Look within, don't malign Malaviya

Second opinion: Sanjog Maheshwari Mr N Jamal Ansari's article, "BHU, not AMU, to blame for partition" (Second Opinion, August 28) reflects his poor knowledge of Hinduism which, in fact, is a way of life that epitomises the purest form of secularism as embodied in the lofty ideal of vasudev kutumbakam. Both great Indians -- Madan Mohan Malaviya and Sir Syed Ahmed -- could be described as ambassadors of this spirit of secularism. Aligarh Muslim University and Banaras Hindu University are both great institutions of higher learning with exemplary secular credentials. If these institutes have shown occasional signs of digression from the lofty ideals of their founders, then how can one blame the latter?

During my five years of association with AMU, I had no occasion even to remotely suspect anybody harbouring any discrimination or bias against anyone on the basis of his or her religion. At the Hadi Hasan Hall of the hostel we were all part of a great family -- I was nicknamed Sanjogbhai, everyone else was so-and-so bhai for me. I am sure my other Hindu classmates of the time will agree with me when I say that we will always cherish the memories of our joyful association with our Muslim friends during our AMU days. My experiences suggest that the secular spirit of Sir Syed still pervades the cultural ambience of this great seat of learning.

By this, however, I do not mean to suggest even remotely that there has not been any unwanted incident in the long history of AMU. All those unfortunate things that happened in the past were because of politics. And politics is something that no institution has ever remained free of. I challenge Mr Ansari to show me one university campus that has remained unaffected by the avalanche of greed, corruption and quota/reservation politics. It is a fact that wherever there is students' politics there is bound to be the existence of a diverse spectrum of political opinion. This, many would contend, is an example of how democratic our educational institutions really are. Obviously, violence in the name of any ideology cannot be condoned.

Thus, Mr Ansari will do well not to indulge in the dirty game of mud-slinging and should refrain from maligning a person of the stature of Madan Mohan Malaviya.