RSS National Spokesperson Shri Ram Madhav's interview to News Laundry

Text By : Sri Anand Purohit ( RASTRACHETHANA ) 

---

" Rashtriya Syayamsevak Sangh RSS National Spokesperson Shri Ram Madhav interviews with News Laundry where he speaks about sigficance of saying Jai Shri Ram, RSS views on Babri demolition, Media biased on RSS, relations with VHP, credit for the RamJanaambhoomi Andolan, women in RSS, significance of Khakhee shorts in Shakha, RSS on Muslim terrorism, RSS connection in Malegaon blasts, Youth joining RSS, RSS views on communism, RSS in assassination of Mahatma Gadhi, RSS views on caste system, Role of full-timers Pracharaks in RSS, RSS views on homosexuality, RSS relations with Muslim organizations, RSS on Uniform Civil Code." 

Anchor: Hello and welcome. Today on News Laundry I have with me Mr. Ram Madhav, the National Spokesperson of the Rashtriya Syayamsevak Sangh. 

Anchor: Hello and Welcome Sir.

Ram Madhav: Thank You.

Anchor: Jai Shri Ram.

Ram Madhav: Thank You.

Anchor: Is that appropriate greeting? I mean Jai Shri Ram as around the God, not Ram Madhav.

Ram Madhav: It’s always an appropriate greeting in North India. I mean, irrespective of whether it’s RSS or other ways. Jai Shri Ram is a greeting in North India anyway.

Anchor: But not in the South where you’re from?

Ram Madhav: Not so very popular or normal way of greeting in South India. In South India it is mostly ‘Namaskar’.

Anchor: Acha. What is your preferred greeting now?

Ram Madhav: Jai Shri Ram is fine from your side, from side Namaskar.

Anchor: Actually, honestly you know when I was young, our gardener (mali) would say Jai Shri Ram and it was no self-consciousness in saying Jai Shri Ram. I’m talking you know in the early 80’s. Now there is a political affiliation if you greet someone like that. Do you feel that change?

Ram Madhav: Maybe with some people, but generally even today you go to the country side in North India, very naturally they greet you with ‘Jai Ramji Ki’, ‘Jai Shri Ram’, it’s a very natural way of greeting.

Anchor: Nice. The first thing I would like to ask you is (for our viewers Mr. Ram Madhav have been spokesperson since 2001 of the RSS, one of the youngest spokesperson of any party or organization). When was your first exposure to RSS?

Ram Madhav: As a child I used to attend Shakha. 

Anchor: How old were you?

Ram Madhav: Then I was probably 4 or 5 because my father was also a member of RSS. So along with him I used to attend Shakha. Many people join RSS at a very young age.

Anchor: Most people

Ram Madhav: Yes, mostly they join the organization and then slowly they understand, then at some stage they decide whether to continue or many people don’t continue also.

Anchor: What is the drop out rate?

Ram Madhav: We don’t have any statistics with us.

Anchor: What do you think as you started at an early stage?

Ram Madhav: It is difficult to give it in actual numbers but once you join the organization and spend some time in it you will never forget that experience. In fact I know people who became Chief Ministers of states from different parties. When we meet them after 30 years - 40 years, they would ask us,’Are you still doing the ‘Namaste Sada Vatsale’?

Anchor: So it’s like a bounding school. It’s like the doon school creek. Like Rajiv Gandhi and their gang, they never forget what happened in school. Their loyalty remains to school even more than to the country. Like the ‘Doom Cabinet.’ Is it related like that?

Ram Madhav: No, association with RSS means association with country in a way. The way we look at the country and other things. So that association remains in their minds forever.

Anchor: Just before we started this interview Mr. Madhav informed me that actually he was 28 when the Ramjanmabhoomi movement took place, the Babri Masjid demolition or should we call it a disputed structure demolition took place. I used to work in an organization called NewsTrack which Madhu Trehan had started and you just told me that you used to take that cassettes around the country to show what had happened. Is that right? 

Ram Madhav: We definitely use to watch them. I think they used to be monthly news magazines. We used to wait for them because they used to contain three - four major events.

Anchor: And why was this particular episode of Babri demolition offered?

Ram Madhav: No, before that also the Karseva was also there in one of the cassettes then actual incident was there. Subsequently, two - three other stories from the Ram Janmabhoomi related issues. 

Anchor: You used to show this to other shakhas? In what light? I mean what would they get from it?

