What does it mean to be Hindu in India?

[Guest guest]

What is India Editorial

 

What does it mean to be

 

a Hindu in India?

http://www.whatisindia.com/editorials/wis20041119_what_does_it_mean_t

o_be_a_hindu_in_india.html

 

Unease grows in the hearts of common Indians as they watch a revered

saint being arrested and humiliated

 

What is India News Service

November 19, 2004

 

The arrest and remand of an individual of ascetic stature and the

head of one of India's most affluent mutts has led to the beginnings

of a deeper analysis of what it means to be a Hindu in India.

 

Leaving aside the rooftop cheers of rabid anti-Hindu and anti-

Brahmin outfits like the DMK, whose leader is commonly known as a

ruthless politician with no scruples, the political bluster of

ministers and those seeing the developments as a means to garnering

the limelight for themselves, there is a growing unease in the

hearts of common Indians. To add to it is the unbelievable silence

of the prime minister and the chief minister of Tamil Nadu, whose

policemen arrested the seer.

 

What does it mean to be a Hindu in India anymore? It seems to mean

that the heavy books of law will be thrown at you literally and

figuratively. That you, by virtue of being a so-called majority, are

denied the exceptions and the accommodations made for all others,

that you will be called a murderer even though the public prosecutor

has failed to provide adequate evidence against you and is fumbling

and asking for more time.

 

Guilty before proven innocent

 

Acknowledged murderers like Veerappan, who have taken the lives of

our policemen, security personnel, innocent villagers and anyone who

stood in their way, are lauded as "Chandana Veerappan" and "Robin

Hood." The incestuous circle comes to a tight close.

 

Laura Kelly, in an article titled H H Sri Jayendra Saraswati - A

Victim of Gutter Politics of Tamilnadu, says Veerappan had links

with Karunanidhi. The editor of the Tamil magazine Nakkeran, who

also had contacts with Veerappan, published a news item about

Sankararaman's murder. He had been in contact with Sankararaman.

 

As Balbir Kunj writes in The Pioneer, "While, ironically, the same

DMK is celebrating Kanchi Shankaracharya's humiliating midnight

arrest, the 'secularists' and self-proclaimed human rights activists

are busy rationalising the sordid drama in the name of "rule of law"

and "equality before the law". Those (the Left and

other "secularists") who are now quoting the rules have no respect

either for the law or the Constitution."

 

Anuradadha Dutt says in the same paper, "Shortly after the news of

the arrest of Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati broke, a

shocked politico observed on a news channel that though there were

numerous cases pending against the Jama Masjid Shahi Imam, no one

had dared to arrest him for fear of upsetting the Muslims."

 

As thought this were not enough to raise public suspicion, now comes

a glaring slap of a judgment in another murder case against a PMK

leader. How different is the Panruti MLA from the seer? Shouldn't

the law be applied equally? The Hindu reported, "The Madras High

Court today granted anticipatory bail to the Pattali Makkal Katchi

MLA from Panruti, T. Velmurugan, who is an accused in a murder case.

He was directed to stay in Coimbatore and sign before the judicial

magistrate there daily." And Justice S. Ashok Kumar, while

rejecting the plea of Velmurugan's brothers, Thirumavalavan and

Kannan, said, "Normally, in a case of murder, anticipatory bail is

not granted, except in exceptional cases and for cogent reasons."

 

One would ask, "Does not the very position, prestige and respect the

Acharya commands make this an exceptional case? Does not the

unprecedented stench of anti-Hindu political wrestling focused on

one of the richest Hindu mutts make this an exceptional case? Does

not the hasty arrest without due process targeting the leader of a

majority of Hindus make this an exceptional case?"

 

Who is the person we are looking at? Is it another common criminal,

an individual with criminal cases against him, or a saint with a

clean track record to date? Who is this Shankaracharya that the

press has been so quick to condemn? What makes them jump to adverse

conclusions? Is it media bias? It is well known that Sun TV is

owned by the DMK, whose rank and file are celebrating this arrest.

Jaya TV is owned by the chief minister of Tamil Nadu and The Hindu

has marital connections with the DMK. Their coverage has caused

people to question their neutrality, and a group has called for a

mass cancellation of subscription to The Hindu.

 

The Shankaracharya's Hindu Brahmin status has made him a target of

the DMK and other "atheist" groups, and his unorthodox ideas to

integrate modern Indian life and keep the mutt "contemporary" have

alienated him from staunch orthodox Hindus.

 

One can see his logic: Tibet remained a "spiritual" country, but

isolated from the modern world against the will of the people of

that country. Tibet, as it was, no longer exists. The Acharya's

proactive stance was perhaps a way to prevent inviolate

obsolescence. His proactive forays to gain political representation

for the Hindus was the basis of a longstanding misunderstanding

between him and the murdered Shankararaman.

