Religion is a touchy business - Don’t trouble trouble, till trouble troubles you

(Dawn
September 17, 2007)

Don’t trouble trouble, till trouble troubles you

by Jawed Naqvi

NEW DELHI: Religion is a touchy business everywhere, evidently more so in South Asia. Recently an official of the Archaeological Survey of India was required to give an affidavit to the Supreme Court to clarify whether in his considered view there was an ancient bridge, or “sethu”, that was built by the “vaanar sena”, literally an army of monkeys, which was used by Lord Rama, to cross the Palk Straits to battle Ravana, the villainous king of Lanka.

The Supreme Court’s query was preceded by an unusual controversy over a natural formation of corals straddling the Palk Straits, which inhibits shipping. If this barrier were removed, it would cut the distance for ships between Singapore and Mumbai or Karachi by about 30 hours. In some ways the project offers benefits like the Panama and Suez canals. Some followers of Rama believe that the natural structure was in fact built by the army of “vaanars” or monkeys, which played a major role in the triumph of Rama over Ravana. There was a more earthly dimension to the controversy. The billion-dollar project first became a turf war between Tamil Nadu Chief Minister K. Karunanidhi, who last week passed a vote in the state assembly to press ahead with the demolition, and his arch rival J. Jayalalatiha who opposes the move, citing religion, but wooing voters. Both leaders ironically enough represent the once flourishing Dravida movement of Tamils, which had slammed religion as a tool of exploitation. Hinduism, particularly Brahmanism, was the movement’s main target. All that has changed. But both leaders have played footsie with religious Hindu parties such as the BJP.

However, why the Supreme Court asked for the clarification about the sethu’s antecedents is a bit of a mystery. Suppose the bridge was backed with historical evidence to show it as part of the Rama lore, would it be put up for demolition? Or, suppose it was found to be a matter of faith for some if not of all of Rama followers, would it then qualify for removal? If on both counts the court’s decision would not influence the decision, then why did it ask the potentially loaded question? Any way, the official in his zeal to present an objective account of history, for that is what the archaeological survey is mandated to do, apparently breached the sacred line of religious sensibilities. He affirmed that to the best of his knowledge there was no historical record of Rama’s existence, much less of a bridge which was used to conquer Lanka to retrieve Rama’s loyal wife Sita, from Ravana’s lair. The story of Rama and Sita is celebrated in the world’s most populous Muslim state of Indonesia, with reverence. Allama Iqbal had gone a step further in his adulation for Rama. He wrote: “Hai Raam ke wajood pe Hindostan ko naaz; Ahle nazar samajhte hain usko Imaam-e-Hind”. (The existence of Rama makes Hindostan proud; the discerning accept him as the Imaam of this land).

The government’s affidavit was manna to the old guru of religious revivalism, the BJP, even more so to its currently marginalised stalwart, the former home minister Lal Kishan Advani. He gleaned in the affidavit a potential election issue, and also a means to upstage his BJP rival and party president Rajnath Singh. So he summoned the media, issued dire warnings to the government and asked the prime minister and Congress president to apologise.

The government, sensing electoral trouble, wasted no time in making amends. It moved immediately to withdraw the affidavit, but not before two of its own senior ministers were caught in a public brawl over the matter. He would have resigned if it were his ministry’s fault, taunted one. She was ready to resign if the affidavit was indeed mishandled by her ministry, retorted the other. Muslim groups watched the denouement with apprehension. The BJP tried to canvass support from the Sikhs. They declined to oblige. Look here, said the head of the Sikh worshippers in Delhi. We don’t worship Rama. We are a monotheistic religion. But we respect founders of other religions. So kindly don’t drag us into your fight with the Congress.

Religion is like a nuclear weapon. We conceive it as a means to protect ourselves from mysterious forces of evil but eventually end up becoming its insecure defenders. In fact we have become so touchy about our religions that we are willing to plunge headlong into a bloodbath as defenders of our faith. Worse, sometimes these defenders of faith take themselves more seriously than is otherwise healthy for those in their vicinity.

The Bajrang Dal, a plainly fascist offshoot of the Hindutva upsurge, claims to be followers of Lord Hanuman, Rama’s aide de camp during his exile in the forest. Now, Hanuman is deified as sankat mochak, one who helps overcome a crisis. Before the advent of the Bajrang Dal in recent years the legend of Hanuman had a much wider appeal among the ordinary people across India. There was for example, this boisterous but adorable bunch of boys and girls who clubbed themselves together as vaanar sena in Nehru’s own home. A very young Indira Gandhi as her contribution to the battle against colonialism led the sena. Their schedule would involve singing patriotic songs and distributing subversive pamphlets against India’s former rulers.

During the Ram Leela, a theatrical enactment of the story of Rama during the celebrations of Dussehra, marking his victory over Ravana, the rural and urban folks alike would jostle for a glimpse of Hanuman in the green room after he took off his make up and the forbidding mask together with the traditionally elongated tail. The Bajrang Dal and other Hindutva groups have changed that cultural appeal in a major way.

Nowadays these spurious Hanuman fans go about handing instant justice against Hindu boys and girls who would dare to befriend or marry a Muslim or a Christian. These folks usually become most active on Valentines Day when young lovers, if seen exchanging cards or greetings, are given a right royal hiding instantly. The punishment is meted out often with the police looking on. The vigilantes are not in any way different from the Muslim counterparts that we encounter in South Asia, or the more vehemently threatening ones in Iran or Saudi Arabia. So here is a breed of defenders of the Hindu faith who seem to know little about Hinduism but claim to be its saviours. Many in their flock were active participants in the pogroms of Gujarat and the demolition of the Babri mosque in 1992.

As I said religion is a touchy issue in our region, and I know this from personal experience in Mustafabad, a village in Rae Bareli once ruled by Shia zamindars. It is commonly seen during the observation of Muharram here that the upper crust of the community taps their chests gently during the “maatam”, an act that can be loosely translated as self-flagellation in grief. The lower caste of Muslims are more committed to lacerate themselves with swords and sharply honed chains. Their wounds are cured with rose water and miracle, but rarely ever are they given medical care.

Occasionally, a father would slit the soft skin on his small son’s head with a knife making the young boy bleed profusely. Self-flagellation is of course not unique to the Shias of South Asia. The Hindu Tamils inflict gashes on themselves with iron nails and, like the Shias, they too walk on fire to follow the requirements of their faith. Go further east, in the Philippines, and you would find young men nailed on the cross every Easter. Anyway, one day, during a maatam, I saw some men handing over their blood-soaked chains to their companions who would lash themselves severely and pass on the contraption to others and so on. I know I should have restrained myself but couldn’t. I broached the issue with an elderly person and said that this act could be very risky in view of India’s difficulties with HIV/Aids. If they want to do maatam, they should at least not share the chains. The man called me a “kaafir” and nearly got me lynched. Therefore, as far as religion is concerned, I now believe in the dictum: Don’t trouble trouble till trouble troubles you.