One phrase that had nearly gone out of circulation was "Unity in Diversity." Originally coined by the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, it first appeared in his book The Discovery of India. He believed that India's diversity of languages, religions, castes, and creeds could be a source of strength, not conflict. It denotes harmony and unity among different cultures and regions.

Alas, since India's "real independence" in 2014, every effort is being made to obliterate the memory of Nehru. Overnight, the Nehru Museum became the Prime Minister's Museum. Today, Nehru is projected as the one responsible for all the ills afflicting the nation. If he relied on science and technology to take the country forward, there are many leaders competing to take the country backwards.

That is why I was a little taken aback when Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in his year-ending Mann Ki Baat, broadcast by All India Radio and Doordarshan, mentioned this phrase, perhaps for the first time. He and his team are fond of ushering in a one country, one election, one dress, one food system.

Modi mentioned it in the context of the Mahakumbh at Allahabad, renamed Prayagraj, which began on January 13 and would conclude on February 26. He said the Mahakumbh, held every 12 years, symbolises India's unity in diversity. He waxed eloquent on the significance of the Kumbh for Hindus, their culture, and traditions.

This year's Mahakumbh is particularly significant as the planetary positions are hugely "beneficial," and this happens only once in 144 years. Not everybody is lucky enough to witness or take part in this kind of Mahakumbh. Small wonder that over the next one and a half months, a staggering 400 million Hindus are expected to participate in the Mahakumbh.

It is not the first time that the Mahakumbh has been organised in the country. In fact, this tradition has been intact for over a millennium, whether parts of the country were under the Mughals or the Europeans. They never did anything against the tradition, which UNESCO recognises as one of the greatest traditions of mankind. Nobody ever spoke or did anything against the holding of the Kumbh.

When my son joined the Press Trust of India, he was posted at Haridwar for almost the entire duration of the Kumbh there. He filed a series of human-interest stories from Haridwar, where his connections extended to not just the government authorities but also the religious leaders. Neither he nor anyone considered his religion an irritant, let alone a liability, at Haridwar.

I lost some respect for the Kumbh and Mahakumbh when I heard from reliable sources that many young men would bring their aged relatives, like parents and grandparents, and leave them at the mela. They would not be able to return to their native places as they would not know the way, being mostly illiterate.

There were philanthropic organisations that would provide such stranded persons with meals. They would eventually die on the banks of the river, whether it is the Ganga in Haridwar or, the Triveni of Ganga, Yamuna, and Saraswati in Prayagraj or the Shipra in Ujjain and the Godavari in Nashik. This was one way of getting rid of old people, who thought it was lucky to die at such sacred places.

I don't believe that such practices have come to an end. If children who take their parents and grandparents to the Mahakumbh return without them are legally penalised, this practice will come to an end. I wish the government had thought along these lines.

Instead, the emphasis of Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad chief Mahant Ravindra Puri, who has been busy organising the Mahakumbh, is on something else. The pilgrims converge there to take a dip in the river. It was Puri who was the first to take the holy dip. The first day's bath was known as Shahi Snan or the Royal Bath. Only the privileged, like Puri, were allowed to take a bath on the inaugural day. Shahi is not a Sanskrit word.

This year, after hundreds of years, the organisers thought it necessary to change the nomenclature. Suddenly, Shahi Snan became Amrit Snan. For starters, Amrit, the nectar of immortality, is the substance obtained by churning the ocean. The story is that while transporting Amrit, some of it spilled in Prayagraj, Haridwar, Ujjain, and Nashik, where the Kumbh happens by rotation once in four years.

Nobody can deny them their right to change the name of anything religious. Since they have the majority in Parliament and many state assemblies, they have been changing the names of places like Allahabad, Ahmedabad, and Mughalsarai in their bid to deny that the Mughals ever ruled this country.

But what Puri and Company did this time was unacceptable. They gave a decree that non-Sanatanis—Muslims and Christians—would not be allowed to run food stalls or provision stalls at the Mahakumbh site. It was not an empty threat. Groups of "sadhus" went around asking the shopkeepers to prove their Hindu, Sikh, and Jain identities by showing their Aadhaar cards. Those who had Muslim or Christian names were summarily asked to leave with their belongings.

The policemen who accompanied the saffron vigilantes stood solidly behind them as they made mincemeat of the constitutional provisions that ensured equality to every citizen, irrespective of caste or creed. In any country where constitutional morality was practised, such people would have been behind bars. Puri was upfront about it. When questioned, he said non-Muslims were not allowed in Mecca and Medina.

It did not occur to the Mahant that those two places are in theocratic Saudi Arabia, whereas Prayagraj is situated in secular, democratic, socialist India, that is, Bharat. If Hindus of India want to visit Mecca and Medina, Puri should have asked Narendra Modi to raise the matter with the Saudi authorities. Indian Muslims would not have any problem if Modi did so.

