"INDIA REJECTS HATE" is a moving declaration and will be appreciated all round. But it is superficial, not well thought out.
First, we need to define "INDIA".
India is PEOPLE to whom your pious appeal is directed. So let us look at the PEOPLE. Are the Hindus and the Muslims the SAME in outlook, views and beliefs, or in their desire to fall into each other's arms like brothers? And, what is India without East Bengal and West Punjab? Are THEY going to reject hate and start loving the Indians and cry for Akhand Bharat?
And do you sincerely believe that India is between WAGAH and HOOGLY? Also, do you sincerely believe that ALL "INDIANS" will heed this call and militancy will end in Srinagar soon merely by pious appeals? You disregard the "INDIANS" on the OTHER SIDE of the artificial borders fixed in 1947. How will those in Lahore and Dhaka, indistinguishable from those in Delhi and Mumbai, react to your appeal?
If those who left INDIA in 1947 swearing to subjugate SRINAGAR and DELHI, too, do not repeat your words, then there can be NO love. The underlying causes of PARTITION are not being looked into, nor indeed the verdict of KORAN on the HINDUS (Kafirs). Nor are we looking at the psychology of the invaders and the victorious that is totally apart from those who surrendered TERRITORY and fled in all directions for safety!
The populous slogan, "REJECT HATE!" will appeal to those who SHARE the same ideals but not to those who have "tasted the Hindu blood", that is, secured easy VICTORY (Partition) over the Hindus after slaughtering TWO MILLION.
In post-Partition India, where the power ratio favours the Muslims, let us wait for the day when a Muslim leader says, "There is NO Kafir and no Momin in Bharat but all equal citizens like the members of one family. Hence we should reject hate!"
Finally, HINDUS HAVE ALWAYS REJECTED HATE. One needs to address those who could never love despite Gandhi and all the other mahatmas since the beginning of time.
COMMENT ON THE WIDELY CIRCULATED ARTICLE ENTITLED "INDIA REJECTS HATE!"
We ought to look at the "INDIANS" more realistically. There are the NATIVES- all whose FOUNDERS OF RELIGION were born in Hindusthan. Then there are those whose FOUNDERS OF RELIGION were born in the Middle East. At present THEY (the foreigners) have the upper hand (with Lahore and Dhaka in their possession). Their DREAM is different from that of the NATIVES who ought to be concerned with safeguarding Delhi.
To give MEANING and FORCE to your idea of love, the NATIVES will have to REJECT pacifist Gandhi but acquire SHAKTI to be at par with the non natives.
Your idea is good but with flaws. India has always believed in love while the others NEVER stopped hating the Indians! In reality the very frontiers and borders of India are the product of extreme and permanent HATE. The challenge for the DREAMERS (natives) is immense.
3 Feb 19.
PS: The FIFTH word in your esteemed write-up ought to be "PARTITION" (instead of INDEPENDENCE)! The difference is IMMENSE. The former would make us sit (or stand) UP, while the latter induces the sleep of complacence and FALSE security. None can love the sleepy and the complacent!