Ram Madhav: This was the actual video footage of that incident. So, those who could not go would actually see that. 

Anchor: What were the reactions when they watched that?

Ram Madhav: Ram Janmabhoomi Movement in our view was a historical movement in this life of the nation in post-independence. 

Anchor: Are you proud of that movement when the structure came down or not?

Ram Madhav: About the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, i.e. the movement for building a Ram Temple there, which was actually right from the beginning we have always maintained that it was not about the temple, it was about the self-respect of the nation. In that sense we always supported that movement. But certain consequences, like the unfortunate incident on 6^th December 1992 which ended in pulling down of the structure was not certainly there in the scheme.

Anchor: Do you feel sad when someone like Advani calls it a shameful moment or rather he would call it a moment of pride?

Ram Madhav: No for certain historic developments, you need not have to be judgmental about them. I am not saying what Advaniji said is right or wrong. I am not even commenting on his comment. But, I’m saying that I need not be judgmental about it that whether I should take it as a matter of pride or a matter of sorrow. I would say it was a historic moment. Something which was not planned had happened. Let’s take it to its side. Move on.

Anchor: No I think it’s great to be non-judgmental which is one of the thing I appreciate about any organization. About RSS also, being non-judgmental is always attractive which is why an organization like RSS could beat you! Why do you think it is that an organization like the RSS has such a stormy relationship with the main-stream media? It is often the favorite punching bag of the main-stream media. Why is it? 

Ram Madhav: I really don’t agree with this whole proposition that main-stream media has a problem with RSS always. It depends on what you call a main-stream media?

Anchor: Like English Media?

Ram Madhav: If you’re talking about the so-called Delhi-based English media, then yes, occasionally we find them too judgmental, a bit of ununderstanding of what RSS really stands for. Sometimes deliberate and sometimes because of the training. RSS is something which you have to really understand seriously. One of the scholars said about RSS that it is very difficult to understand it but very easy to misunderstand it. So many people by looking at it superficially tend to misunderstand it. I give benefit of doubt to some of our English journalist friends that they probably misunderstood us. Some do it deliberately knowing that what they are saying is not true. 

Anchor: But generally what is it about the RSS that brings that?

Ram Madhav: It’s a core philosophical difference. The way we look at India, the way they look at Bharat, that’s a very fundamental difference.

Anchor: Is it the non-judgmental way of RSS as opposed to very judgmental way of the English meida where they have a set of rights and wrongs?

Ram Madhav: About RSS they became judgmental. We can have a view point about the country. We can say this is the way we look at it. Journalists can say that alright this is a view point, but there is another view point, we support you or don’t support you. Fair enough. In democracy, everybody is entitled to his views. But to say that I am a sinner, I’m a fringe element, is what is judgmental! That’s not correct about any media, whether main stream.Any way I don’t give credit to only English media in Delhi. In this country even Hindi media is mainstream, Urdu media is mainstream and there we know lots of people who understand what we stand for.

Anchor: You’re right. Living in Delhi we kind of think that everything mainstream is Delhi which is not true and historical movements have proved that time and again. What is your relationship as an organization with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the VHP?

Ram Madhav: You know in the course of last 80-85 years that RSS is in existence, the members i.e. the Syayamsevaks  have gone out and started various organizations sometimes by planning from RSS, sometimes independently. Vishwa Hindu Parishad was started by a specific purpose by RSS members. So we still continue to have this relationship at the ideological level, we both share the ideological aspect.

Anchor: Is it your errant child?

Ram Madhav: Every child has the right to be errant. But it’s a very grown-up organization. It is an organization that is in existence for 60 years now.

Anchor: The Congress have been in around for a longer time that that, but I wouldn’t say that Rahul Gandhi is a sign of maturity.

Ram Madhav: I don’t won’t to make any personal comment.

Anchor: The RSS is too gentle and too kind. 

Ram Madhav: As far as the relationship is concerned, we share HR relationship, we share human resources. We sent our cadres there, there cadres join RSS. It is a two-way HR relationship. In 60’s they launched a program to mobilize Hindu Saints to declare that untouchability is a sin. They got Hindu saints to come under one platform that in this country untouchability is a big sin. This was a great revolution for Hinduism in the 20^th century, which Babasaheh Ambedkar, Mahatma Gandhi all wanted, that Vishwa Hindu Parishad can achieve in 1969 at Udupi.

