Why RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat’s Vijayadashami Message Resonates With Manipur

When RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat warned against creating divisions in society for cheap popularity or political gains, his words had particular relevance for Manipur. After prolonged violence, displacement and mistrust, Manipur needs leadership that can address grievances without driving communities further apart. His Vijayadashami address in Nagpur on October 20 touched upon several issues that deserve attention in the state: constitutional conduct, responsible protest, dialogue, respect for diversity, youth development and the responsibilities that come with belonging to a nation.

What makes Mohan Bhagwat’s message worth examining is that he did not place responsibility on one section of society alone. He spoke of the duties of protesters, governments, administrators and political leaders. While warning against hatred and division, he also acknowledged that problems within society and shortcomings in the system naturally give rise to protests. Both observations matter in Manipur, where public grievances cannot be ignored, but where political mobilisation must also lead towards solutions rather than deepen existing divisions.

The Sarsanghchalak also acknowledged that a country as large and diverse as India will inevitably face social problems and institutional shortcomings. People have a right to raise their concerns and seek remedies. His warning was against turning genuine grievances into opportunities for personal popularity or political advantage, particularly when such actions leave society more divided.

Manipur has much to reflect upon here. Demands for protection, justice and rehabilitation must be taken seriously. But the measure of any political movement or public intervention should also be whether it brings people closer to a solution. For families living with displacement and uncertainty, what matters is not the strength of a speech but whether it produces relief, security and a realistic prospect of returning to normal life.

Those who lead public movements have a responsibility beyond expressing anger. They must explain what they hope to achieve and how their demands can improve people's lives. Governments, in turn, cannot expect public frustration to disappear without addressing its causes. Listening to grievances before they harden into confrontation is part of responsible governance.

One of the strongest points in RSS Chief Bhagwat’s address was his insistence that intense emotions do not place anyone above the Constitution or the law. This obligation, he said, applies equally to governments responsible for maintaining public order, organisations leading agitations and political leaders engaged in public life. He also called for dignity and decorum in speech and conduct.

For Manipur, this principle must be more than a public appeal. Citizens should be able to protest lawfully and expect their concerns to receive a fair hearing. At the same time, threats, violence and collective punishment cannot be justified in the name of public anger or community interests.

The credibility of the state depends on whether the law is applied consistently. People must have confidence that their safety and rights do not depend on their community identity, political connections or proximity to those in power.

There is another uncomfortable truth in Bhagwat’s message. Political leaders often demand restraint from their opponents while remaining silent about the conduct of their own supporters. Constitutional discipline has meaning only when leaders are prepared to uphold it on both sides.

Bhagwat referred to the Constitution’s opening words, “We, the People of India”, to underline the emotional bond that holds a diverse country together. His argument went beyond formal citizenship. A shared national identity, he suggested, must be reflected in how people treat one another in everyday life.

This is especially relevant to Manipur, where different communities have their own histories, identities, traditions and aspirations. Meiteis, Nagas, Thadou, Zomi, Kuki, Meitei Pangals and smaller communities must all feel that their dignity and identity have a secure place in the state's future.

Unity cannot be built by asking people to abandon what makes them distinct. Nor can it survive when communities begin to believe that their rights and security are less important than those of others.

A wider sense of national belonging becomes meaningful when people experience fairness in public institutions, respect in social relations and dependable protection under the law. Emotional unity cannot be sustained through declarations alone. It must be supported by conduct that gives people reasons to trust one another.

Mohan Bhagwat also spoke about the gap between India’s philosophical traditions and the way people conduct themselves. A civilisation may possess a rich body of thought, but that inheritance has little practical meaning unless its principles are reflected in human behaviour.

This observation deserves attention in Manipur, where appeals for peace have become familiar. The harder question is whether those appeals influence how people treat their neighbours, displaced families and members of other communities.

Peace is not merely something to be demanded from a public platform. It must be reflected in the willingness to help those in distress, speak truthfully, reject collective blame and recognise suffering even when the victims belong to another community.

The same principle applies to government offices and public institutions. Promises of equal treatment mean little if a vulnerable person cannot obtain assistance when it is needed. Bhagwat’s emphasis on putting values into practice reminds us that the character of a society is revealed less by what it professes than by what its people and institutions actually do.

Another important observation in Sarsanghchalak's address was that neither government action nor public agitation can, by itself, resolve every social problem. He spoke of the role ordinary people can play through collective initiative and dialogue, referring to educational efforts in which residents, parents and volunteers helped improve outcomes.

