioned in a manner which has made all the Hindus of India realize that Hindu religion, Hindu society, Hindu culture, Hindu art, Hindu architecture, Hindu sculpture, Hindu music, Hindu literature and in short Hindu civilization in general are under a serious threat of Government sponsored, Government controlled and Government directed extermination and extinction from the sacred soil of India. The UPA Government is functioning as a powerful mouthpiece of the lethal global forces of evangelical Christianity and terrorist Islam on the one hand and moribund brand of anti-Hindu (anti national as well) Indian Marxism on the other. The sleepless Hindus of India are highly amused by the recent news that our Sonia-pageboy and ever Sonia-servile Prime Minister has been spending sleepless nights after watching the tearful parents of Kafeel and Sabeel Ahmed, involved in the terrorist plot to blow up Glasgow Airport and targets in London, on television. Is it not very touching that our human, humane and ever compassionate (towards Muslims and Christians only!) Prime Minister should be so moved by the glorious 'Sonia-secular' deeds of Kafeel and Sabeel Ahmed in London? The nation in general and the Hindus of India in particular would like to confront our Prime Minister not with suicide bombs but with the following civilized (might be even 'communal and saffronized' but definitely not 'criminal'!) questions :

a) Why did not our Sacred Sachar Committee inspired and guided imbecile Prime Minister demonstrate similar sentiments after watching television footage of mutilated bodies of victims of Islamic terrorism both at home and abroad?

b) Why did our impotent Prime Minister, instead of strongly condemning the Islamic terrorists / criminals soon after they blew up the train compartments in Mumbai last year, urge with such solemn supineness and stupidity an attitude of public restraint, expressing the hope that the tolerant accommodating �spirit� of the city of Mumbai would prevail over the 'ghastly tragedy'? Why did Dr Manmohan Singh choose to ignore the emotions, feelings and sentiments of the families of 247people who got killed on that day? Why was it not viewed as blatant violation of human rights by our Prime Minister?

c) Why did our Prime Minister choose to warn our security forces in Jammu and Kashmir that his Islam-embracing Government would adopt a policy of 'zero tolerance'? If the security forces had indeed violated human rights, then the moot question is as to why did he not deem it fit, strangely enough, at the same time, to condemn the gross violation of Hindu human rights by terrorists who have attacked and continue to attack Hindu temples? Why did he not declare and elaborate his Government's policy on dealing with such violations of human rights by the Islamic terrorists of India?

d) Why did our Prime Minister declare in Havana that Pakistan was as much a victim of terrorism as India, thereby giving a clean chit to those Islamic terrorists from Pakistan responsible for the grisly deaths of thousands of Indians in India?

e) Why is it that our Prime Minister, who has shown such pointedly 'humane' consideration for the Islamic terrorists throughout the world (Afsal Guru definitely not excluded), never had a single sleepless night over the mass genocide of Kashmiri Pandits and the pitiable plight of Kashmiri Pandits living in abysmal conditions after being thrown out of their hearths and homes by Islamic terrorists in the Kashmir Valley?

f) Why was our 'compassionate' Prime Minister not so moved when terrorists struck in Delhi on the eve of Diwali and at Sankat Mochan temple on the eve of Holi? Does it not show that the imagined sorrow of some touches our fictitiously cosmetic and cold-blooded Prime Minister more than the unwarranted grief of innocent people who have grievously suffered on account of Islamic terrorism?

g) Why is our Prime Minister indulging in cynical politics, regardless of the dangerous consequences for our nation and its people?

In the context of the recent terrorist acts in Glasgow and London, when our Prime Minister was talking to the journalists, he cautioned in a tepid neutral manner against labelling any community or country as terrorist. He also repeated the cliché that a terrorist has no religion or community. But, when it comes to implementing a policy at the ground level, how can security personnel identify suspects, if no kind of profiling is permitted? In this context the exact words of B R Haran rooted in political realism become relevant: �Except for Islam, is there any other religion that has the concept of jihad, a 'holy war' against infidels? The politically incorrect question � as investigations in any terrorist attack proceeds, why most people involved are found to be Muslims� - cannot be wished away. Recently Dr Manmohan Singh stated, 'Let us not brand Indians and Pakistanis as terrorists'. Why is he batting for Pakistan, considering the fact that our western neighbour is the breeding ground of terrorism? Recently, Home Minister Shivraj Patil defended Pakistan and appealed not to blame that country always for terrorist acts. But if not Pakistan, which other country is sending terrorists to India? If not Muslims, followers of which other religion are indulging in such terrorist activities in the name of religious faith? Our Prime Minister has a short memory. On the eve of his visit to Havana, when he met with Gen. Pervez Musharraf at the sidelines of the NAM summit, he had famously stated, 'The role of 'Hindu' fundamentalists cannot be ruled out,' while responding to questions regarding the Malegaon mosque bombing. Was it right on his part to use the term 'HINDU' then? Dr. Manmohan Singh's concern both for terrorists and their victims seems to be Sonia-selective. It would augur well for the Prime Minister to face the facts as they are instead of rushing to the defence of one particular community, which is unbecoming for his post and stature�

