While much of the
Kedarnath temple in Uttarakhand state is under mud deposited by the recent
devastating floods, a new wave of “temple politics” has well and truly begun in
the country.
The self-styled “Iron
man” of India and prime ministerial hopeful, Narendra Modi, was the first to
step forward, saying the Gujarat government would repair or rebuild the temple,
a revered site among India’s one billion Hindus.
Uttarakhand chief
minister Vijay Bahuguna immediately rejected Modi's offer, and also refused
offers of help by other Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders, saying that the
Uttarakhand government, although impoverished, was fully capable of restoring
the temple to its former glory.
The temple attracts
over a million pilgrims and tourists between May and June, before the July
monsoons - which came a fortnight earlier this year - make the mountain journey
too treacherous.
Bahuguna’s fear that a
rival political party will take credit for restoring the temple is well
founded. Religion, of which temples of all sorts are the core, has been a major
driving force in sub-continental politics well before independence.
The freedom struggle and
Mahatma Gandhi’s presence could not dilute the religious undertones in the body
politic, first manifesting in the division of Bengal long before freedom came.
Independence from
Britain was itself preceded by the partition of the subcontinent into a truncated
Hindu-majority, yet secular, India and a new Muslim Pakistan amidst mass
displacement and bloodshed between the two religious groups in which more than
a million people may have been killed.
It was not surprising
therefore that one of the major cultural acts of independent India’s first
government on Nov 12, 1947 was to order the reconstruction of the Somnath
temple in Gujarat, which had been repeatedly razed by Muslim invaders. The last
time was by Mahmud Ghazni in the 11th century, but it became a symbol of
foreign domination of Indian soil and its ethos.
Sardar Patel, a close
associate of Gandhi who consolidated the new Indian state by incorporating more
than 500 former principalities – sometimes through military action – led the
project.
Somnath has since
become the venue for the launch of many a political movement, including the
Bharatiya Janata Party.
The sole voice of
dissent for Somnath’s reconstruction came from the then prime minister, Jawahar
Lal Nehru, who correctly saw it as an attempt at Hindu revivalism.
India is not a
theocracy, thanks mostly to men like Nehru, but this “principle” of reversing
“historic wrongs” has been a recurring political theme for Hindu groups such as
the BJP wanting to make India a Hindu nation.
Once in a while, the
Congress Party also finds its leadership susceptible to what can be called
temple politics.
The BJP, however,
remains the main practitioner of this political art of rousing religious
tempers through temples.
Its patriarch, former
deputy prime minister Lal Krishna Advani, launched the BJP revival in the late
1980’s by demanding the construction of a Ram temple in Ayodhya replacing a
Muslim mosque that was seen as a hated symbol of Moghul rule, and was allegedly
built on the ruins of the birthplace of Lord Rama.
Advani’s demands
eventually led to Hindu zealots demolishing the mosque, resulting in a
bloodbath in Mumbai and elsewhere. The party has since then kept the political
fires burning by focusing on mosques in Varanasi, Mathura and several other
Hindu holy places.
The BJP is not the
only party pandering to religious sentiments. In the Punjab and the
Delhi-Haryana region, the Akali Dal is a Sikhism-centric political party.
Muslims too have their
religious political fronts in states such as Assam, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh
and Kerala.
In Kerala state,
Muslim political parties are part of the ruling alliance. The Neo-Buddhists
have also formed political parties, especially in Maharashtra, but they do not
have the same religious fervor as the others.
Christians do not have
a political party as such, but at least one party, again in Kerala, is
understood to be reflecting the aspirations of Syrian Christians in the region.
These parties have no
real ideology other than exploiting the faith of their respective communities.
Barring a vague belief
in capitalist economics and an assertive regional chauvinism, they are still
far away from envisioning a socio-political uplift of the people.
They, by definition,
have no concern for people other than their own co-religionists. For want of a
genuine political, social and economic agenda, they pander to the lowest common
denominator, fueling religion as the main source of identity, overcoming
classical stratifications of caste and class, in their own pursuit of political
power.
Ironically, India’s election
code specifically bans the use of religion in elections. This law is routinely
broken. Almost no one complains, because almost everyone banks on religion to
win an election.
John Dayal is the
general-secretary of the All India Christian Council and a member of the Indian
government’s National Integration Council.
Source - UCAN
Source - UCAN