Emergency Against Hindus?

VHP says Kanchi Shankaracharya's arrest is an Emergency against Hindus. Of course in the same case, if the accused had been the seer's equivalent in another religion, and if that person Hadn't been arrested, it would have again been again an Emergency against Hindus.

Uma Bharathi's supporters would say BJP is not just against OBCs (dont know her caste but thats what someone else said) but against sanyasins and so the war between groups will go on. Who knows if the victim was an Iyengar, it could be Iyengars vs Iyers and so on..

I dont know if Shankaracharya is innocent or guilty but still I am supposed to have an opinion on him. If he is the person, he is supposed to be, then prison shouldnt make a difference to him,after all this is just another maya and he will be able to clear himself through the judicial process. But this Emergency against Hindus? What should I think and do?

Well when in doubt I go to Ramayan. For a longtime, I couldn't understand the reason for the post-pattabhishekam story. Why couldnt Ram and Sita live happily ever after. Why did Ram listen to a washerman and banish Sita. Is there a message for me to learn from it?

I remember reading in the Hans Anderson story about the mermaid, in which there is a line about the weight of the crown. And then more practically some years back when a daughter of a minister in VP Singh's govt was kidnapped and exchanged for prisoners I again thought of the weight of the crown. Wouldnt it have been a better example if they had stuck to the principle and not released the prisoners?

Even if Ram had imprisoned the washerman for speaking ill about Sita, I doubt if anyone would have questioned him. And he could have certainly ignored him. But when a question rose about his capacity and judgement, he realised the other side of power, those who are in power should not just be fair, but also SEEM to be fair. And one of the practical examples are those who assume moral responsibility and resign (no not like Nitish Kumar who come back quickly :) ) . And to perhaps to prove himself to firm ruler, he took that decision.

OK if that had been the message, then was Ram really fair? How on earth was he fair to Sita? Sure inspite of his father having 3 wives, he didnt marry again. And yes he proved that he didnt care for the throne when he returned it to Bharat in the beginning. But what about Sita?
Life was unfair to Sita. So is that the message in Ramayana that life is never fair. Or is that supposed to be that temptation can be your worst enemy?

Power has its trappings (Ram) and Temptations has its trappings (Sita) ? Is that the message of Ramayan?

But still I couldnt let go of it. And kept thinking about Sita. She too didnt think of marrying someone else too. And then I cheered when I realised in the end, Ram did ask her to return, but even though she loved him, she refused to accept him. And when she realised he had wronged her, she didnt compromise her dignity either.

Then today I realised another aspect of the sequel. It hurts when someone you trust and respect is not what you want them to be. And respect for one doesnt mean agreeing to everything they do. Sita didnt stop loving Ram, but at the same time she didnt justify everything he did. She went with him to the forest, but choose to not return to the kingdom later.

So in my own way, I too hold both the beliefs about the arrest. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and all should be treated equally under law, including Gurus and Godmen.
We blame politicians for politicising everything, but unless we stop, they aren't going to. Let justice takes its course, and lets stop politicising it and concentrate on Human emergencies like poverty. Sorry VHP I don't think this arrest is a symbol of Emergency against Hindus.

posted on Friday, November 12, 2004 3:47 PM