Anchor: Sir you endorse VHP’s program?

Ram Madhav: Broader program, certainly Yes.

Anchor: Some programs make you cringe, that they dent the RSS’s non-judgmental aura and credibility?

Ram Madhav: All organizations have freedom to charcoal its own programs. Again we don’t want to be judgmental about their programs. But, I don’t think that one should blame the Vishwa Hindu Parishad for any program. They are pursuing the agenda that we generally thought that they should pursue.

Anchor: Have you met often enough Dr. Praveen Togadia?

Ram Madhav: Occasionally, but not very often as he’s busy with his activities.

Anchor: What’s he like in personal interactions, because when I see him speak he’s very dramatic.

Ram Madhav: He has only two hands, two legs.

Anchor: He’s got a character when he talks. I am not judging him. I am talking in a very non-judgmental and interesting way.

Ram Madhav: Again it’s not very fair on my part to comment on any individual. He’s a senior leader in the organization. He’s a nice person. A cancer surgeon, by training.

Anchor: It means he’s good with sharp objects then?

Ram Madhav: Every doctor does it.

Anchor: Sometimes they get disproportionately more space of things that maybe the RSS did. For example if I were to just quote what Justice Liberham during the Justice Liberham Commission, VHP’s Sadhvi Ritambara is a very loud noise on the RamJanambhoomi movement, back then I am talking about. Nowadays, people wouldn’t know. During those days, she was a person who everybody would have heard of and Justice Liberham had said that the Babri Masjid, I mean the disputed structure, the blame or credit for the entire temple construction movement must be necessarily attributed to Sangh Parivar. However organizations like VHP who won’t even have grown up of 10,000 get a lot of space where an organization like RSS which has got 50,000 Shakhas alone, no one ever knows how many members it has gets disproportionately less credit. Does that bother you?

Ram Madhav: See this whole movement it’s not about credit in the first place. It’s not that RSS should get credit for it or Shivsena should get the credit for that whole demolition thing. It’s not about that. But let me gently tell you Vishwa Hindu Parishad has its unit in 100,000 villages, more villages than we have our Shakhas. So they have a large presence in the country. But even that, that movement was a hugely popular movement. From the grassroots people joined it and participated in a big way. As per has Liberham Commission is concerned, we said when the report was tabled, when it was released by the Home Minister also, we took number of objections to several of its conclusions.

Anchor: So he should give you credit or not?

Ram Madhav: We have not launched any movement in all this years for credit for our organization.

Anchor: That may not have been the purpose, but that could have been an off-shoot like Amitabh Bachchan became an actor for the love of the love of the craft. But people made him a super-star. So, maybe Ram Janambhoomi Movement was started for the love of Lord Ram.

Ram Madhav: But also for the love of the country.

Anchor: Ya, but is it possible that you should get the credit.

Ram Madhav: Anybody can take the credit. Our Raghuvanshi can take; Bal Thackeray can take for putting idol inside. Bal Thackerayji had taken credit for whatever happened that day, anyway anybody can take the credit.

Anchor: No, I think if Bal Thaceray can go to UP, Ayodhya, it will be full of Bhaiyas and he may not like it.

Ram Madhav: No, if you recall, he said those who pulled down the structure were Shivsainiks.

Anchor: But they were all Bhaiyas and Biharis and UPites?

Ram Madhav: Anybody can take the credit.

Anchor: Okay fine. Why can’t women be members of the RSS?

Ram Madhav: In RSS, we have number of activities, number of constituent organizations in which women participate in very large numbers. For example, our service projects, about 170,000 of them, many of them are run by women. In-fact self-help groups are completely run by women. As far as daily shakha is concerned, which is one core activity of RSS, since it takes place very early in the morning; we thought that there should be a different activity at a different time for women. They have shakhas, about 6000 Shakhas are held for women. They take place in the afternoon or sometimes in the early evenings i.e. 4 o’clock or so, which time doesn’t suits for men. It is time of suitability of men and women, because it has to be happening every day! Every day my mother or my sister or somebody has to go in the Shakha. If it takes place in the morning, then things would be difficult. Similarly, if a man, like if I were to go in the Shakha every afternoon 12 o’clock, who will earn money!

Anchor: I went through your websites, and in the Frequently Asked Questions, your often asked why those khakhee shorts? And I read it because the morning Shakha is all about physical exercise, it’s like a physical training (P.T.), shorts make it easier to train. Is that the reason?

