> Parmacharya -Part IV -Subramanian Swamy > I brought the fierce Muslims-rights agitator Mr.Syed Shahabuddin to > Kanchipuram to have a darshan of the Parmacharya. Shahabuddin had told > me many a times that he had a urge to see the Parmacharya. He never > explained why. Nor I asked him why since I assumed everyone would like > to see a living God on earth. > Although Shahabuddin is a strict Muslim, he accepted two fundamental > points defining a patriotic Indian Muslim. The first point, a patriot > would accept that though he is a Muslim, his ancestors are Hindus since > 99.9 percent of Muslims of India are descendents of converts. Muslims > who think that their ancestors are Persians or Arabs or from > Tajikistan, can never be patriotic Indians, because they live in a > myth. They are psychologically uprooted from India. The second point is > that although the present day Indian culture is composite, in which all > communities and religions have contributed, the core of this culture is > Hindu in character and substance. Hence even if one changes one > religion, it need not lead to a change of culture. Religion is > personal, culture belongs to the nation. > Shahabuddin had accepted the two points and that is why I defended him > against the charge that he was communal. But the RSS [which is not > pro-Hindu, but merely anti-Muslim] , saw in Shahabuddin a convenient > hate figure, and dubbed him a “second Jinnah”. Naturally bigots of the > RSS protested when they came to know that I was bringing Shahabuddin to > meet Parmacharya. When we arrived at the Kanchi Mutt, the Mutt-Pujaris > told me that Parmacharya had wanted me to bring Shahabuddin right into > the inner part of the Mutt where he was staying. We were made to sit > before a shut door, and told Parmacharya would come soon. > The door was opened by Parmacharya himself. When Shahabuddin saw him, > he started to weep, with tears rolling down his cheeks. He folded his > hands in a ‘namaste’ and said “Oh my Lord Parmacharya, please save my > community and save the nation”. I was taken aback [Much later when we > were back on our way to Chennai, I asked Shahabuddin why he broke down > , before the Parmacharya. He simply said that he could not control > himself when he saw the radiant face of the Parmacharya. ] > Parmacharya asked Shahabuddin what troubled him. He said “The Babri > Masjid has been shut to Muslims by a Court Order and I pray to you to > help us open it to us”. [At that time, 1988 there was no talk of its > demolition by RSS]. Parmacharya told him that Hindus and Muslims should > work out a compromise. He suggested a number of proposals, such as > joint prayers, or Hindu Prayers on Monday-Wednesday- Friday and Muslims > Namaz on other days with Sunday being denied to both. All these > compromise proposals, Shahabuddin said, would be unacceptable to devout > Muslims. > I added in my proposal. Koran prohibits Namaz in constructions built > by demolishing other religions holy places : therefore if it can be > proved that a temple was demolished by Babar’s men to build the mosque > in Ayodhya, and then the Muslims themselves should agree to the Babri > Masjid demolition. > Parmacharya looked at me with a benign smile. He had earlier warned me > to stay away from this issue, instead asked me to concentrate on > political and economic issues. But Shahabuddin quickly agreed that > Koran prohibited reading namaz in such places, but contested that Babri > Masjid was built on a temple site. He said he had construction blue > prints to prove his point. Two hours of discussion had taken place, > and therefore the Mutt pujaris were getting impatient. A big crowd was > waiting for the Parmacharya’s darshan. So Parmacharya closed his > discussion by asking Shahabuddin to bring his blue prints and come > again. Surprisingly, again Shahabuddin prostrated before him, and then > we both left. > Shahabuddin never came back again. But two years later, I became the > Law Minister. I confronted the Muslim organizations with a proposal > that the Government would appoint a Supreme Court Judge in a one man > Commission of inquiry to determine whether or not there was a temple > before the Babri Masjid was built. And if the conclusion was that there > was a temple, then Muslims must agree to give up the Masjid. If not, > then the Hindus would vacate the masjid. > Surprisingly, while all the Muslim organisations agreed to my proposal, > the fanatic Hindu organizations refused to agree. Our government did > not last long enough for me to go ahead with the Commission of Inquiry > anyway disregarding the fanatics. Nor could I persuade the successor > Narasimha Rao Government to follow my proposal. It would have amicably > resolved the issue. But alas, Babri Masjid was finally demolished in > bitterness. > Perhaps Parmacharya was telling me not to get involved from the > beginning because he foresaw that it would be demolished as a part of > destiny. If Babar’s violence was undone 450 years later, then RSS > violence on December 6, 1992 could also be undone someday, but I hope, > by understanding and love. Otherwise the cycle of violence will > continue in the country, with the Hindus and Muslims not reconciled to > each other. > > In April 1990, I received an urgent summons from Parmacharya to come to > Kanchipuram. So I rushed. When I saw him, he merely smiled, put up his > palm in blessing and then waved me on to go away! I was puzzled. Why > was I asked to rush to the Kanchi Mutt from Delhi, merely to be sent > away? The Mutt pujaris told me that on Parmacharya’s instructions the > Mutt had decided that I was to share the dais with Rajiv Gandhi on the > occasion of Parmacharya’s 97th birthday in May that year, to be > celebrated in Kanchipuram. It turned out that no other politician > except Rajiv and myself were to share the platform. It was a great > honour, not only that I would be with Rajiv, but more that it was on > Parmacharya’s instructions. But why did he so honour me? > > That May meeting turned out to be crucial for me, because it created a > rapport with Rajiv which I did not have before. Rajiv too had great > regard for the Parmacharya and therefore his selection of me to pair > with Rajiv, meant for Rajiv that I could be trusted. From that date > onwards, Rajiv trusted me blindly with no reservations. > > Parmacharya thus not only altered my outlook, but he also ensured from > time to time that I came on the right path. Once for example, in 1992, > the two junior swamis, Jayendra Saraswati and Vijendra Saraswati had > asked me to collect some funds for a Ghatikasthanam library that they > wanted to build in honour of the Parmacharya. They even printed letter > heads to make me the “Patron” of the project, but insisted on a > donation. > > With great difficulty, I collected Rs.15 lakhs and gave it to them as > Janata Party’s gift. When Parmacharya came to know about it, he sent me > a query: “Why should you donate to the Mutt when you are yourself > begging for funds from the people to run your party? Please do not do > it in the future”. Since then I have stopped giving donations to any > cause. Beggars cannot donate. > > Naturally, when Parmacharya attained samadhi in 1994, I felt like an > orphan in public life. HE was always there when I had a dilemma to set > things right. But I had the God’s grace to see him, a living divinity, > for 17 years. Many of his opinions and directions I can never reveal, > because he said them knowing fully well that I will keep it to myself. > But by guided and listening to him, I have become so strong mentally > as a person, that I feel that no one can cow me down or demoralize me > no matter how bad a situation I am in. > > Parmacharya taught me that the easiest way to finish an enemy is to > make him a friend. He had urged me not to hate the sin, but the sinner. > Of course, sometimes the easiest way is not available because of ego > clash, and so the sinner has to fought to be made to realize the sin. > But one has to keep in mind that there is a God’s scheme, redemption > for the sinner what we call as prayaschitam. The ultimate revenge > belongs to the divine. As human beings we have no right to revenge; > only self-defence and righteous struggle. As Hindus, this is easy to > understand because we believe in the law of Karma. People who see me > fighting fiercely with Indira Gandhi, Chandrasekhar and Jayalalitha and > then working with them get confused or even disgusted at what they > perceive as my opportunism. I do not make up with those I quarrel with > at height of their power, but when they cease to be in office. The > reason for this flexibility in making friends out of enemies of yester > year is the advice that Parmacharya once gave me in 1977: “India is > plagued by divisions, and the egos of our rajas had played havoc with > our national security, making it easy for foreigners to conquer us. > Therefore, never hesitate to create unity, without of course > compromising on the fundamental concepts of morality. India has never > forgotten those who unite the nation.” I have defined three such > fundamental moral principles. > > These three fundamental concepts of morality are > > I shall not speak lie, even if I withhold truth. > > I shall practice what I shall preach. > > What I do will be transparent for all to see. I consider myself > therefore free to plan my political strategy as I see best, without > regard to criticism from my political opponents, but within these three > moral limits.
Posted on: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 04:19:47 +0000