 

Rights and wrongs

 

Some state that the arrest could not have been made without the

specific authorisation of the Chief Minister, in view of the

standing of the mutt worldwide, the high profile enjoyed by Sri

Jayendra Saraswati, and the ramifications of such a course of

action, and that Jayalalithaa had "been punctilious in respecting

the Hindu sentiments and the sanctity of its institutions." Thus,

the paper says, there is absolutely "no reason to suspect any

ulterior motives on her part, or on the part of the police."

 

Jayalalithaa on Wednesday broke her silence on the arrest, asserting

in the Assembly that he had been held on "startling and definite

information" about his involvement in a murder case.

 

Lack of evidence

 

"Whether the seer is guilty or not will be known after the court

verdict. But whatever "evidence" the prosecution has produced so

far, can at best be termed dubious. It is based on cell phone

records and the phone does not belong to the Shankaracharya. The

money recovered from the alleged killers has been traced to a bank

account, not that of the mutt but an NGO.

 

The counsel for the Acharya has clearly stated in interviews with

NDTV that the evidence was not conclusive. The public prosecutor has

himself requested time to gather his "evidence"

 

What motives?

 

What motive could the Acharya have had? If we are going to

speculate that this ascetic will benefit in some way by this murder,

make off with crores that are his to control in any case, we should

also consider that it is being said that Shankararaman's threatened

expose of mutt irregularities caused the acharya to have him

murdered.

 

The charge is that the Acharya spoke to hired killers and ordered

the murder. Some have called for a cool analysis of the situation.

Realistically speaking, a man with as much influence as the Acharya

need never have to call a killer, hand over money, and commit murder.

 

Our nation has hundreds of criminals who "distance" themselves from

such acts with ease. Any number of people could have killed

Shankararaman, including the notorious associates of the Nakkeeran

editor whom Shankararaman contacted. This could have been done to

frame the Acharya and cause enough chaos to warrant political

control of an institution flush with cash. After all, the prime

source of unofficial political cash, Veerappan, is dead, and until

someone fills his shoes, the cash will cease to flow.

 

The political angle

 

Why did Jayalalithaa give her nod to the midnight arrest of the

pontiff in Mahboobnagar on Diwali? Until a few months ago, the

Kanchi seer was one of her close advisers. Why did DMK chief

Karunanidhi insist on sitting in a dharna for inquiry into

Sankararaman's murder?

 

Some assert that Jayalalithaa and her party have been very close to

the holy man, so the turn of events is quite startling: "It has to

be assumed that a presentable case has been built up against the

Sankaracharya, although Ms Jayalalithaa has never been known to be

too particular about criminal cases. The electoral drubbing she

received after her tie-up with the BJP and her pro-Hindu policies

may have forced her to look for ways to rebuild an anti-Brahminical

image. At least her action has pre-empted Mr Karunanidhi from making

a to-do about the charges against the Kanchi head, and has suggested

that she is growing distant from the BJP's Hindutva line"

 

The difference lies in the community the arrested seer belongs

to. "The inference was that political compulsions, hinging on wooing

minority votes, had cast a protective cordon around the Islamic

pontiff, who is notorious as a rabble-rouser In this case, the

timing and surreptitious manner of the seer's arrest, on Diwali,

followed by a long weekend and Id, another holiday, suggests that

something unholy is brewing. For, the closure of the courts and

jails in this period ensured that the Shankaracharya could be

hurriedly secreted away without hope of redressal until the vacation

ended. It was a deliberate move to preempt remedial action on his

behalf.

 

Several groups say political parties have their eye on the mutt's

coffers. The DMK has gone so far as to suggest that the mutt

management should come under a government board. However

Jayalalithaa has said she is not interested in taking over the hoary

institution. "We want that the mutt should not be defamed. We do not

want the mutt to come to a standstill," she said.

 

The aftermath of the arrest of has brought into sharp relief several

issues relating to the management of religious mutts in general.

While it is true that these organizations control vast sums of money

and are not required to report their financial dealings to the

public in general, they do not differ in operation to any other

religious group world over.

 

However, the political motives seem to be stronger than any the

Acharya could have had to be a party to this murder. Apart from the

cash involved, there is a lot of control and power associated with

the mutt's various organizations. He has reportedly told high-

profile visitors that he was a victim of Jayalalithaa's vendetta.

The seer reportedly said he had refused to make over a popular and

well-established medical school run by the Kanchi Mutt trust to

Jayalalithaa, and this had further angered the chief minister.