I am including this inncident not as a religious one. Generally we avoid discussing religion, unless that is necessary for explaining history.
This inncident happened during the writing of constitution. I am giving it as an historic event and not as a religious one.
I remember vividly that midnight in Melur near Kumbhakonam when he solemnly and seriously advised and warned us to take the initiative in protecting religion through the Constitution. We failed to grasp his point. Suddenly he electrified us with the stern mandate that it was high time for us to dedicate ourselves to the great task.
What happened within the next few days revealed his prophetic vision. The Parliamentary Delegation of the British Government came to India to negotiate points touching Indian Freedom an din particular to suggest a new Constitution for the nation. Except for the head of the Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham all other Peethadhipatis seemed to be in utter darkness about the delegation and the need to place before them convincingly our suggestions and the present and future status of religion and religious institutions.
We wondered whether at all the delegation would give us an interview. Anyhow according to his instruction we sent a number of telegrams to the delegation, which as we expected wee not all responded to. But somehow His Holiness seemed to be optimistic and his optimism was a enigma to us all. The fools we were! Was he not the author of the Divine Plan?
Quite unexpectedly a telegram called me forth to Madras in connection with a different purpose. When I entered into “The Hindu” Office in Madras on that quite different errand, the late lamented Kasturi Srinivasan, the then Editor of “The Hindu”, sprang a surprise over me by telling that the Parliamentary Delegation would be visiting “The Hindu” Office in the next few minutes. A tea party was arranged in honour of the delegation at the Hindu Office. And so, I stood face to face with those eminent people, who did not even reply to our numerous telegrams. The secretary of the delegation entered first and Sri Kasturi Srinivasan introduced me to him. It told him that our telegrams were not responded to. He was kind enough to advise me to place our points personally before Mr. Sorenson (M.P.) who was the most important member of the delegation.
As matters were so quickly developing I had no time to prepare any written memorandum. I explained by word of mouth to Sorenson and desperate condition of our religion and religious institutions and drew his attention to His Holiness’ ides of getting Constitutional safeguard for these. Sorenson was kind enough to ask me to meet him once again in Delhi.
I returned to His Holiness to break the news of this wonderful turn of events. After a little meditation His Holiness advised to prepare a memorandum touching religion as a fundamental right. Fundamental right! It was a time when not much was thought about fundamental rights in general, and still less about religious belief as a fundamental right I may not be wrong if I say that this was the birth of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution itself.
I met Mr. Sorenson at Delhi and submitted our memorandum. He was deeply impressed with, nay moved by, His Holiness’ concern of our people and for his very practical wisdom.
Of course, the Parliamentary Delegation was not a success. But the idea of enshrining religious belief as a Fundamental Right had unmistakably and unassailably and unassailably struck root, thanks to the foresight of Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Paramacharya. The ball has definitely beet set rolling!
Then came the Cabinet Delegation. When we once again moved the Head of the Delegation, Sir Stafford Cripps, to our suggestion, he said that ultimately it was only the leaders of India who were going to frame the constitution, and so advised us to meet them.
Even as I recall those days, I am thrilled to think of the divine power of the Yogi then living in a remote village in the far southern part of the country. We were just instruments. It was his power that revealing itself through us.
It was the peak hour of India’s Freedom Movement when nothing but politics seemed to be worth attention. Anyhow we made bold to meet Sardar Patel and spoke to him about religious freedom. He just flared up to say that Hinduism spoke with different tongues and was not fit for survival. It told him about the efforts of His Holiness to bring to the forefront the underlying unity among what seemed to be different tongues. Sardar Patel was highly impressed and said that he simply could not believe that there could be a Mathadhipati in India who did not just think in terms of his own Siddhanta but thought of the generality. he said that something could be done towards what we wished, if only we really made efforts to unify the different sects of Hinduism.
Then started our holy pilgrimage through out India to bring together all the Siddhantins and make concerted efforts. With the miraculous Tapo-sakti of His Holiness we were able to meet all the religious Heads of India, and for the first time in our history were able to bring them together under one label. “The All India Maths Conference”. This coming together of religious sects gave a new strength to the plea regarding religious belief as a Fundamental Right and getting constitutional safeguard for religious institutions.
India became independent. The Constituent Assembly was set up to frame our Great Charter. In the great excitement of those days none seemed to pay any attention to religion and religious institutions as subjects to be covered by the Fundamental Rights of the Constitution. The tapasvin of Kanchi was then camping at Ambi village. He called forth eminent lawyers of Madras to suggest suitable clauses concerning religion and religious institution for inclusion in the Constitution.
These great lawyers prepared lengthy clauses at great pain, but only to be rejected by the Adviser of the Constituent Assembly. The Adviser suggested a simple clause, but His Holiness’s legal knowledge was superior to that of the Adviser and so he found out over subtle defects even in that simple clause. His Holiness himself made a very important change in it. The suggestion of His Holiness was welcomed by Constitutional pandits wholeheartedly with a sense of wonder at His Holiness’ astonishing legal acumen.
Anyhow political leaders were not prepared to give unchecked freedom to religion and religious institutions. So this freedom was diluted by the addition of the phrase “in accordance with law’. This would mean that the State could thoroughly interfere in religion and religious institutions, because this condition would bind religious institutions with whatever new law a none-too-religious Government may bring forth.
At His Holiness’ behest a representation was made to, members to suitably amend the clause at the stage of the second reading. When we met Dr. Ambedkar in this connection, we did not have any hopes, because we knew of his staunch and stern views. But behold the power of Paramacharyas’ penance Dr. Ambedkar told in all earnest that he was for religion and religious institutions. He declared that religion and religious institutions was split into four parts by the framers of the Constitution, so that the restrictive phrase “in accordance with law” applies only to fourth part.
Now in final form Article 26 of the Constitution reads as follows:
“…Every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right (A) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes (B) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion (C) to own and acquire moveable and immovable property and (D) to administer such property in accordance with law.”
If such a constitutional guarantee has been got for the independent running of religious institutions it is in no small measure due to the initiative of His Holiness Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Paramacharya. Originally the wording was only “Every religious denomination shall have the right” etc. Nobody found any discrepancy in this wording, including the august Constitution-makers.
His Holiness alone saw that this was not enough. No Hindu thinks that he is first and foremost a Hindu. He thinks only a terms of his subsect. e.g., that he is a Vaishnavaite, a Saivite, a Smartha or a Saiva Siddhanthin and son on and so forth. Similarly no religious institution in India is running under the label of Hinduism. We only have Vaishnava, Saiva, Smartha, Saiva Siddhantha, etc. etc., Maths and Monasteries. So the word “religious denominations” could not have constitutional application to many of these institutions. Therefore His Holiness felt that the wording should be changed as “every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right, etc.” His supreme will was ultimately carried out!
In all this His Holiness remained behind the screen. But he was the one moving spirit and great political leaders, eminent lawyers, distinguished parliamentarians and experienced jurists just carried out his prophetic schemes for the maintenance of our religious belief and for the constitutional safeguard for our religious institutions. This aspect which has not seen the light of the day till now deserves to be written in letters of gold in the history of our religious; perhaps also of our Constitution – making.
http://www.kamakoti.org/souv/5-41.html