Ram Madhav: Right.

Anchor: Isn’t shorts a western concept?

Ram Madhav:  Shorts were very much in use in our country for the police and paramilitary during the British Regiment and even after the British Regiment for about 20 years. That was the uniform they used. We are using shorts only for the sake of convenience. And we never realized that our shorts are also now in international news. It’s news for News Laundry. It’s a matter of convenience and we actually allow any shorts for our daily activities including Bermudas. We have no problem with those things. In fact this whole perception of we oppose everything is wrong.

Anchor: While I sympathize with the RSS and agree with whatever much it says, I also understand why some people say, because many of your members come up with a rather unusual claim that western clothes are responsible for this, vo ye pehente hai, vo jeans pehente hai, and these people have some roots to the RSS, people say ye dekho RSS kya bol rahe hai! So what you’re saying is RSS doesn’t says ki western clothes nahi pehene chahiye, there are no such dogmas.

Ram Madhav: No as I said, in our Shakhas we allow any shorts. Many people come in the so-called Bermudas. It’s for the convenience for the program we’re undertaking. Obviously, we can’t play kabaddi in jeans. 

Anchor: Exactly, I have been to a Shakha if you would be happy to know. You also play a game called Kaun Shivaji, where you know Aurangzeb is chasing, whoever cuts, like school-children in English Medium call ‘cut the cake.’ But in RSS it’s called ‘Kaun Shivaji’ the name given to the same game. So, I understand why those shorts. But when I see everyone with the buttons and the khadhis, times have moved and now you get alternatives are more convenient. But, your shorts are the same?

Ram Madhav: Not for day-to-day Shakhas, but for certain occasions, we use our different type of shorts which you’re talking of. That shorts we use twice a year when we do the march-past on the streets or some event of the organization. There is a suggestion from many people that we should shift to long regular pants, is actively under consideration and we’ll certainly change and when we change, it cannot be secret, we’ll tell you.

Anchor: Fantastic. During the peak of the war against terror, the Bush Doctrine after 9/11, the Muslim terror was the biggest conversation all over the world. That time there was a one particular sentence to which a lot of people took objection to, which many would say that there is an element of truth in it. I want your reaction to that, which is ‘All Muslims may not be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims’. What is your view on that statement?

Ram Madhav: Depending upon what you call as terrorism, for example IRA (Irish Republican Army) raged a terror war, continues to do it, less often now, now less frequently. Do we call them terrorists? If yes, then what kind of terrorists are they? Are they Christian or Catholic terrorists? So, I would only say that what that particular terrorist says is what you have to take into account. If the terrorist is saying, that I’m doing it for the sake of my religion, then take it. Don’t go on by what the apologists say in Delhi’s English media. Apologists may give any color to it. But what that terrorist is saying exactly is important.

Anchor: So, at that time, coming back to the statement, that ‘All Muslims may not be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims’ in that context during the Jihad war, would you think it is an accurate statement?

Ram Madhav: I’m sure you must be aware of it that the statement came from a senior Bank Official in Saudi Arabia. No RSS man had said it. So whether we agree with or not is inevitable. Today we see a variety of terrorists and somebody who is indulging in terrorism in the name of Maoism in large parts of India. They have put innocent people to death. We have sacrificed hundreds of our cadres to Maoists. So, in our view they are also terrorists. Again at the same time, what the terrorist says is important.

Anchor: So, you don’t entirely disagree with the statement, but you also don’t agree to it, that’s what I am getting. You don’t want to get in a position which is consistent with the non-judgmental attitude of the RSS, which I greatly admire!

Ram Madhav: From that statement onwards, things have moved further. I mean at that point it was true.

Anchor: In the same context, someone retorted and I was stumped at the time said that ‘Similarly, not all terrorists are Hindus, but the Hindu ones end from being from the RSS’. How do you react to this statement?

Ram Madhav: Again that’s why I qualified your previous statement as what that particular terrorist indulging in terror activities is important. In RSS, there is no place for hatred, no place for violence, no place for terror in our scheme of things. Anybody indulging in that should be out of it. And if he’s doing it, he cannot be a Hindu, because in Hinduism there is no place to kill innocents.

