Communalism: February 2006 Archives

At the very outset let me state that many theories have been propounded on this earth. Some of them survived for some time and then gradually passed out of existence; others emerged like meteors, exhibiting their dazzling radiance for a very short time, and then vanished into darkness. The mere existence of a theory is not the essential point; what is important is whether the theory promoted the welfare of all, the spiritual well-being of all -- otherwise its advent on this earth was quite useless. Such useless theories are not even worth mentioning.

Any theory will contain the seed of well-being if its firm foundation is sama-sama'ja tattva [principle of social equality]. It may survive for a very long period -- even for eternity - if it cherishes the ideal of forever promoting the welfare of all. This is the essential point.

I have already said several times, and I repeat, that while moving towards the inner world, human beings have to maintain equilibrium and equipoise in the external world. If some declare that "Brahma satyam' jaganmithya'" ["Only Supreme Consciousness is real and the world is false"], they will not be able to do anything in this "false" world. They are simply deceiving themselves - it is a sign of hypocrisy. An honest person should never resort to hypocrisy in any sphere of life; under no circumstances must he or she compromise with any unjust theory. This is the rule; this is correct. Propriety dictates this.

In this fight for independence, the Indian leaders committed a blunder. they should have engaged themselves in an economic fight instead of starting a political movement. The British took advantage of this blunder of the Indian leaders. They got the opportunity to divide India into two parts. They infused in the Muslims the idea that the Hindus formed the majority, and that therefore if the British quit India the government would naturally go into the hands of the Hindus, and the Muslims of the whole of India would remain as their subjects.

This shrewd policy yielded good results. A Hindu phobia grew among the Muslims. The Muslim leaders began to propagate this Hindu phobia at the top of their voices, and as a result of this anti-Hindu sentiment created out of Hindu phobia, a Muslim nation was again born in India in this twentieth century. Directed by this Hindu phobia, they demanded a separate homeland for the Muslim nation. It was not possible for the Hindus to resist this demand for a separate homeland, because at that time no nation which could be termed a Hindu nation was formed in India.

There are numerous divergent views regarding the exact interpretation of the term "nation". Some are of the opinion that the inhabitants of a particular state form a nation. Even if the terms "state" and "country" are taken to be synonymous, the controversy over "nation" does not end. Some people hold the view that the structure of a nation depends on language. Others are of the opinion that the foundation of a nation depends on one or more than one factor from among the following: similar manners and customs, similar mode of living, similar traditions, racial similarity, religious similarity, etc. But practical experience does not indicate that these factors are especially important.

COPENHAGEN, Feb. 1 — Broadening a debate that has set Europe against the Islamic world, several European newspapers on Wednesday reprinted cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad in an unflattering light, supporting a Danish newspaper that had inspired a huge outcry in the Islamic world by publishing them in the first place.

For some it was a vile capitalist plot aimed at rewriting the recent history of half of Europe, transforming wartime resistance heroes into villains, and denying the laudable ideals and legitimacy of a great political movement.

For others it was a long-overdue denunciation of a couple of dozen thoroughly evil regimes who wrecked their nations' economies, tortured their citizens, and between them were responsible for up to 100 million deaths.