Many of my intellectual friends from different walks of life try to crush my enthusiasm or curb my spirit for lashing out continuously against the many problems, ills and maladies plaguing our country today, by putting the following questions:

1. Do you think the politicians of India are affected by your independent radical views?

2. Do you think the pseudo-secular intellectuals of India care for your unorthodox views?

3. Do you think the common people of India are concerned about your unconventional views?

Many decent men and women in India today wish to serve our country, but they are perplexed and their power seems infinitesimal. Despair seizes them. Those who have the strongest passion suffer most from the sense of impotence, and are most liable to spiritual ruin through spiritual lack of hope. So long as we think only of the immediate future, it seems that what we can do is not much. It is probably impossible for us to find an immediate solution to all the national problems created by our politicians and more particularly the UPA brand of politicians in our country. As we are hopelessly witnessing the vulgar drama relating to the sure prospect of our having a disgraceful person as our President, it should be clear that we cannot remain unaware of the fact that though we may see the evil, we cannot quickly cure it or remove it by any of the ordinary methods of politics. We cannot destroy the excessive power of the State or of overweening political corruption in our land. We must recognise that India at the present moment is being ruled in a wrong spirit and a change of spirit will not come from one day to the next. In this context I derive my inspiration as a journalist from the inspiring words of Bertrand Russel (1872-1970): �Our expectations must not be for tomorrow, but for the time when what is thought now by a few shall have become the common thought of many. If we have courage and patience, we can think the thoughts and feel the hopes by which, sooner or later, men will be inspired and weariness and discouragement will be turned into energy and ardour. For this reason, the first thing we have to do is to be clear in our own minds as to the kind of life we think good and the kind of change that we desire in the world. The ultimate power of those whose thought is vital is far greater than it seems to men who suffer from the irrationality of contemporary politics�.

India is passing through a period of unprecedented crisis�political, economic, social, religious and cultural. Ever growing indiscipline and violence. Ever expanding vistas of bestiality and corruption in all our institutions�State, Public and Private. Total collapse of all time honoured spiritual, cultural, ethical and moral values. Never ending disorder, chaos and confusion in every walk of life. In this hopeless situation, India badly requires fearless individuals who can understand all its problems, rising up to the challenge of facing human nature at its worst in the eyes in these dark days without subterfuges.

I started this story with the pseudo-secularly selective insomnia of our never vigilant Prime Minister. To quote the brilliant words of B S Raghavan: �Our PM has a sleep problem. There is a separate course called Sleep Medicine in USA. One of the four MDs secured by my son (an American citizen practicing in USA) is on Sleep Medicine. He is coming next month to India and he may be able to throw some light on the reason why our PM doesn't lose his sleep in certain situations and loses it in other situations. For instance, at the time of stock market scam in mid-1990s, when hundreds of thousands of crores of investors were wiped out, our PM (then FM) told Parliament and the media that he couldn't be expected to lose his sleep over a petty thing like that. In other words, while investors lost their sleep over the monstrous swindle, our PM had sound sleep. When terror has the country in its vice-like grip today, he loses sleep thinking of the tragic plight of the perpetrators who have to face the embarrassment of police inquiries and their possible arrest and prosecution! Yes, I must consult my son!!�

An intellectual is fundamentally concerned about validly exact knowledge and freedom. Yet these acquire meaning not as abstractions - as in the rather banal statement - You must get a good education so that you can enjoy a good life - but as experiences actually lived through.

Edward W Said in his Representations of the Intellectual has exactly demarcated and defined the role of an intellectual: An intellectual is like a shipwrecked person who learns how to live in a certain sense with the land, not on it, not like Robinson Crusoe whose goal is to colonise his little island, but more like Marco Polo (1254-1324), whose sense of the marvelous never fails him, and who is always a traveler, a provisional guest, not a freeloader, conqueror or raider.
A true intellectual's public performances cannot be predicted or compelled to fit into some slogan, orthodox party line or fixed dogma. He appeals to as wide as possible a public, who is his or her natural constituency. He is aware of the fact that insiders, experts, coteries and professionals mould public opinion into rigid grooves, making it conformist and encouraging an arrogant attitude of all knowing omniscience of men in power. While these insiders promote sectional or special interest, a fearless intellectual should raise relevant questions about larger national issues affecting the nation as a whole. When an average citizen feels powerless in the face of an overwhelmingly powerful network of social authorities - the Media, the Government and Public Corporations etc, as an informed outsider an intellectual should go to his rescue by wielding a language that tries to speak the truth effectively to power. His spirit is a spirit in opposition, rather than in accommodation. The real challenge of intellectual life is to be found in the dissent against an inequitable system founded on discrimination, completely violative of all the known canons of equity, fair play and natural justice.