Anchor: It is unfortunate that RSS names get sullied for all the social work it does around the world since 1920’s, like Sadhvi Pragya, whose father was a RSS worker. Then there is Swami Assemanand, then there is Sunil Joshi, then there is a person who is alleged to have killed him, Harshal Solanki. Each of these people is apparently connected to the RSS. Why do you think that is?

Ram Madhav: Firstly, in the cases in which they have been made accused now, in all those cases earlier a different set of people were arrested. 110 Muslim boys were arrested. One or two of the cases, those Muslim boys are still in jail. They are not even let-off. Now, suddenly a different set of people were arrested, the names you mentioned. Now, the prosecution wants the country to believe that they were not the culprits, but these were the culprits. Here also, no evidence. I’m not saying whether they’re right or wrong, whether they have committed that act or not. Again, I don’t want to be judgmental. But, how can without any evidence we conclude that first they are guilty? Secondly, since they are guilty, RSS is guilty.

Anchor: I’m not being judgmental. I’m not taking positions. My position on the RSS is as neutral and sympathetic as yours. I am merely saying that if someone rattles off a list of those people who are accused of violent attacks in the name of Hinduism and 95% of them end up with having some link with the RSS, then it weakens my position to argue on behalf of the RSS.

Ram Madhav: Probably only to prove the point that this conspiracy has been hatched, one would tempt to say that. Only to prove that there are some people from the RSS also who are terrorists. You want to prove that, so you implicate it. 

Anchor: So, you’re saying that it could be possible that all the people from the RSS are framed to give RSS a bad name?

Ram Madhav: Firstly, many of these people, about 90% of the names you mentioned had nothing to do with the RSS when they committed that crime, probably some of them had associations with RSS before. Sorry, I used the word committed crime; they are ‘alleged’ to have committed the crime. It’s only an allegation, because we have gone through the whole things very carefully. We still are not sure that whether the allegations are right. But, they were not members of RSS, if that’s the case, then I would start calling everyone a terrorist. Last week a Congress leader in Tripura was caught carrying illegal weapons in Bangladesh. Police arrested him. So, should I know say that Congress party is a party of terrorists? You cannot say. Similarly, merely you found some people and accused them of some wrong doings cannot blame the whole organization.

Anchor: Is it that people as adults make a conscious decision to join the RSS? Or is that rare?

Ram Madhav: These days it’s not rare at all. In fact more and more people join RSS as university students.

Anchor: Do you think that is why the discipline of RSS is going down as these rowdy rogue elements entering without understanding the culture right from the age of four like people like you have?

Ram Madhav: No, RSS discipline is very much intact to this day.

Anchor: Mr. Madhav, I have the greatest sympathy for RSS. I cannot acknowledge that someone who’s 18 can be taught a culture like that. There is a reason why people join the army at 16-17 as I had a shot at IMA (Indian Military Academy); I have done programs in NDA (National Defence Academy). The kind of regimentation you can do at that age, someone can’t decide at the age of 25 and say that I would to become a Major in the Army. He will not be able to do it.

Ram Madhav: Even in Army, you can join after graduation.

Anchor: That is because they are running short of people. It’s a fact. That is because the army has a shortfall. Otherwise in Army you have to be from that age as that’s the only age you get discipline. Otherwise, some disciplined person like me who likes to keep a beard ordaadhi-mooch and long hair joins the Army. Do you think they will let me in?

Ram Madhav: For inculcating discipline, patriotism etc; age is never a bar. You can join the organization at any age, you can inculcate those values and as far as the question of discipline is concerned, we have absolutely no difficulty in what age they join the RSS and these days we get a lot of number of university-level students joining directly.

Anchor: I have read about RSS’s statements about different things. Otherwise from a certain kind of Muslim fanaticism, certain kind of Christian fanaticism, another big problem the RSS has with is communists. You hate communists. And I do too. Why?

Ram Madhav: We certainly have a problem with the ideology of communism because we always stood for one nation idea of this country. We always believed that India is one nation. Communism from beginning believes that India was never one nation.  At the time of partition also, if you read the communist records they advocated for 16 different national entities in this country. So, at the very ideological level we have a problem.

Anchor: But the RSS’s dislikes for communists goes into the 1930’s, that time communist thinking didn’t have any consequence. You have a problem with Indian Communists or you have a problem with communism in general.

Ram Madhav: I’m saying about Indian Communists.

Anchor: So, just to clarify, RSS has no problem with the idea of communism?

