DOES THE APPEAL FOR PEACE & HARMONY APPLY TO HINDUTVA BRIGADE AS WELL FOR FUTURE?
With the exception of few, every leader of political or social importance is making an appeal to the common people to maintain peace and communal harmony in the wake of Supreme Court judgement in the Ram Janambhumi-Babri Masjid case as part of which the entire 2.77 acres of disputed land has been given for construction of Ram temple and Government has been directed to provide 5 acres of land elsewhere for construction of mosque.
The Prime Minister has said, ‘After the verdict, the way every section of society, of every religion, has welcomed it is a proof of India’s ancient culture and tradition of social harmony.’
He also said, ‘The calm and peace maintained by 130 crore Indians in the run-up to today’s verdict manifests India’s inherent commitment to peaceful coexistence.’
The Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh chief has made an appeal, ‘I urge the people of India to maintain law and order.’
Lal Krishna Advani’s reaction is, ‘I stand vindicated, and feel deeply blessed,..’ It will be interesting to see how the Court will now judge him as an accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case.
The SC observes, ‘As regards the inner courtyard, there is evidence on preponderance of probabilities to establish worship by the Hindus prior to the annexation of Oudh by the British in 1857. The Muslims have offered no evidence to indicate that they were in exclusive possession of the inner structure prior to 1857 since the date of construction in the sixteenth century.’
This has been the basis of handing over the disputed site to Hindus.
It further observes, ‘The exclusion of the Muslim from worship and possession took place on the intervening night between 22/23 December 1949 when the mosque was desecrated by the installation of Hindu idols.’ And then it goes on to say, ‘The Muslims have been wrongly deprived of a mosque which had been constructed well over 450 years.’
While acknowledging Muslims offering namaz from 1857
in the inner structure but saying there is no evidence of this before 1857,
although accepting that the mosque existed for at least 450
years, the judgement says, ‘Dividing the land will not subserve the interest of
either of the parties or secure a lasting sense of peace and tranquility,’ and
offers the land to Hindus. It balances by saying, ‘Justice would not prevail if
the Court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims who have been
deprived of the structure of the mosque through means which should not have
been employed in a secular nation committed to the rule of law. The
Constitution postulates the equality of all (emphasis in the judgement) faiths.
Tolerance and mutual co-existence nourish the secular commitment of our nation
and its people.’
The purpose of the judgement and the national appeals,
before and after the delivery of judgement – issued by authorities as well as
social-political leaderships – are understandable. At best the judgement is a
compromise to appease the majority while assuaging the feelings of minority,
whether justice has been done is questionable. Similar to the clampdown in
Jammu and Kashmir, a tight security control ensured that ‘peace’ would be
The first two authors were not allowed to hold a two day communal harmony workshop on 17-18 August, 2019, at Ram Janaki temple at Saryu Kunj in Ayodhya in which Professor Ram Puniyani was to speak and have been issued notices soon after that by the Resident Magistrate of Ayodhya prohibiting them from opening a bank account of their ‘Sarva Dharm Sadbhav Trust.’
The Sarva Dharm Sadbhav Trust has plans to build a multi-faith harmony centre in Ayodhya to convey the message that Ayodhya, sacred to at least five religions – Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism – is a place which is symbol of communal harmony. They were detained again on 19th August when they wanted to hold a press conference at the temple. The Government obviously didn’t want any other point of view, than in favour of Ram temple, to be expressed by anybody for the last four months. This is how ‘peace’ and ‘social harmony’ has been enforced upon the country.
If such a tight control had been observed in 1992, when Bhartiya Janata Party’s government was in power in Uttar Pradesh, probably the mosque would not have been demolished. The Chief Minister Kalyan Singh went back on his word given to SC, that he would be faithful to the Constitution, to claim that he was a RSS worker first and CM later, after the mosque was demolished. In 2002, in spite of PM Atal Behari Vajpayee admonishing Narendra Modi, the then CM of Gujarat, to follow ‘Rajdharm,’ and Defence Minister George Fernandes wanting to deploy Army, rioting went on in Gujarat for three days. And we should remember that this violence was triggered by burning of a train in Godhra carrying kar-sewaks who had gone to perform shila-pujan at Ayodhya, 17 years in advance of a judgement in favour of Ram temple.
Earlier this year Amit Shah, the Home Minister, and Mohan Bhagwat, both have rejected the SC judgement allowing entry of women of menstruating age to Sabrimala temple in Kerala. The Home Minister is also openly discriminating against Muslims, contrary to the Constitutional principle of equality of all faiths, by excluding them from the possibility of obtaining Indian citizenship as part of the proposed Citizenship Amendment Bill.
It is interesting that the politics of Hindtuva which has
built itself up on violence and hatred, starting with the murder of Mahatma
Gandhi, and doesn’t care if the copy of Constituion is burnt at Jantar-Mantar
and holds an unfavourable SC judgement in contempt, is displaying a new found
faith in Constiution, values like equality and fraternity enshrined in it, and
respect for a favourable SC judgement. It is obvious that it has worked to
build a consensus, taking most Muslim organizations on board and also the SC
judges into confidence, to arrive at this judgment. But the larger question is,
has this consensus for maintaining peace and harmony been built selectively
only for the Ayodhya judgement?
If the BJP/RSS genuinely believe that peace and harmony
should prevail from now on, can we expect no more mob-lynching incidents,
killing of intellectuals, discrimination against minorities and dalits and in
general politics of hate? Are they also going to respect Places of Worship
(Special Provisions) Act, 1991 which prohibits conversion of any place of worship?
And conversion doesn’t always take place in the manner in which it has been
done in Ayodhya. At Mazar mod in Indira Nagar, Lucknow at a corner plot where
Muslims used to offer namaz, gradually over years, after a stone was kept under
a tree, Hindus have started worshipping a deity
and now there is a Provincial Armed Constabulary camp as well at the
site. In a TV channel discussion on Indian Ahead on 23
Ocotber, 2019, in anticipation of the Ayodhya judgement, in which
the third author was also invited, Vishwa Hindu Parishad spokesperson Vinod
Bansal has admitted that they have a list of 30,000 sites in addition to
Kashi and Mathura, where Hindu temples were demolished to build some Islamic
structures. The working President of VHP Alok Kumar has said that SC judgement
on Ayodhya is not the end of the story, it is the beginning, in the context of
Kashi and Mathura. Will the BJP/RSS top brass counsel VHP leadership and make
it clear to the country that observance of peace and harmony is meant for them
The demolition of Babri Masjid invited the problem of
terrorism to India. More such misadventure is going to plunge India into deeper
By Sandeep, Yugal Kishore Shashtri and Lubna Sarwath
(Note: The first and third authors are with Socialist Party (India) and Yugal Kishore Shashtri is Mahant of Ram Janaki temple in Ayodhya.)
- Amir Khusro
- Covid-19: Role and limitations of doctors and treatment protocols
- NRIs have ‘gobar’ in their heads, Why? Explains Justice Katju
- When will the covid pandemic end in India?
- Researchers develop an algorithm for lensless, miniature cameras