Moti Ram Mensa
Dishonourable Kothari ji,
Early in the morning nobody wishes to spoil his entire day but today, by expressing your narrow minded hatred-filled ideas, you tried to spoil the entire day of Bahujans of the country. But when you read my reply, your evening would certainly be spoiled. While writing your editorial you probably failed to remember that the current era is not the era of the underworld of the print media. The social media is currently dominant, and you could not have even imagined that in this era, a huge number of people will puke on your kind of ideas.
You must know that the first line of the constitution that you want to change also has Article 19 which envisages freedom of expression as a fundamental right, on which the foundation of your newspaper stands. The foundation on which, you and your father Karpur Chand Kulish have created this media entity - now you want to change that foundation via your newspaper.
The importance of the sacred profession you belong to for a democracy can be evaluated by Franklin D. Roosevelt's observation: "If a country's media is honest, their government can not become anti-people." Being a person of that great profession, by using your newspaper for promoting a religion you show your lunatic mindset. The people of your mentality live a life of such a philosophy and contemplation that they have nothing to do with real life.
Before I attempt to answer your questions, I want to remind you of your duty as a journalist. A journalist should fight for whom? Should he fight for his religion or for the propagation of the thought system of his religious texts? Or should a journalist fight to establish the great values of equality, liberty, freedom and social justice? Well, at this point you would have no idea, because you want your supremacy. It is history. Whenever we (exploited deprived society) tried to organize our efforts, then your pen tried to vandalize our efforts. Today's editorial is therefore not new. We also know what your passion is for the RSS. The Sangh is going beyond its real agenda (Brahmanical supremacy) and getting a form of political supremacy (as you think). You also have hatred in your belly for reservation. Despite all this, I've attempted to answer the issues raised in the following way.
The first issue you pose is that Hindutva is nationalism, not a religion. That Hinduism is not a religion is proved. But how is it nationalism? On the one hand you are saying that all Upanishads and all texts propagate nationality and humanity, and on the other hand you are saying that the texts don't even contain those words. Do you want to prove that your sages who wrote the texts were not aware of this nationalism? If so, why do you want to mislead again? It is beyond comprehension.
Your second question, which reflects your real grouse, and has forced you to articulate this narrative. You are calling Babasaheb Ambedkar a leader of impaired vision because you have no idea about his long vision. He knew that when you get a chance to translate the meaning of India you would translate it as "Hindustan"; therefore he himself translated it as - India that's Bharat. Congressmen have always been doing it in the former style, which led to the partition of India. Your great forefathers are responsible for this act. Why did you suddenly change tactics, when you have been saying Hindu-Hindu ever since your newspaper has been established over 50 years ago? Isn't the real reason a part of your deliberate politics? Isn't the reason behind it the growing bond among the exploited, dispossessed and the Muslims? That seems to be the real reason to me. Suddenly, in the midst of a crisis of your great religion, is it managing to survive by bringing in the agenda of nationality? Because you have not tolerated our progress and independent thinking.
Your third point is that India is an identity defined by English. When the translation of the Constitution of India is 'Bharat', then how is it an English identity? People of Germany and Japan explain their nationality as German and Japanese - then why cannot we identify ourselves as Indians rather than Hindustani? The other side of the issue is that the Germans and the Japanese are people of the same race and language. While we are the largest group of different castes and languages. If we keep our own identity along with the Indian identity, then we can be free from the slavery of mystics like you and we can also feel the pride of being Indian. Well, let me remind you, in case you have forgotten, that your ancestors claim a different origin from the rest of the Indians.
The fourth point: you said that reservation has divided the Hindus. In fact, the word Hindu was brought here by foreigner Muslims (as you have written in your article). So on the one hand you are rejecting the identity given by the British, and on the other hand you are proudly accepting the identity given by other foreigners. Why the double standards? Only for the sake of opposing reservations, please don't sacrifice your commitment to Akhand Bharat and let your personality be broken.
Now you have come to the great Upanishads. Even if I memorize all the Upanishads, how shall my nation, my people become strong? And how would I utilize it for equitable distribution of resources in this country? How will that ensure everyone's interests, enhance our physical capacities (just like you use them)? You are a strange man who wants to feed people from the hollow contemplation of the Upanishads.
Kothari ji, living reality is: only you need to have this knowledge, not us. The same way today, in the memory of your great grandfather Manu, you have started Punarlekhan (rewriting). Your dream will never be complete because now we won't read Rajasthan Patrika, but of course, will use Facebook Patrika.
Your well wisher,
Moti Ram Mensa, an Indian.
Illustration courtesy: Nidhin Shobhana