Stop denigrating Nehru, save his memorial: Karan Singh

Rajya Sabha MP, former ICCR President and former chairman of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) Dr Karan Singh has waded into the Nehru memorial controversy. Taking strong exception to BJP general secretary Ram Madhav's comment that NMML is a Gandhi family "pocket borough", Singh tells TOI's Sagarika Ghose that the present government must not denigrate Nehru or a great institution like the NMML.He also said a museum of good governance is not what the NMML is supposed to be.
Ram Madhav recently called the NMML a Gandhi "pocket borough". Your response?
Pocket borough very unfortunate term. This is a great institution. It's one of the major academic and research institutions in Asia. You see, you must remember the background. Nehru died in 1964. He had been PM for 17 years, from the beginning of our Republic. Before that for 30 years he was the right hand person of Gandhi along with Patel. When he passed away there was a sudden void. Its difficult for generations now to realise. Nehru strode like a colossus, because he was the only PM we knew. When he passed away Shastri refused to move in to Teen Murti. We then decided to make the Teen Murti complex, the national memorial to Jawaharlal Nehru. Like you have the Lincoln memorial or the Jefferson memorial.
So its basically a memorial to Nehru?
The museum is not only restricted to Nehru but has collections on the freedom movement from 1857-1947. The library has become the greatest repository of the literature and documents of the freedom movement. Besides Nehru, we have archival collections of K.B. Hedgewar, M. S Golwalkar, Ram Manohar Lohiya, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, Jay Prakash Narayan. No member of the Gandhi family is on the society or the committee. Sonia Gandhi was not even on the executive committee, nor was Rahul. The NMML is a major asset to the intellectual life of India and must be promoted, protected and helped in every way. Do not denigrate a great institution.
How do you react to the proposal to make it into a museum of good governance?
What does good governance have to do with a museum of the freedom movement? You can have institutions of good governance separately, you have the Indian Institute of Public Administration. The NMML has to be what it was set up for.
Was the appointment of Mahesh Rangarajan illegal?
In the 9 years I was there we went through several directors. Mridula Mukherjee was also there, that created a lot of problems, she went under a cloud. We advertised and interviewed several and thought Mahesh very suitable. He was young active and the four years that he was there he made Teen Murti into a hive of academic activity, it was buzzing with seminars, events and lectures. The scholarship programme was going well. Mahesh was already attached to Delhi University, but left his job and came to us on a lower scale. That happens rarely. He was appointed at NMML four years ago. Then we decided to make him permanent, purely on his merit. We sent the file to the Ministry and received a letter from the ministry (not from the Election Commission) saying that the ACC (Appointment Committee of the Cabinet - PM HM and concerned minister) has approved, but please only notify the appointment after the elections. So that's what I did.
Couldn't you have done it earlier?
We did. We sent the file to the Culture ministry. But you know how files move in the government, its not in our hands. Ittefaq se hua that it was cleared only at end of the term. It was simply a question of making permanent a man who has worked for 4 years who has been found to be doing a very good job. It was hardly an earth shaking appointment of a political nature. Sonia Gandhi had nothing to do with it.
How do you react when the minister says the appointment was immoral and illegal
Immoral and illegal how? Somebody works well, you make them permanent. The timing was purely because of how slowly files move in the government, there was no mala fide intention. We were delighted that we had got a very good man at the NMML. We didn't want him to leave and technically he needn't have. If he had been a bureaucratic type, he would have said if it's illegal, go to court and prove it. But he was clearly distraught. He was such a suitable person, I feel so sorry about the fact that he's left.
Is this government trying to erase the legacy of Nehru?
There's an attempt to denigrate what Nehru did, and I do say, don't denigrate Nehru. I don't think attempts will succeed because what Nehru did was outstanding. He made mistakes, he was not a demi god, but if Gandhi was the father of the Indian nation, Nehru was the father of the Indian state. New generations have no idea of the condition we were in after Independence. Millions of refugees were pouring in to Delhi, millions were homeless, lakhs were murdered on both sides. Nehru and Patel held the country together. How can you denigrate such a man?
How must Nehru be remembered by new generations?
Nehru laid the foundation of modern India and the whole constitutional set up. He was an impeccable parliamentarian, people used to come from other states to listen to him speak in parliament, particularly on foreign affairs.For 14 years he was off and on in jail. His selected works now go into 80 volumes, he wrote letters to chief ministers, travelled incessantly in India educating people about democracy and why it was important. He was a people person, when he entered a room, the energy would change. Churchill said of him, "Nehru had no hate and no fear". That sums up Nehru. This doesn’t mean we approve of all that he did, Nehru can be revisited reassessed, but you can’t denigrate a leader.
In the sphere of culture and education, the right wing feels they have been marginalised by the Left for long..
There were a genre of Left leaning intellectuals who were allergic with anything to do with the word Hindu. Saraswati river is mentioned in Rig Veda as the great river, but they said, no Saraswati is a Hindutva invention. This was a tendency of Left wing historians. But now the government is going to the other extreme.
Is Gita the essence of India as the culture minister claims?
For me Hinduism is the Upanishads, even the Gita is a derivative work. I think the Upanishads are the soul of India. Upanishads are shruti - that which is heard, Gita is smriti - that which is remembered. Theologically, smriti is at a lower level than shruti.
What do you make of the PM's recent statement in Dublin that reciting Sanskrit shlokas is seen by some as against secularism?
Ridiculous. I think the PM was being facetious. I recite shlokas whenever I speak, I adore shlokas. Isn't that a bit like saying those who quote Shakespeare are criticised as being anti-Christian? There are five words in the Rig Veda : Ekam Sat Vipraha Bahuda Vadanti: truth is one, the wise call it by many names. This is the basic mantra of secularism and and its in the Rig Veda. There are multiple paths to the divine. But yes there is a point that it took 30 years to get Sanskrit into JNU. They refused to accept Sanskrit, after I became chancellor I said it has to be there as a resource. Nehru did yoga, he could do the shirshasana.