Ram Madhav: Communism idea, we have a major problem with their division of society into two warring groups, there is a perpetual war between the ‘haves’ and ‘haves not.’ On the whole the idea of communism stood for all these years and stands this day. To divide the society into two groups and to imagine that there is a perpetual war between these two groups is something that a Hindu mind cannot comprehend. That’s what we felt.

Anchor: You think also it’s unrealistic like I studied economics in graduation and there was a paper, I was completely blown away that it was prescribed as it didn’t seem a serious academic. It said that in the pure communist society there is no police, there are no criminals because there is no crime, there is no pride and there is no ego. It was a rather Utopian.

Ram Madhav: That was during Utopia, which they wanted to create and when that situation came Lenin never gave up his power. Lenin ideally should have given up his power for Utopia to come. But, he said that was a Utopia.

Anchor: So, do you think communists sell Utopia as a brand?

Ram Madhav: They could not sell it for long. I don’t want to make too much comments about them as the world has seen and rejected that ideology in seven decades and in Hinduism we say Shatayu Bhava, they could not do for hundred years.

Anchor: What would you say to this statement that there existed no state, no King, No penalty, all protected each other by virtue.

Ram Madhav: Yes, in Hinduism there was a time, the Satyayuga, Kritayuga, there was a concept Narajyam, Naivarajyasi. There was no king or rule, nobody to punish, nobody to be punished, there was an ideal state. It was there at one point of time.

Anchor: It sounds very communist.

Ram Madhav: They stopped at the level of capturing power.

Anchor: But do you believe that this state is possible? This whole communist USP.

Ram Madhav: It’s not communist, but very Hindu concept of Narajyam, Naivarajya. You must understand that there is a last line in that, because we have to read the full Shlokha, the last line says Dharmenaivya Prajasarve Rakshantismam Parasparam, people will protect each other on the basis of Dharma. So, this dharma is different from communism.

Anchor: So, do you believe this too?

Ram Madhav: Dharma-based society is what we strive for!

Anchor: Obviously you would know have been for the RSS for so long, this lines is from a book ‘A bunch of thoughts’ by Guruji. I am a little confused. Someone told me this book is banned in India. Is that true?

Ram Madhav: Absolutely not.

Anchor: Was it at any point.

Ram Madhav: No, never. ‘Bunch of Thoughts’ is actually a collection of pieces of speeches by Shri Golwalkar.

Anchor: Guru Golwalkar was the Second Sarsanghachalak of the RSS. The man who made it a force to reckon in India and he’s been shown in the shady roles in films which have to assassination of Bapu and we always see this long-haired man standing in the background. Do you ever feel outraged when you see films like that?

Ram Madhav: That is because nobody knew the actual history. There was a person by name, Mr. Narayan Apte in the group of people that were accused of Mahatma Gandhiji’s murder. Narayan Apte used to have a beard.

Anchor: So, in all this films that man they show is supposed to be Narayan Apte.

Ram Madhav: I tend to think that.

Anchor: I think you’re being too kind to this film’s makers.

Ram Madhav: If they are trying to show Guruji Golwalkar, they were wrong. And I must tell you that when Mahatmaji was murdered, Guruji was in Chennai, he immediately issued an statement to all the RSS Shakhas to bring the flag half-mast and organize condolence meetings for Mahatmaji and he immediately flew to Delhi to pay his personal condolence to Mahatmaji.

Anchor: So, do you feel that RSS has been unfairly demonized in involvement in Bapu’s murder?

Ram Madhav: Absolutely, three commissions have been constituted after Mahatmaji’s murder. Nathuram Godse said 'RSS was a coward; it had no courage to do it. So he did it'.

Anchor: But he was a member of the RSS like this other four people. You have too many black sheep’s.

Ram Madhav: 15-20 years before that incident he would have probably attended it. But, he certainly disassociated his act and himself with the RSS. There were three commissions; the last one was in 1967 i.e. the Kapoor Commission. It also categorically said that there is no evidence to links this things to RSS.

Anchor: I don’t think you should get defensive about that.

Ram Madhav: Not at all, in fact the whole country never believed in it. But right from 1950 onwards in our morning prayer we have been having Mahatma Gandhi’s name. So, where is the question of apology?

Anchor: I think that also could be because as luck would have it that some RSS guy who has attended at some point ends up either blowing something or shooting someone and that happens at such alarming regularity that people try to connect the two.

