Tue Dec 24 11:09:26 UTC 2024: **RSS Chief Bhagwat’s Call for Peace Ignored by Followers, Highlights Internal Divisions**
Pune, India (December 23, 2024) – RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat’s recent lecture on “India – The Vishwaguru” in Pune has sparked controversy, not for its message of India as a global leader, but for the stark contrast between his public pronouncements on peace and harmony and the actions of his followers. While Bhagwat called for an end to the campaign to convert mosques into temples and condemned those who seek leadership by fanning communal flames, his appeal has been largely ignored by key figures within the RSS and its affiliated organizations.
Bhagwat’s speech, which included pleas for religious tolerance and an end to the divisive search for temples, was met with widespread praise from those critical of the RSS. However, this positive reception outside the organization was notably absent within the RSS itself. The RSS mouthpiece, *The Organiser*, downplayed Bhagwat’s call for peace, focusing instead on India’s eternal dharma and culture. The Hindi mouthpiece, *Panchjanya*, omitted the peace-related sections entirely.
This silence, coupled with statements from Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath declaring “Sanatana Dharma” as India’s national religion, highlights a deep internal division within the organization. Hardline elements within the RSS openly criticized Bhagwat, questioning his authority and urging him to remain silent on issues of religious tolerance. These factions have actively promoted a fiercely anti-Muslim ideology, directly contradicting Bhagwat’s public statements.
The article highlights the inherent duality within the RSS, showcasing a public face of peace and tolerance juxtaposed against a private, often violent, reality. While the RSS garners international goodwill by associating itself with Mahatma Gandhi, the organization simultaneously reveres figures like Golwalkar and Savarkar, whose ideologies are considered openly fascist by many.
The author questions Bhagwat’s authority, wondering if his calls for peace are genuine or merely performative gestures for an international audience. The article concludes by reflecting on the hypocrisy inherent in Bhagwat’s words, suggesting a profound disconnect between the RSS chief’s stated ideals and the actions of his followers. The author questions whether Bhagwat genuinely desires peace or whether he is simply a figurehead for an organization unwilling to relinquish its intolerant ideology.
First Piper 