Rajesh Pathak
Regarding the consequences of education introduced by British in 19th century what eminent writer, Ramdhari Singh Dinkar, had to say is that due to its effect the mentality of neo-educated Indian youths had got to be the mentality of a vanquished. So as to keep their heads high in self-respect before their Christian teachers, Christian friends and British they openly began to condemn the ways of Dharma, in the same way as were doing the missionaries. Among them who were more thoughtful they went as far as to declare that be it God with form or formless, and be it Vedic or Puranic , modern or ancient all the ways of Hindu Dharma are of no use. Since there had been no place for Dharma in education-curriculum they had no idea about it. They were in fact foreigners in their own homes. [ Page 525,526; Sanskruti Ke Chaar Adheyaye]
In 1947 we gained independence and British went back. But the legacy they left behind them was now taken forward in the name of ‘secularism’. And how deep was the effect of it that I myself came to realize when I happened to go in a symposium held last days. There I heard an incident from a speaker. The incident was related to such an individual who went to America in 1976 for higher study, and settled there. After 14 years he had a chance to come back to India in 1990 . The occasion was to join a seminar organized in Mumbai. Since the five star hotel where he stayed was lying in the posh area of Mumbai, it, he says, didn’t make him feel as if he had come from America to the different world of his homeland. But next day the jingle of the bell of the temple fell in his ear. Searching he reached the temple. And then so long as he stayed, he went to the temple daily.
Seminar, then, came to an end, and the last day the participants were invited to share their experience with others. And when his turn came, he told, ‘No doubt, I gained much from the seminar. But the chance I got having come to India to visit the temple will remain indelible in my memory for ever. That was the moment of supreme bliss for me.’ Hearing this from him, one of his Indian Hindu fellows later lashed out at him , ‘ What was that you were telling about temple! What was the need to make public the matter of personal faith. Don’t you know there are Christians and Muslims too in the seminar, and this might hurt their sentiments?’
It was beyond understanding for this poor fellow as to why should somebody’s religious sensibility be hurt due to mere mention of his visiting to the temple. But where he knows that it was due to ‘secularism’ that more such things to the self-denial of national heritage and antiquity as a whole had got to be ingrained in the mindset of the then people at large !
