https://www.southasiamonitor.org/spotlight/should-future-india-be-held-hostage-divisive-ideology
Places of Worship: Striving for Peace and Reconciliation
Ram Puniyani
With the case filed by five women regarding worship at Gyanwapi mosque; flood of issues raking in to the past is being witnessed. That Gyanvapi mosque was built by demolishing Vishwanath temple has been supplemented by Krishnajanmbhumi Mathura issue. And that’s not all, along with this claims are floating about Tajmahal, Kutub Minar, Jama masjid and every conceivable major relic of medieval period built by the Muslim kings. The argument is being proffered that Islamist claims over Hindu sites like Ayodhya earlier, need to be quashed and these places be restored to Hindus, to whom they belong and have been wrongfully appropriated/destroyed/modified by the Muslim Kings.
Arguments are also floating that future cannot be built by ignoring the past. That secularism is not suitable for a country like India, as India needs truth and justice. Claim is that past cannot be regarded as dead and the cutoff date of 1947 has been imposed without a proper debate through ‘Places of religious act in 1991’ without any consultation with the victim community (read Hindus). The arguments being repeated ad nauseum seem to be preparing the ground for massive repetition of what happened in 6th December 1992, the demolition of Babri mosque.
Most of these arguments totally negate the principles of India’s freedom struggle, Indian Constitution and rational understanding of the past. The ‘places of religious worship act’ is being criticized as demonic. India has a long history but it is during last few decades that the ‘demolition ideology’ seems to be leading the ideologues of rightwing. Medieval history during which many Muslim kings ruled is the central part of criticism; it is being projected as the period of atrocities on Hindus. The Hindu versus Muslim binary is being propagated and in a way imposed on social thinking by the most dominant political organization and its myriad associates. By repeatedly propagating this; they seem to have succeeded in creating a ‘social common sense’ of temple destructions, forcible conversion and Islamist supremacist project of Muslim kings. The real binary of Indian society is buried in this false narrative.
The rule of Muslim kings in no way was driven by the goal of spreading Islam or to establish supremacy of Islam. The kings, Muslims or Hindus were ruling in collaboration with the powerful landlords and kings, irrespective of their religion. Be it Muslim kings, Akbar to Aurangzeb; they were associated with the landlords/kings of other religions. Kingdoms were based on feudal system and not around religion. Akbar had Birbal, Todarmal, Mansing and hoard of others’ doing his bidding and he was also getting advice from them. Aurangzeb had nearly 1/3rd Court officials who were Hindus as per Prof Athat Ali’s book.
The wars were not along religious lines. Shivaji’s initial battles were against Hindu king, Chadra Rao More; Sikh Gurus had serious confrontation with Hindu kings who were ruling in neighboring hills. The places of worship might have been destroyed for myriad of reasons, wealth, political rivalries and the rebels against Kings hiding in those places.
The Indian culture has been a mix of cultures of people of diverse religions, Hindus and Muslims in the main. Even Islam did not spread through kings, though some Muslim kings did put the condition of conversion to Islam to the rival king. The mass conversions have been mainly due to the longing of those oppressed by caste system.
To project Hindus as being oppressed by Muslims is off the mark. The economic oppression of Hindus and Muslim poor was at the hands of the landlords for revenue collection. The other oppression was that of caste system which has been the hallmark of Indian society. That’s how Dr. Ambedkar sees the Indian history. He says coming of Buddhism was a revolution as it challenged the caste system. The following period was the period of counter revolution in which there was a massive attack on Buddhists and places of Buddhist worship.
In a way this is the real binary of Indian society. The hegemonic upper caste ideology pitted against the low caste untouchables (later called dalits). The motives behind killings of Buddhists were ideological. Pushyamitra Shung went to the extent of offering a golden coin to anyone who brings the head of a Buddhist monk. This is what wiped out Buddhism from the land of its birth.
During freedom movement it was correctly perceived by the national movement that the British, the colonizers have oppressed us the Indians. So it directed its energies against the British rule. During this period the upholders of upper caste/elite ideology focused on the ‘foreigner’, Muslims and kept aloof from the movement and struggle to throw out British rule. They went to construct the narrative of tyrannical Muslim rule and need to have the Hindu nation. That’s why the very notion of secularism is alien to them and wants to oppose it as a Western concept. Their rooting is in the social system of Kingdoms, where Kings-Landlords ruled and exploited the poor in the name of religion.
The modern state, modernity, has no place for such this landlord-clergy alliance lording over the people. Secularism is a universal value where state looks at the citizen as equal irrespective of one’s religion. The defenders of demolition project and diggers of the past are not only opposed to pluralism and secular values but also are totally blind to the demolitions of places of worship of Buddhist or Jains for that matter. They selectively pick up some few cases and harp on that. This is made to reflect on today’s Muslims and this divisive ideology lays the foundation of hate, violence and polarization.
The increased clout of this ideology is trying to compare the places of religious worship act with farmer’s laws. The places of religious act 1991 was aimed to focus social energies on building the future while preserving the integrative aspects of Indian syncretism, what Nehru underlined as Ganga Jamuna Tehjeeb. This is well reflected in what Goswami Tulsidas in his Kavitavali says, “Tulsi Sarnaam Gulam hai Ramko, Jako Ruche so kae Vohu, Maang ke Khaiboo, Masit ma soibo, Lebe ko Ek no debe ko Do. (My name is Tulsi, I am a slave of Ram. My give and take with the World is done. I live on alms and sleep in a mosque)
