MANAGE DIFFERENCES
THROUGH TOLERANCE
Differences are a reality of life. The only way to manage differences, both in secular and religious fields, is to live according to the principles of tolerance.
Some educated Hindu gentlemen arranged a four-day seminar in Vrindavan. I embarked on this journey upon invitation. A brief account of this journey is given here.
On January 14, 1993, we drove from Delhi to Vrindavan. There were four people in our caravan—Dr. Rajkumar Bhatia, Dr. Mahesh Sharma, Dr. Surender Sharma, and me.
Upon reaching Vrindavan, we went to Geeta Ashram. Both our lodging and the seminar were arranged there. Upon entering the Ashram, we discovered the seminar was already in progress. Consequently, we went straight to the hall and participated in the seminar.
Lodging for the seminar, participants was arranged at Geeta Ashram. Two people were accommodated in one room. I was accompanied by a member of the RSS who was highly educated and counted among the intellectuals. We shared the room. We both used to wake up at dawn.
One day, I asked him a question when he woke up after sleeping while sitting on the bed. I asked, “Tell me, what do you want from Muslims? What should Muslims do so that your complaints against them get resolved? Do you want Muslims to adjust to Hindus unilaterally in this country?”
He immediately replied, “No, Maulana Sahib, it’s not like that. We want Muslims to become equal citizens. We only want one thing from our Muslim brothers: that they consider this country as their own.” These were the words of a person who holds a high position in the organization. During the conference, everyone was free to express their thoughts openly. I give here some excerpts from the discussions there.
Swami Agnivesh said, “It seems to me that people have fixed notions. People already believe that if someone is a Muslim, then he will be like this, and if he is a Hindu, then he will be like that. We need to change this way of thinking. Otherwise, nation-building cannot be successful.”
One gentleman said that today, political figures determine the country’s agenda. This is a matter of concern. The country cannot be handed over to the political interests of a few individuals.
A Hindu youth said, “The country is being led astray. Chaos is being created. We must stand against this. Otherwise, the country will be ruined.”
Dr. Mahesh Sharma said that today’s problem is that people do not respect each other. What is in others is also in me. This ability to see is not present in people. All wise people say that if there is an enemy, it is within you. But now we have changed our enemy. Now, we understand that the enemy is not within us but outside. This mindset needs to change. We should be ready to hear bitter truths about ourselves.
One gentleman said, “At this time, India is in a critical condition. We, the 85-crore people, are at odds today. People do not know where to go.”
Another gentleman said, “Ram Manohar Lohia used to say to heat the country. So, we heated the country. However, after seeing the result, it is understood that Lohia’s slogan was wrong. The better slogan is ‘to cool down the country.’”
Yet another gentleman said, “We should not be arrogant under any circumstances. There was a time when communism was considered an unassailable ideology worldwide. But today, it is being understood differently.”
One gentleman was an expert in Gandhian studies. He mentioned in his speech that Mahatma Gandhi once wrote in his newspaper that Hindu-Muslim unity is essential for the country’s progress, and without it, the country cannot progress.
B. K. Rai, a Professor of history at Allahabad University, said that he went to the Kumbh Mela which was attended by more than a crore people, yet he didn’t see anyone hungry. Even if someone doesn’t have a penny, he still gets food. This is the power of religion.
Differences are a reality of life. In our daily lives, both inside and outside the home, we encounter differences. How should we handle them? We should live according to the principles of tolerance. This approach should be adopted in matters of religion as well.
A gentleman said, “Nation-building work could not be done after 1947.” He further said that people still do not pay attention to fulfilling their responsibilities. After December 6, nation-building is number one on my agenda.
A Swami ji from Vrindavan asserted that the supreme power is known by many names, such as Jagannath, Allah, God, Rab, and Waheguru. However, despite these varied appellations, we ultimately supplicate ourselves before that singular Supreme Power. The conflict does not arise from differences in worship or its methods; rather, it stems from material interests, often leading to communal tensions in society, manifesting in various forms. Therefore, it is imperative to cultivate a spirit of tolerance in society—embodying the principle of ‘follow one and respect all.’
The seminar at Vrindavan took place in a large hall with carpets spread. About sixty people were sitting in a circle in the seminar. Different people were expressing their opinions on the current state of the country. Amidst all this, a boy entered the hall carrying a plate. On the plate was a cut radish sprinkled with salt. The boy passed by with the plate. Everyone took a radish according to his wish and started eating it. In the end, tea was brought, and a cup was placed before everyone.