Manipur has its own reasons to take this argument seriously. Community organisations, religious leaders, teachers, women’s groups and other local bodies can contribute to rebuilding contact between people through work on education, relief and everyday needs.

Such efforts, however, cannot become a substitute for the government's responsibility to provide security, justice and rehabilitation. Community participation works best when public institutions fulfil their duties and create conditions in which people can cooperate without fear.

Reconciliation is difficult when communities remain divided over fundamental political questions. Yet dialogue need not begin with agreement on every disputed issue. Cooperation over a child's education, assistance to a displaced family or the restoration of an essential service may provide a starting point.

These efforts cannot settle every disagreement. They can, however, help people rediscover the possibility of working together.

Bhagwat expressed concern about young people accepting information circulated through social media without sufficiently examining its reliability or consequences. While calling for government attention to digital platforms and OTT content, he also stressed the importance of developing independent judgement among the younger generation.

For Manipur, this concern is far from abstract. In a society already troubled by fear and mistrust, an unverified video, an old photograph presented as a recent incident or a misleading social media post can worsen an already tense situation.

Young people must learn to question what appears on their screens. Who published the information? When and where was the video recorded? Is the claim supported by a reliable source? These simple questions should become part of everyday digital behaviour.

Schools, colleges, community organisations and newsrooms can help cultivate such habits. Media literacy should not be treated merely as a technical skill. It is also a matter of public responsibility. Adults, particularly those holding political or community influence, have an even greater obligation to exercise caution. A person with a large audience can do considerable harm by circulating information without checking its accuracy.

Drug addiction among young people was another concern raised by Mohan Bhagwat. He called for timely action and connected the country's future with the ability of its younger generation to assume responsibility. His message was not confined to material achievement. He also spoke of developing the qualities needed to build a stronger society.

Manipur cannot afford to overlook this concern. The response to drug addiction must extend beyond action against trafficking. Treatment, counselling, education, sports and employment opportunities are equally necessary if young people are to find a way out of addiction.

Those recovering from addiction need support to return to family and community life. Condemnation alone cannot provide that opportunity.

There is also a larger question about how society treats its youth. Young people are frequently called upon to defend community interests and participate in public movements. They must also be given opportunities to study, develop skills, earn a livelihood and contribute through constructive leadership.

Their energy should not be valued only when it serves an immediate political or social cause. Their future deserves attention in its own right.

Although he criticised what he described as destabilising forces and the limitations of a materialistic worldview, he also acknowledged that India has much to learn from other societies, particularly in enterprise and achievement. His advice was to remain open to learning without losing an understanding of one's own national identity.

There is a parallel lesson for Manipur. Cultural identity and openness to new knowledge need not be opposing ideas. Protecting language, land, traditions and inherited knowledge should go hand in hand with better education, technology and livelihood opportunities.

A society confident in its identity need not fear learning from others. At the same time, development should not require people to disregard the cultural foundations of their lives.

His concerns about family life, environmental protection and unrestrained consumption also deserve consideration in the state. Manipur’s forests, water bodies, cultural knowledge and family networks are closely connected with the lives of its people. They should not be treated as secondary concerns when decisions about development are made. The challenge is to pursue material progress without weakening the social and environmental foundations on which communities depend.

Character-building also found a place in the address delivered by chief guest Sanjay Gupta. Bhagwat’s emphasis on conscience, goodwill and dignified conduct gave the discussion a wider public meaning. In this view, leadership cannot be judged only by political success or immediate popularity.

For Manipur, character in public life should be visible in difficult decisions. It requires leaders to correct misinformation even when it benefits their own side, acknowledge suffering beyond community boundaries and pursue workable solutions when confrontation might attract greater public attention.

These are demanding standards. They are also necessary if public confidence is to be restored.

The real test of RSS Sarsanghchalak Bhagwat’s Vijayadashami message lies in its application. His observations on grievances, constitutional restraint, diversity, dialogue and social responsibility offer much for Manipur to consider. But their worth will not be determined by how warmly the speech is received or how frequently its words are repeated.

Those who agree with his message must be willing to apply its principles even when doing so is politically inconvenient.

Manipur does not lack appeals for peace, unity or mutual understanding. What it needs is greater consistency between public declarations and public conduct. Grievances must be heard, every citizen must receive protection under the law, and communities must be given practical reasons to rebuild trust.

That is where RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat’s message can acquire real meaning for Manipur. Not in another round of speeches, but in the conduct of those who claim to speak for society and in the decisions that affect the lives of ordinary people.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of India Today NE or its affiliates)