Ram Madhav: There is no alarming regularity. Whatever Nathuram Godse did to Mahatma was absolutely a wrong act. We condemned it and anybody indulging in violence will not have RSS’s endorsement or support.

Anchor: In the ‘Bunch of Thoughts’ Guruji said that it your dharma i.e. your duty to work hard and collect as much as money possible, but then you should use that wealth for the betterment of society. He doesn’t say that one shouldn’t earn money. So, in that sense you must be very proud of Nitin Gadkari as a true RSSian who has very well internalized Guruji’s thoughts. He has a mass mind-boggling great amount of wealth. The second part of what Guruji said that you should give back to society, probably Gadkari would do that sometime soon. But, do you subscribe to this kind of very capitalist type ideology?

Ram Madhav: Firstly how much mind-boggling money Gadkariji has I have no idea. Probably you know the better.

Anchor: One of his children got married and the anticipatory expenditure according to the per plate cost, the amount of guests that came, the decoration, it ran into several crores. So, I am assuming that a poor man does not do that. But, I feel that’s great if it’s your dharma to do that.

Ram Madhav: In our system, it is encouraged to earn money by Purashartha. Don’t make it subjective to anyone person. Any earns through righteous means, through proper means, through hard-work and then distributes it to billions of people.

Anchor: So when are we getting into the second part of it? Or do you think that this is also possible that Mr. Gadkari or anyone, not him in particular has got the first part right of earning a lot of money and what was the second part was making his driver a director, making other staff members directors. He was moving forward to the second part of giving back to the less-fortunate. Do you think it was misunderstood what he was trying to do?

Ram Madhav: Actually these could be very important questions, but directed to a wrong address. In our country we have a habit of sensationalizing things. Gadkariji had asked for and offered himself for an investigation which is going on. So, I don’t want to be jump the gun and say that he has done something wrong.

Anchor: I’m not saying that he has done something wrong. I just read this ‘Bunch of Thoughts’  and read that it is one’s dharma, one’s duty to earn a lot of money and then give back to society. I was merely thinking that Mr. Gadkari bring such a proud member of RSS has done the first half of it and maybe he was accomplishing only the second-half by giving back to people like his driver and others. Maybe that was misunderstood.

Ram Madhav: I’m sure you will have a News Laundry session.

Anchor: I am hoping this would happen soon. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad was primarily organized to get rid of the untouchability as a concept. Yet, I find in ‘Bunch of Thoughts’ that Guruji endorses the caste system on Page 36 infact there is a Shloka about the Brahmins is the hand, Kshatriyas being the arms, Vaishyas the thighs and Shudras the feet. Now, for someone who’s trying to fight the evils of caste system to endorse that idea in a book may make his job a little harder.

Ram Madhav: I don’t know what you mean by endorsing. This was a description at a point in time about the four varnas and not castes. It was about four varnas. You please tell me how many castes are there today?

Anchor: Primarily four.

Ram Madhav: 3900 according to government data. Where there is discussion of 3900 body parts there? So, that was about a different context, about a different time. In any case legs and hands are less important than head if one thinks about that for body parts, are all integral to our body. All this together become integral equal parts of the body. So, let’s not go into it.

Anchor: Sir, head is more important than hand.

Ram Madhav: Without hand will head do everything? For your stomach to be fed, you need hands. What will you do without stomach? Remove stomach and live with head. Varna was the thing of the past, today’s caste system has nothing to do with the age-old varna system, the next Sarsanghachalak after Guruwalkarji Balasaheb Deoras has categorically said that the caste system has outlived its utility. He said it should go. It should go means, you just cannot remove it.  It should go gradually through a process. Today media people are one caste.

Anchor: So, most media people are high class. That is the problem.

Ram Madhav: No, I mean to say one media person marries another media person. An IAS officer marries other IAS officer irrespective of caste. They don’t see caste there.

Anchor: Speaking of marriage, why don’t RSS people get married?

Ram Madhav: Millions of RSS members are married!

Anchor: I’m not saying all but the ones who make it big. Are you by the way married?

Ram Madhav: No, I’m not.

Anchor: That’s why you make it big at a young age.

Ram Madhav: It’s not like that. Only Pracharaks, full-time RSS activists have been mandatory to remain unmarried because of the pressure of work. For example, we have to travel a lot. We have no time for any personal life. So, for that reason some 2,500 people remain like that. But, RSS is run by 500,000 people.

