Opinion Why Muslim intellectuals meeting RSS chief is a step towards communal harmony

As one of the three mediators tasked by the Supreme Court to mediate the Ayodhya Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, I was keenly aware of the fear and concern amongst Muslims that this controversy will be repeated in other mosques. The SC provided legal reassurance in its judgment by elevating the Places of Worship (Special Protection) Act, 1991 to the status of the basic structure of the Constitution, and thus non-derogable and unalterable by any parliamentary majority. This Act provides that the character of any place of religion as it existed on August 15, 1947 cannot be altered. But something more than legal assurance is required when we are dealing with deep-seated fears of a community and Bhagwat stepped in to provide that. Promptly after the judgment, he issued a statement that those celebrating the verdict should do so with “restraint, moderation and politeness” to avoid any provocative actions. Further, responding to a question on whether the RSS would take up the causes of Gyanvapi and Mathura, he stated that while there was a “historic(al) background to the RSS being involved in Ayodhya”, the organisation’s work was man-making and not being involved in agitations — clearly sending out a message that other mosques are not in its crosshairs. That statement allayed residual fears, and contrary to all expectations, the Ayodhya verdict passed off without a single incident of violence, let alone loss of life.

Remarkably, Bhagwat stepped up to the plate once more. Recently, the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi emerged as the focal point of conflict with some Hindus claiming that a shivling existed on the premises. The issue reached the SC. Observers expected that the Places of Worship Act and the Ayodhya judgment would be applied to negate this and other potential controversies by holding fast to the litmus test of character of the place of worship as on August 15, 1947. They were in for a disappointment.

The Supreme Court’s interim order stating that it was still open to examining whether a place of worship bore the characteristic of a mosque or temple — that the Act did not bar the “ascertainment of the religious character” — seemed to bring back the Pandora’s box in full view. It was Bhagwat who came to the rescue by stating that one cannot be looking for a shivling in every mosque, thereby stemming, although only partially, the fear of recurrence of communal conflict over places of worship. It is a pity that right-wing fringe elements do not heed words of wisdom but persist in pursuing narrow and divisive ends.

Bhagwat holds fast to Hindutva but articulates the point of view that it is an inclusive concept in which all communities have equal room, and stresses that the Hindu faith has always upheld tolerance and mutual respect. That is his starting point and he may be of the view that this is the base for India’s constitutional provisions of equality and equal protection. Others may choose to take the Constitution as their starting point. It matters not so much where we start from; it matters more where we find a middle ground to shake hands and live in peace. With common intent, understanding and accommodation, issues such as cow slaughter, use of offensive terms, wearing of the hijab, etc, are resolvable without much difficulty. Nobody in their right mind can sanction or condone lynching and killing. The marginalisation and insecurity of the Muslim community are there for all to see, and must be reversed. Bhagwat has frequently said that India can progress only when all communities come together and no one can say that Muslims do not form an integral part of the mosaic of India.

Respect for all religions and communal peace is a basic requirement for a humane and civilised society. Furthermore, communal conflict impedes governance and welfare, places society in constant risk mode and fuels the worst passions. Hindu-Muslim conflict damages our relationship with powerful Islamic nations. As long as it exists, India’s leaders will never become world statesmen, but the leaders who finally lead India out of this fatal illness will deserve that accolade. All right-thinking people in India and its diaspora, and indeed other communities and leaders, will undoubtedly welcome this initiative. It must be widened in participation to include other Muslim groups so that it is not seen as an elite initiative. On the Hindu side, too, we should see other senior functionaries so that this is not seen as having only Bhagwat’s imprimatur. But undoubtedly, this is a welcome initiative.

Well begun is possibly not half done in a path that is long, but when the Almighty’s work is being done, many leagues can be traversed by blessed long steps. All of us must wish this moderating dialogue good luck and godspeed.

The writer is a Senior Advocate and mediator