Moral theologians address challenges in biomedical ethics in India
Persecution of Christians has worsened around the globe, according to new study
Pope to Cardinals-elect: Keep your eyes raised, your hands joined, your feet bare
Tribal Christians avoid travel fearing attack in India’s Manipur
Pope Francis’ visit to Singapore ‘has revived the faith of our people,’ cardinal says
Cardinal Dolan: Harris received ‘bad advice’ to skip Catholic charity dinner
Indian diocese foils bid to install Hindu deity idol in college
It was only from the end of the eighteenth century that nationalism received the sense in which it is in use today. Hans Kohn defines nationalism as a state of mind, in which the supreme loyalty of the individual is felt to be due the nation-state. Every nation possesses certain objective factors distinguishing them from other nationalities like common descent, language, territory, political entity, customs and traditions, or religion. Though the blend of these objective elements may vary from nation to nation, Kohn opines that the most essential and common element of nationalism is the living and active corporate will of the people.
India dreamed by Gandhiji was universal and pluralistic in nature. Mahatma looked forward to seeing India as a pluralistic country where men of different creeds and castes would live in brotherhood and harmony. He wanted that Hindus and Muslims cooperate each other in their needs. In a write up to Hindus, Gandhi instructed them to attach more importance to Hindu-Muslim unity than to the British connection. The British connection is not indispensable for the prosperity of India while the Islam-Hindu unity is a must, says Gandhi. Three fourth of India can never enjoy freedom if they remain hostile to the remaining one-fourth Muslims. It is wring to think that Muslims and Hindus can never get along together. Though in history there were cases of injustice done by the Muslims, their religion is a noble one and the Muslims in general are noble people. Therefore, he advises Hindus to place full trust in the Muslim brethren. Their trust and their respect can be won only by helping them in their time of need. In this context Gandhi advises Hindus to join the Muslims in the Khilafat movement, which was aimed at preserving the authority of the Ottoman Sultan as Caliph of Islam.
He firmly believed that there will be peace in India only if the Hindus tolerate the Mohammedan form of worship of God and vice-versa. He was critical of the Hindu Maha Sabha, one of the anti-Muslim movements of the time. Gandhi never dreamed of India once becoming a Hindu Rashtra. He had out rightly clarified that Swaraj will favour Hinduism no more than Islam; not Islam more than Hinduism. In the freed India he wished that the minorities are protected. He said, ‘Swaraj recognizes no race or religious distinctions. Nor is it to be the monopoly of lettered persons nor yet of moneyed men. swaraj is to be for all, it will include even the maimed, the blind and the starving millions.
But the idea of nation the Sangh Parivar entertains is very different from that of Gandhi’s Ram Raj. K.S. Sudarshan, one of the former chiefs of Sangh-Parivar had made clear that once the BJP has 2/3 majority it would not hesitate to revise the Constitution: formulate a uniform civil code and annul article 370 and minority rights. As pronounced earlier, after capturing 2/3 majority in the Parliament in the elections conducted in 2018, the BJP government has already cancelled the article 370 and made Kashmir one of the Union Territories of the Central government. The Modi government is waiting for the appropriate moment to bring in the uniform civil code for all citizens. Nothing to wonder if the BJP takes away in recent future many of the minority rights of Muslims and Christians that are outlined in the Constitution.
kundu1962@gmail.com
Leave a Comment