014 Why was Gandhiji unnecessarily raising the issue of religion in a mourning speech?

ybrem: Following is a quote from Vol. 32 of Gandhiji's Complete Works. Context: He was speaking at a public function in Khulna (now in Bangla Desh). Occasion was: Death of Desh Bandhu Citta Ranjan Das. Date: 17th June 1925.

... On more than one occasion at Darjeeling, he told me that the
freedom of India depends on non-violence and truth. The Hindus
and Mussalmans of India should know that his heart knew no
difference between the Hindus and the Mussalmans. I would like
to tell all Englishmen in India that he bore no ill will to them. "If I live I live for swaraj; if I die I die for swaraj," that was his vow to his motherland.
What shall we do to perpetuate his memory? It is easy to
shed tears, but no tears can help us or his nearest and dearest. Only if everyone of us, Hindus, Mussalmans, Parsis and Christians, all who call themselves Indians, pledge ourselves to do the work in
which he lived, moved and had his being, shall we have done something. We are all believers in God. ...

ybrem
*Gandhiji was unnecessarily raising the issue of religion in a mourning meeting. "The Hindus and Mussalmans of India should know ... Only if every one of us Hindus, Mussalmans, Parsis and Christians .... ". All these references remind people about their religion which should have been a private character and possession. It is like waking up a sleeping monster.

*A simple statement like "We shall pledge ourselves to the work which Late Chitta Ranjan Das strived and dedicated himself" or something on similar lines would have served the purpose.

*"We are all believers in God ...etc." also opens up a pandora box.

*Gandhiji ought to have probably raised some issues like floods of Bhairab river on the banks of which Khulna was situated, about the menace of tigers and other wild animals in the mangroves of Sunderbans, cyclones and tidal erosions from the Bay of Bengal, the poverty of people, scarcity of clothes, rising prices, dwellings, rents etc. In Telugu (my mother tongue), we call these 'Iti bAdhalu' (problems of daily existence). Even on the days of mourning people, particularly children had to eat and poverty might have forced them to fast. To eat or not to eat may be a dilemma of personalities like Mahatma Gandhi, Anna Hazare, and their ilk. To eat or not to is not the dilemma of poor. How to get what to eat is/was the dilemma of the poor.

*It is not my wish to find fault with Gandhiji. This is because we do not know the socio-economic environment of servile India of those days. Yet I am tempted to deduce that Gandhiji's preoccupation with Bhagavad Gita, prayers and Hindu-Mussalman Unit, led to suspicions in the minds of Zinna and his friends. Had Gandhiji avoided prayers and Gita in public places, there would not have been an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and schizophrenia for Zinna. Funnily, even in 2011, we see Rahul Gandhi wearing a religion-indicative cap: Click here to see a flicker photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28101929@N08/6260365253.