Hazare's statement shows he needed to make a lot of spaces in his words to accommodate the popular leader in India. Observers said Hazare would not endorse Modi since he is a member of the BJP for he did not believe in political parties. The Gandhian leader clearly struggled to decode the idea of Modi and somehow managed to shield himself by the individual-party conflict theory.
How does it matter if Modi does not belong to the BJP? Is only individualism the basis for Hazare's judgment for Modi or is that his acknowledgement of Modi in disguise? Will he also endorse a Sonia Gandhi or Manmohan Singh if they quit the Congress? How can a political party be put to a value judgment by separating the individual factor from it?
Hazare might have said that he endorses Modi but not the BJP for he is convinced about the former's administrative skills and clean image. The Gujarat chief minister has maintained a clean image despite being a member of a political party. It doesn't matter whether he is a member of the party or not.
Hazare has been found to be indecisive a couple of times when it comes to judging Modi. Recently, he was reported to have praised Modi, which he rubbished later. A few days ago, he said neither Modi nor Congress's Rahul Gandhi are fit to become the prime minister of India. And now, he is saying he would endorse Modi if the latter had left the BJP. If the man is not fit, then why should Hazare try to endorse him even as an individual?
Hazare only tried to please all by making such na-ghar-ka-na-ghat-ka remark. As one has rightly summed up, he tried not to offend Modi's supporters but might have ended up both secular and nationalist Hindus of India by neither condemning nor endorsing Modi.