Passing of a great Hindu thinker

On 3 December 2003, pujyaniya sri Sita Ram Goel passed away.  He died in his sleep after a long illness.  His mind remained as sharp and lively as ever till the last day.  His contribution to Hindu revival is unmatched. It is with profound sadness that Hindu intellectuals read of the passing.

Sita Ram Goel was born in 1921 into a poor family. All through his career as a polemical writer, the most remarkable feature of Sita Ram Goel’s position in the Indian intellectual arena was that nobody even tried to give a serious rebuttal to his theses: the only counter-strategy has always been, and still is, “strangling by silence,” simply refusing to ever mention his name, publications and arguments. In the 1950s, Goel was not active on the “communal” battlefield: not Islam or Christianity but communism was his priority target. Yet, under Ram Swarup’s influence, his struggle against communism became increasingly rooted in Hindu spirituality, the way Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s anti-communism became rooted in Orthodox Christianity.

In May 1957, Goel moved to Delhi and got a job with a state-affiliated company, the Indian Cooperative Union, for which he did research and prospection concerning cottage industries. During the Chinese invasion in 1962, some government officials including PN Haksar, Nurul Hasan and the later Prime Minister IK Gujral, demanded Goel’s arrest. In 1963, Goel had a book published under his own name which he had published in 1961-62 as a series in Organiser under the pen name Ekaki (“solitary”): a critique of Nehru’s consistent pro-Communist policies, titled “In Defence of Comrade Krishna Menon.” The serial in Organiser had been discontinued after 16 installments because Eknath Ranade and AB Vajpayee feared that if any harm came to Nehru, the RSS would be accused of having “created the climate,” as in the Gandhi murder case. This critique of Nehru’s pro-China policies cost Goel his job. He withdrew from the political debate, went into business himself and set up Impex India, a company of book import and export with a modest publishing capacity.

Goel’s declared aim was to defend Hinduism by placing before the public correct information about the situation of Hindu culture and society, and about the nature, motives and strategies of its enemies. For, as the title of his book Hindu Society under Siege indicates, Goel claims that Hindu society has been suffering a sustained attack from Islam since the 7th century, from Christianity since the 15th century, also from Marxism, and all three have carved out a place for themselves in Indian society from which they besiege Hinduism. The avowed objective of each of these three world-conquering movements, with their massive resources, is diagnosed as the replacement of Hinduism by their own ideology, or in effect: the destruction of Hinduism. Goel’s writings are practically boycotted in the media, both by reviewers and by journalists and scholars collecting background information on the communal problem. Since most India-watchers have been brought up on the belief that Hindu activism can be identified with the RSS Parivar, they are bound to label Sita Ram Goel (the day they condescend to mentioning him at all, that is) as “an RSS man.” It may, therefore, surprise them that the established Hindu organizations have so far shown little interest in his work. Yet the RSS, VHP and BJP have all distanced themselves from Goel over the years.

It is not that they would spurn his services: in its Ayodhya campaign, the Vishva Hindu Parishad routinely referred to a “list of 3000 temples converted into or replaced by mosques,” meaning the list of nearly 2000 such cases in Goel, ed.: Hindu Temples, vol.1. Goel also published the VHP argumentation in the government-sponsored scholars’ debate of 1990-91 (entitled History vs Casuistry), and he straightened and corrected the BJP’s clumsily drafted White Paper on Ayodhya. In the Ayodhya dispute, time and again the BJP leaders have appealed to the Muslims to relinquish all claims to the supposed birthplace of the Hindu god Rama, arguing that destroying temples is against the tenets of Islam, and that the Quran prohibits the use of a mosque built on disputed land. In fact, whatever Islam decrees against building mosques on disputed property, can only concern disputes within the Muslim community (or its temporary allies under a treaty). Goel has demonstrated in detail that it is perfectly in conformity with Islamic law, and established as legitimate by the Prophet through his own example, to destroy pagan establishments and replace them with (or turn them into) mosques. For an excellent example, the Kaaba itself was turned into a mosque by Mohammed when he smashed the 360 pagan idols that used to be worshipped in it. Therefore, SR Goel is rather critical of the Ayodhya movement. In the foreword to Hindu Temples, vol.2, he writes: “The movement for the restoration of Hindu temples has got bogged down around the Rama Janmabhoomi at Ayodhya.

The more important question, viz. why Hindu temples met the fate they did at the hands of Islamic invaders, has not been even whispered. Hindu leaders have endorsed the Muslim propagandists in proclaiming that Islam does not permit the construction of mosques at sites occupied earlier by other people’s places of worship (...) The Islam of which Hindu leaders are talking exists neither in the Quran nor in the Sunnah of the Prophet. It is hoped that this volume will help in clearing the confusion. No movement which shuns or shies away from truth is likely to succeed. Strategies based on self-deception stand defeated at the very start.” Goel’s alternative is to wage an ideological struggle against Islam and Christianity, on the lines of the rational criticism and secularist politics, which have pushed back Christian self-righteousness in Europe. Hindu hearts and minds have to be won back by an effort of consciousness-raising, which includes education about the aims, methods and historical record of religions.