This is an example that indicates how simple Vrindavan’s seminar was and how its proceedings were conducted in such a casual manner. It was precisely according to my taste because simplicity is in my nature. I prefer simplicity in every matter. The focus of the seminar was on sharing one’s views with others.
A gentleman said that first of all, we need to determine what is dominant. Is it the country that is dominant, or is it religion? Some people have made religion supreme. We have seen that the country itself has come under threat. Therefore, now we should make the country dominant.
In this seminar at Vrindavan, I realized that if Muslims remained silent, Hindus would respond better and more effectively. Many times, it happened that someone said something negative about Muslims in a speech. I remained silent. After that, a Hindu stood up and responded compellingly, so much so that if I had responded, perhaps I could not have given such a powerful response.
A gentleman from Udaipur, Kishwarsant, delivered a profoundly emotional speech. He said that today, people talk about everything in the name of Gandhi. I ask, is this what Gandhi wanted? The violence that erupted from this movement is opposite to the principle of non-violence, which is what Gandhism stands for. Then how can this be Gandhism? Gandhism is synonymous with non-violence. I have seen Gandhi’s era. But seeing what is happening today makes me very sad. The fire of hatred is widespread today. Gandhi’s country no longer exists. Darkness prevails all around. The country is undergoing a period of moral decline.
A Hindu scholar during his speech mentioned an incident that Gandhiji wrote about in his autobiography. He wrote that he met Allama Iqbal in London during the Second Round Table Conference (1931). Iqbal introduced himself by saying, “I am a Kashmiri Pandit.”
Before 1947, Hindus and Muslims generally conversed in this manner about their lineage. But, due to the unnatural movement of the ‘two-nation theory’, the mood on both sides had changed. Now, such talk arouses nationalistic sentiments.
Doctor Mahesh Sharma has been associated with the RSS from a young age. During a conversation one day, I said tolerance is now essential for national unity.
He said that the followers of Golwalkar do not like the word tolerance. They say that we don’t just tolerate others; we welcome them. They say, “Be truthful, and you will be welcomed.”
Many people say we should not pay so much attention to religious disputes. Other issues are more worthy of attention, such as education, economics, creating national character among the individual, etc. Today, the most essential task is to prepare the new generation to play their proper role in the country’s development.
Mr. Ram Bahadur Rai, the editor of Jansatta, spoke the least. I observed that people listened to him with great attention whenever he spoke. Seeing this, I thought that some people consider speaking more important but speaking less is even more important. But to say less, one needs the power of tolerance, and very few people possess that.
A gentleman said that violence has increased significantly in the country. We intend to counter violence with non-violence; this is our resolution, and we must depart from here with this determination. We, the people, must rise above all kinds of divisions and differences. Humanity is paramount; we must leave here believing in this. Humanity comes first, followed by religion and other considerations.
Mr. Raj Narain Singh was a police officer in Azamgarh.
In his speech, he said that Muslims must consider the country’s past ancestors as their own. Without this recognition, nothing can be achieved. If it is said that only one belief is correct and all others are wrong, how can adjustment and brotherhood be established in such a situation? The relationship between Hindus and Muslims is a very important issue.
A gentleman said that we talk about non-violence but want to bring it through force. This is contradictory. Whenever we talk about action and implementation, we start talking about violence. Then, the question arises: what do we want to do? Do we want to bring about democracy or anarchy in this country?
A gentleman said that we were heavily involved in Jayaprakash’s movement; we hoped that something good would come from it. But Jayaprakash said in response that nobody listens to me. Similarly, Gandhiji said that my words didn’t matter after independence.
After the seminar, I returned to Delhi on the evening of January 16, 1993. When we passed through the market in our car, I saw that the people in the market were busy with their normal business activities. Here, forgetting the Hindu-Muslim question, people were engaged in their work. Through their actions, they said that our biggest concern is earning a living. We have nothing to do with your speeches.
When I went out of the city, the world seemed even broader. Here, the world of nature was giving a divine message. The vastness of the sky was firmly established. The trees were proudly displaying their greenery. The system of the sun and the moon was firmly in place. The breeze was giving its comforting message.
I thought that people get excited about inflammatory speeches. But why is there a need to get excited or heated over a voice so worthless that it dissipates in the air as soon as it is spoken? Or why be excited or enthusiastic about something printed in the newspaper that ends up in a waste basket by evening?
