The Hindu : Puja at the Qutub Minar

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Dec 27, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Puja at the Qutub Minar

By Rajeev Dhavan

Such reclamation is an invitation to vague assertions armoured by political malevolence to split civilised governance in ways that have no meaning or purpose except the hate and spite that fuel it.

THE YEAR 2002 draws to a close with reports that on December 21 the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal were stopped from performing a puja (prayer) at the Qutub Minar which they claimed `was built after demolishing... Jain and Hindu temples'. The Minar has existed for eight centuries. Is there a logic in seeking to claim it for prayer? If so, what is this logic? Does every alleged `Hindu' site have to be reclaimed? On what basis? Is this logic applicable only to the Hindus? Will it be extended to Buddhists? And, Muslim sites or Christian ones?

And, if history is to be re-written, will the Sangh Parivar support Maori claims in New Zealand, Red Indian claims in America, the claim of the Mayas and Incas in Central and South America, the resurrection of all tribal sites in Africa? To such reclamation, there is no limit. It is an invitation to vague assertions armoured by political malevolence to split civilised governance in ways that have no meaning or purpose except the hate and spite that fuel it. It credits neither the Hindu faith nor the principles of governance that draw India together.

L.K. Advani's `introduction' to the BJP White Paper on Ayodhya (1993) spoke of the kar sevaks who destroyed the Babri Masjid as "not just eras(ing) a symbol of our subjugation... (and) building a symbol of resurgence... but show(ing) us as if in a flash how far we have to travel". Clearly, India has to go back to the 13th Century to move into the future. The White Paper articulates "the recommencement of a suspended evolution... from Somnath to Ayodhya"— supposedly to fulfil "the Somnath spirit" to make Ayodhya the "greatest nationalist assertion in known history". Is all this real? Or just a nightmare? The party of the White Paper is in power. The BJP has prescribed no restraints on itself. Its supporters claim a full license to do what they like — destroy, incite and terrorise with total impunity.

From 1992 to 2002, the BJP Parivar evolved a `political immunity' that the legal and political system will be so used as to protect the communally unscrupulous who fuel BJP-led politics. After the carnage and elections in Gujarat, Indian democracy has been `modified'. There was no President's Rule for the failure of secular governance in Gujarat. Contrast the threats made to Bihar and West Bengal. M.F. Husain's paintings were destroyed and permission given for his prosecution; but Narendra Modi's and Praveen Togadia's outrages go unpunished. Deepa Mehta's films were censored by fundamentalist mobs, but real `hate speech' is `loud-spoken' by the Parivar without restraint. Although the Places of Religious Worship Act, 1991, places a `1947 based' status quo on all religious sites except Ayodhya (which is to be resolved by courts), the Parivar espouses a provocative policy of reclamation of sites including the latest example of the Qutub Minar. Are we living in the 21st Century? Or, is it part of the Parivar's plan to make this century more barbaric than any other that preceded it. The leaders are silent — both those of the BJP and its `secular' allies. When Enoch Powell gave his racist `rivers' of blood speech in 1968, the Tories expelled him from the party. Mr. Vajpayee keeps quiet when he should speak; and preaches peace after his party wins Gujarat electorally by promoting communalism.

What is the nature of the compact that draws or should draw Indian governance together? Today, this compact is based on India's complex — albeit much amended — but engagingly comprehensive Constitution. For a moment, forget the words of the text. Forget, too, that if we tried to draft a new Constitution, we would signally fail to do so. Here we are looking deeper into the noumenal soul of the Constitution beyond its text and phenomenal practices. There are to be four elements to our constitutional compact.

The first is a pro-active democracy which includes but is not limited to periodic elections. The second is a uniquely Indian policy of secularism founded on a neutral wall of support for all faiths, religious freedom for all and social reformism. The third segment encompasses civil liberties and social justice to which India is committed for immediate and linear fulfilment. The fourth foundation is the rule of law whose custodianship is vested in the Supreme and other Courts so that the discipline of the Constitution is not transgressed by the vagaries of political greed, corruption and arbitrariness. It is on these bases that India's complex civilisation with its unparalleled diversity and enormous differentials is brought together.

Do we want to re-write this compact? The original intent of the BJP-led Government in establishing the Constitution Review Commission was to transform the Constitution. With this plan exposed, the Commission came up with nothing substantially different in its final report of 2002 other than screwdriver proposals to fine tune what exists. If the destruction of the Babri Masjid is taken as a starting point, the Sangh Parivar's demands appear to be as follows: (i) reclaim all Hindu (and now Jain) sites on the basis of any assertion that has any `populist' support; (ii) throw out of India `undesirable' migrants — especially those from Muslim countries; (iii) permit the censorship of all speech which the Sangh Parivar's self-styled leaders and mobs find objectionable; (iv) applaud any Hindu fundamentalist move to intimidate those of other faiths; (v) build on the plank of `Hindutva' to create a state that gives pre-eminence to the new crude politicised Hindu faith; (vi) marshall public education so that these new `Hindu' values form the basis of a value-based education; (vii) treat Indian governance as being in transition until it achieves `Hindutva' shape and substance; (viii) treat non-Hindus as citizens within a `Hindu' framework; (ix) re-write the special provision for Kashmir; (x) launch the equivalent of a `Hindu' jihad — electorally and otherwise.

These claims are supported by the political practice of the BJP and Sangh Parivar — often directly and stridently with unashamed ease. Unfortunately, the Parivar finds sustenance in various judgments of the Supreme Court as alleged pointers in the `saffron' direction. Amongst these rulings are the Babri Masjid case (1994) which provided a status quo to the `makeshift' temple over the destroyed mosque, the Hindutva ruling (1995) which is taken to re-define Indian secularism, various judgments on Hindu religious endowments (1996), the Text Book judgment (2002) which opens the doors for a supposedly `value-based' school education, and the Minorities case (2002) which virtually evaporates the special rights guaranteed to minority education institutions by the Constitution and fifty years of the Court's decisions. But, these elliptical judgments have not tarnished the Constitution's secular character.

In practice, the BJP's onslaught — which according to its White Paper began concertedly in 1984 — has weakened the principles of Indian governance and bypassed the `real' Constitution that draws India together. Today, we reflect on the BJP's victory in Gujarat in disbelief. One way to explain Gujarat is to accept the BJP had a better electoral army founded on a more effective campaign and propaganda to divisively rally the `Hindu' faithful. What has emerged over twenty — and especially the last ten — years is a lethal BJP political cocktail. This formula belies everything Indian governance stands for. Yet it is going to be used again in the many elections next year whilst Indian secular forces remain divided. The plan to perform puja at the Qutub Minar and reclaim the site has a chilling significance — not just for the minorities but for Indian governance. The year 2002 was a bad year. We have much to unlearn from, and struggle against, it.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Communal crimes and punishment

More friendly in tone

Puja at the Qutub Minar