The Hindus of India today are being treated like second class citizens by government interested only in minority votebank politics. Hindu society, Hindu religion and Hindu culture require fearless and knowledgeable intellectuals to espouse the cause of the Hindus to the men in authority. In these dark days for Hindus and Hinduism in India, bold intellectuals and individuals have to speak out for and testify to the sufferings of the Hindu community as a whole.

In this context I have to cite the example of Eliezer Wiesel. Born on 30 September 1928, he led a life representative of many Jewish children. Growing up in a small village in Romania, his world revolved around family, religious study, community and God. Yet his family, community and his innocent faith were uprooted and destroyed by the Nazis upon the deportation of his village in 1944. In his first book NIGHT, we are moved by the most powerful and renowned passage in Holocaust literature in which Eliezer Wiesel recorded the inclusive experience of the Jews:

'Never shall I forget that night, the first night in camp, which has turned my life into one long night, seven times cursed and seven times sealed. Never shall I forget that smoke. Never shall I forget the little faces of the children, whose bodies I saw turned into wreaths of smoke beneath a silent blue sky. Never shall I forget those flames which consumed my faith forever. Never shall I forget that nocturnal silence which deprived me, for all eternity, of the desire to live. Never shall I forget those moments which murdered my God and my soul and turned my dreams to dust. Never shall I forget these things, even if I am condemned to live as long as God Himself. Never.' And Wiesel has since dedicated his life to ensuring that none of us forget what happened to the Jews.

Through his writings and leadership, Eliezer Wiesel has aided in the recognition and remembrance of Jews killed in the holocaust, the establishment of Israel and has dedicated the latter part of his life to the witness of the second-generation and the vital requirement that memory and action be carried on after the survivors have all left us. Wiesel's own words are the best explanation: 'Let us remember, let us remember the heroes of Warsaw, the martyrs of Treblinka, the children of Auschwitz. They fought alone, they suffered alone, they lived alone, but they did not die alone, for something in all of us died with them'.

Discriminated and crushed Hindus of India are badly in need of the intellectual services of powerful writers like Eliezer Wiesel to highlight their problems and grievances.

Talking about great intellectuals and their place in any society, Edward Shils (1911-1995) has rightly observed: 'In every society there are some persons with an unusual sensitivity to the sacred, and uncommon reflectiveness about the nature of their universe, and the rules which govern their society. There is in every society a minority of persons who, more than the ordinary run of their fellow men, are enquiring, and desirous of being in frequent communication with symbols which are more general than the immediate concrete situations of everyday life, and remote in their reference in both time and space. In this minority, there is a need to externalise the quest in oral and written discourse, in poetic or plastic expression, in historical reminiscence or writing, in ritual performance and acts of worship. This interior need to penetrate beyond the screen of immediate concrete experience marks the existence of the intellectuals in every society'.

I fully endorse the view of Bertrand Russell that those who have the ability to think and the imagination to think in accordance with men's needs, are likely to achieve the good they aim at sooner or later, though probably not while they are still alive. To give one concrete example. The movement against the subjection of women which later became irresistible in the first half of the 20th century and is still quite far from complete triumph began in a small way with a few impracticable idealists like Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797), P B Shelley (1792-1822) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) in the 18th and 19th centuries. Those intellectuals who wish to gain the world by thought must be content to lose it as a support in the present. Most men go through life without much ardent questioning, accepting the beliefs and practices which they find current and popular (also secular in the Indian context!!) , confidently feeling that the world will be their ally only if they do not put themselves in opposition to it. New and radical thought about the world is often incompatible with this cosy comfortable acquiescence. It requires a certain intellectual detachment, a certain irrepressible solitary energy, a power of inwardly dominating the world and the outlook that the world endangers. Without some enthusiastic willingness to be lonely, new thought can neither be achieved nor sustained over time.

To quote Bertrand Russell here 'It will not be achieved to any purpose if the loneliness is accompanied by aloofness, so that the wish for union with others dies, or if intellectual detachment leads to contempt'. Responsible intellectual detachment is subtle and difficult to achieve. It is difficult because it is hard to be intellectually detached and yet not aloof. Such fruitful thought on human affairs is not common and most theorists tend to be either conventional or sterile.

As an intellectual and as a journalist, I would like to walk around, asserting my right to have a space for myself in which I can stand and talk back to authority with unshakeable inner strength and dignity, since unquestioning subservience to authority in today's India is one of the greatest threats to an active, creative and moral intellectual life.

To be able to work in the service of Sanathana Dharma, Hinduism and the Hindus, to be able to commit every nerve, every muscle, and every drop of sweat towards that great, sacred and noble cause, to grow with that never-ending and exciting work, is to become greater oneself in this struggle against great odds and then to be able to say at the end: I die, but there remains something that is more important than my life and will last longer than my body: my work. That is my hope, which is worthy of tremendous efforts, that is my goal, for which it is worth living and, if need be, dying.