Anchor: You have been extremely non-judgmental. You didn’t wanted to give a judgment on ‘Muslims are terrorists; terrorists are Muslims’ issue, on the English media. For an organization that is so non-judgmental, their views on homosexuality, on same sex marriage, on women empowerment in a sense of them that are allowed to smoke, drink or do whatever they want. You see very judgmental comment. Why is that?

Ram Madhav: On all these issues which are in a way in the present situation, a kind of new things for our society. What all you described today are relatively new aspects of our society.

Anchor: I don't think homosexuality is a new aspect of our society. It was around for a while, it was just not discussed.

Ram Madhav:  Not the way it is glorified. When you glorify it, it’s a new thing; otherwise homosexuality is there in our ancient scriptures. But, never glorified it. Always allowed to remain a minor thing.

Anchor: So you don’t have problem it?

Ram Madhav: No, what I feel is that a new thing is sort to be glorified which is slightly apart from the normal mainstream life there tend to be different views. My point is when there is a different perception, why are you pouncing on them. When somebody says homosexuality is not important, you take it as a view point. Those who undertake homosexuality, carry on.

Anchor: I am saying that there will be all sorts of viewpoints; I am merely talking about the consistency of positions. For if someone says I am very non-judgmental, but how dare you be gay?

Ram Madhav: I am non-judgmental about you. I say, I still hold my view. The problem with our so-called liberalists is that actually they are liberal-fascists.

Anchor: I interviewed the Secretary of the Jamaat e Islami Hind a couple of weeks ago, and their views on homo-sexuality and these issues that this liberal-fascists all the time keep scrubbing our throats are very similar to the RSS. So, I asked him that why not the Jamaat e Islami and the RSS work together to make the society better because both of you have a lot of similar views on a lot of this issues. The Rashtriya Syayamsevak Sangh e Jamaat or some switch-out. He gave this answer ‘Main aapse kehta hu, Mohan Bhagwatji agar koi aachi baat kahe, aur nek baat ho, tik baat ho, to kya Jamaat e Islami uski mukafat islea karegi ki wo RSS ke hai. Dono ka morcha ban sakta hai aur banana bhi chahiye. Agar hamare is program ke jarea unke tak ye pegam pahuche. Mujhe bahut khushi hogi agar vo contact kare aur ham to har ek se ho nek aur acha kaam kar raha hai uske saath kaam karna chahte hai, hamai koi haraj nahi. Jahapar differences honge vahapar batladenge.’ So can we hope to see the love and see RSS contacting the Jamaat e Islami Hind?

Ram Madhav: During the emergency when 140,000 of our cadres were in jail. At that time many Jamaat e Islaami cadres were also in jail. At that time a beautiful bond developed between the two groups. As a result after the emergency was lifted, Balasaheb Deoras, the then Chief of RSS was invited for a number of mosques and a number of programs of the Jamaat e Islaami and then he was felicitated.

Anchor: Then what happened?

Ram Madhav: Some kind of interaction continues to this day.

Anchor: Can it be more, I mean it would be fantastic if the Jamaat e Islaami and the RSS had a morning Shakha and a Namaaz happening. I mean Mani Ratnam would not ever come with a better frame!

Ram Madhav: It need not be for the purpose of demonstration. In India, lot of things has gone down in the drain because of this whole purpose of demonstration. It should be genuine. We have a good interaction with a number of Muslims groups. They meet us. They work with us. In many places, they join us or throw flower petals on our march-past and all. It happens in a very natural way and we would like it that way. Yes, we would happily interact with anybody who is for the good of our country, for the good of our society. We are with them.

Anchor: But the problem is that they won’t to impose a Shariat.

Ram Madhav: No, that is for the larger country to decide whether we should have one law in this country.

Anchor: Don’t tell me you’re not even going to judge that. I mean that could have your opposition.

Ram Madhav: We have always said that there should be one law in the country. One common civil code, you don’t call it uniform because it can be a little accommodative, but it should be common to all. One law for all.

Anchor: Well on that note I want to thank you and I hope that the RSS evolves and the next time when I come your morning Shakha is sponsored by Speedo, not the Khakhi shorts variety, just to make it a more comfortable.

Ram Madhav: You will already see that if you come now.

Anchor: A whole bunch of Speedos?

Ram Madhav: They are playing football in good sports shoes.

Anchor: Fantastic. Wonderful talking to you sir.