I have never heard Modi or his External Affairs Minister ever taking up the matter with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. On the contrary, Modi had no compunction in accepting Saudi Arabia's greatest civilian honour, forgetting that the country did not allow Gujarati or other businessmen to sell dhokla to Muslim pilgrims.

I also wonder why Puri is not asking Hindus in Islamic and Christian nations to return to India instead of working there. When his argument failed to carry conviction with the journalists, he advanced another theory: Muslims are "dirty," and they spit in the food they serve. This is another concoction, like the claim that Muslim men and women do no work and are constantly engaged in procreation.

It has been 11 years since India attained "real independence," and Hindu Hriday Samrat Modi has been lording it over in Delhi. Has his government, or that of his yes-men in UP, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, or other states, caught any Muslim spitting into food, let alone convicted and punished anyone? On what basis did Puri say that Muslims are "dirty?"

Imagine what would happen if a Muslim said the same about Hindus and their food practices. In one case from Maharashtra, a pani-puri seller was caught urinating into the vessel containing tamarind water into which holed puris are dipped. A girl who had her suspicions caught him in the act on her cellphone. His name was not Muslim. He was arrested, but God knows whether he was punished.

I know that Christians in the North are either poor or do not have the acumen to do business. Not many Christians would have attempted to open food stalls in Prayagraj. So, the prohibition may not have affected them. Even so, it is galling to think that Christians can't do business at the Mahakumbh site.

Recently, the followers of Sri Narayana Guru in Kerala organised a parliament of religions at the Vatican. Is there any prohibition against Hindus in countries considered Christian? And are they "dirty," or do they spit in food? Why, then, are Christians not allowed to do business at the Kumbh? This is a rhetorical question, and it does not mean that Muslims indulge in such practices.

Has Modi done anything about those who proved that the Mahakumbh does not represent "Unity in Diversity?" Far from that, it has been reduced to a divisive spectacle. The government should have taken summary action against those who ousted Muslim businessmen from the Mahakumbh area. The pity is that this norm will prevail at future Kumbh melas.

What can be expected from a government controlled by the thrice-banned RSS? Its chief, Mohan Bhagwat, claimed that India attained real independence not in 1947 or 2014 but when Modi performed the Prana Pratishtha at the new Ram temple in Ayodhya. He wants that day to be declared Pratishtha Dwadashi, whatever that means. He also made bizarre comments about the Constitution.

I wish Bhagwat had read the Supreme Court verdict that made the temple's construction possible in Ayodhya. The verdict, authored by former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, does not repudiate any of the claims made by Muslims. In fact, it upholds their claims.

When I first read the verdict, I thought the court was going to reject the Hindu claim. However, the ruling favoured the Hindus, with the condition that adequate land should be allotted to build a mosque. If Bhagwat had read the judgment, he would have realised that it was the finer sensibilities of Muslims that forced them to accept it as a compromise.

Alas, the apex court did not dispense justice but offered a compromise. Bhagwat should also study history. He would realise that the British didn't leave India one fine morning. For decades, Indians struggled for freedom, with many losing their lives. Nehru, whom Modi despises, spent a decade in various jails, while others, like Modi, conveniently left for the US during the Emergency.

I have visited the Cellular Jail in the Andamans, where a list of martyrs is displayed. Among them are Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs. None sought clemency from the British. But one gentleman did write several letters seeking clemency, promising to be their obedient servant. The cell where he stayed till he was released on parole has now been converted into a pilgrimage centre, and his picture hangs in Parliament.

Yes, the RSS stayed away from the freedom struggle, believing its duty was to unite Hindus. This country does not belong to Hindus alone. It belongs as much to Muslims and Christians.

Bhagwat recently quoted former President Pranab Mukherjee to make a calumnious statement against Christians. Yes, Mukherjee attended an RSS meeting. I read his speech, which I critiqued in a column. He did not make any comment against Christians. Bhagwat should have mentioned this alleged statement when Mukherjee was alive to respond.

I knew an RSS leader, Kushabhau Thakre, who headed the organisation in Madhya Pradesh. If I claim he told me something unacceptable about the Hindu community, will anyone believe me? If he had told me anything, I should have reported it at the time. This is basic etiquette, which Bhagwat seems unaware of.

He represents an ideology that prompts a minister in Maharashtra to claim that terrorists helped Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi win in Kerala with margins of nearly four lakh votes. The minister, whose father is a former chief minister, even gave a "full form" of EVM. I thought it meant an Electronic Voting Machine.

No, for Nitesh Rane, it means "Every Vote against Mullahs." The minimum action should have been to divest him of his ministership and put him in jail. But how can that happen in a country where Muslims and Christians can't even sell Bisleri water or Monaco biscuits at the Mahakumbh? What kind of "Unity in Diversity" is this? I wish Narendra Modi had explained.