Skip to main content

A few questions we must ask ourselves about the situation surrounding the Babri Masjid/ Ram Mandir controversy

Ayodhya Ram Janambhoomi: राम मंदिर- विवाद से ...

August 5, 2020, was a historic day in India for two reasons. First, it was a year since the special status of J&K was revoked, and the state was converted into Union Territories; it resulted in it being directly controlled by the Central Government in Delhi and no longer controlled by an elected government under the federal setup. It was simultaneously followed with a year-long (and still ongoing) internet and communications blockade. Second, it was a day celebrated by right-wing Hindu nationalists because of the 

ground-breaking ceremony (Bhoomi Pooja/ Puja) that was held to begin construction of a temple for Lord Ram; a temple being built on a land where a mosque that was demolished by close allies of the BJP in 1992 lay. Reaching this point was not easy. It was a struggle that lasted for decades, multiple cases in court, contributions from the Archaeological Survey of India, claims of Muslims invaders building a mosque over a temple etc. The court finally ruled in favour a temple (mandir) being built on the grounds of where a mosque (masjid) lay till 1992.


But, I have some questions, not only related to the verdict but also to the situation under which certain things have happened, some deep and thought provoking, some extremely petty but nevertheless, valid.


Would the court have ruled the same if 1992 had not happened?


The demolition of the masjid in 1992 was an illegal act carried out by Hindu-extremists. The Supreme Court, while delivering the judgement in 2019, repeated that while the verdict was in favour of the mandir, the perpetrators of violence are still not excused and should face a court. This raises another question. 

It is a well-established fact that the demolition was illegal. Even certain Right Wing Hindu nationalists in support of the mandir, agree that the destruction that happened in 1992 was unlawful. I have a simple question. 

While we agree that the demolition was illegal and should have ideally waited for the court to decide what has to be done (as is done in any nation with a functioning legal system), could it not be argued that the court *may* have been influenced by the fact that the masjid was already demolished in 1992 when giving their verdict in 2019? I find it hard to believe that the court, in 2019, would have ruled the same way (in favour of a temple) if there was a mosque still standing. Would the court really have sanctioned the demolition of a religious place of worship? Doubtful. It is hence fair to say that the illegal demolition has, probably, to a certain extent, influenced the court's decision. An illegal act of violence, charting a course for a favourable verdict for the people who caused the violence in the first place is disgraceful.


Why August 5?


The one sentence paragraph between the introduction and the first question mentioned that I will be speaking about things that are 'petty but nevertheless, valid'. 

The date may be a mere coincidence and I hope I am wrong. But choosing a relevant date is almost never a coincidence. Why was August 5, the 1 year anniversary of a blackout and revocation of special privileges in the Muslim majority former state of J&K not only chosen as a date for the Bhoomi Pooja but it being the very Bhoomi Pooja that was attended by Hindutva-BJP leaders? I struggle to convince myself that the date was chosen by random luck and not by any malicious thoughts or ideas. Could they have not been a tad bit compassionate or thoughtful before making such a decision that is hurtful to the Muslim community? Petty but nevertheless, valid, or so I think.


Is the comparison of the demolition of the Babri Masjid with the removal of Confederate Statues fair? 


What irks me about the arguments made by those in favour of the demolition is the comparison to Confederate statues being taken down under the #BLM banner. The profoundly flawed argument says that brutal Muslim invaders destroyed a temple (which may or may not have existed, but let's assume that they are right) and built a mosque. Because of that heinous act, the demolition of the Babri Masjid is justified. What supporters of this argument fail to see is that the demolition of the supposed temple happened during a time of wars, invasions and tyranny. The demolition of the Babri Masjid happened in an established and so far, mostly stable Constitutional Democracy. What's worse, is that leaders of the current ruling party were directly or indirectly associated with the protestors who turned violent and massacred 2000 people. What separates what our Constitution strives to be, and how the situation was when Muslim invaders demolished a holy temple, is that they were akin to brutes (as were many imperialistic kings of that time, be it Hindu or Muslim) and nothing similar to the stability and order that we should be living in, or rather, should have been living in 1992 under the banners of Constitutionalism, the rule of law and civility.


Further, statues of Confederate leaders are taken down because of the principles the people after whom those statues have been made held when they were alive. White supremacy is not something that anyone, irrespective of political beliefs should believe in, or follow, simply because it is discriminatory. However, the Babri Masjid, in 1992 was used by peace-loving Muslims who had nothing to do with the Mughals or any other Muslim invaders. It was used to practise Islam, which is permitted and by no means illegal or wrong, unlike what statues of Confederate leaders stood for. Yes, Muslim invaders *may* have destroyed a temple during a time when wars were and battles were the norm. How does this justify the demolition of a religious place of worship today, in a constitutional democracy ? No idea.


However, a valid question about the original habitants/ users of the land is often asked, but how far back in history should we go?   


Has secularism as we know it, come to an end?


On the front of the event being orchestrated and led by BJP leaders, and how it's against the principles of secularism, consider the following.

Let's begin by defining secularism. Secularism is a principle that refers to the separation of state (power) from religion/ religious institutions. The Ram Mandir issue has been nothing short of controversy. It has attracted media attention world over for various reasons; both good and bad. 

The principles of secularism apply to political parties too. This was reiterated in the S.R Bommai v. Union of India Case (1994) in which the court said that religion and State power cannot be mixed because if a political party comes to power by espousing a particular religion, that religion becomes the de facto 'official religion' and the others are relegated to a secondary position. "The encroachment of religion into secular activities is strictly prohibited", said The Court. How is this related to the groundbreaking ceremony?{1}


Even if we choose to forget the politicisation of the demolition of the masjid and the court case ever since, one simply cannot argue against the fact that the Ram Mandir Bhoomi Puja ceremony was exceedingly politicised. From Ayodhya being draped in saffron to billboards having Modi's, the UP CM, Yogi Adityanath's, the RSS (a sister-organization of the BJP) Chief's photos alongside Lord Ram, the city was decked up no less than a banquet hall before a wedding. Why is this relevant?


This Bhoomi Puja (ground-breaking ceremony) is no ordinary ceremony. It cannot be compared to a campaign visit of a politician to any other temple just before an election, or an iftar party organised by one during Ramadan. The Bhoomi Puja is the result of decades of court battles, an illegal demolition and finally, a verdict in 2019, that was thankfully accepted peacefully by Muslims. The pooja created a big stir and for the BJP to swoop in and take credit for it is against the principles of secularism, especially the points that were reiterated in the S.R Bommai case (w.r.t political parties espousing a specific religion making it the de facto 'official religion' and them encroaching into religious activities). They have quite clearly displayed a religious preference and made their religious beliefs even more evident (than before), and I think that is nothing but a slap on secularism when top-brass politicians (the PM of a country included!!) attend and play a central role in the Bhoomi Pooja of a temple that is associated with the loss of lives, an illegal demolition of a mosque and a legal battle that was gracefully accepted by the Muslims, despite it being against what they wanted. If the PM really cared, the Bhoomi Pooja could have been grand, no doubt, but could have been done in the absence of BJP politicians to at least try and maintain the facade of secularism that has been explicitly mentioned in our Constitution since 1975. As if previous cases were not proof enough, this can be single-handedly viewed as the reason for the end of secularism as we know (NOT to be confused with the end of secularism itself), not because it is the first instance of any political leader indulging in a religious activity but the importance and level of controversy that this specific case has.



--

Edits:

"iftar party organised by one *during* Ramadan, not 'at the end'."





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Visiting the Kasturinagar (KA-03) RTO - a tumultuous but manageable experience to get a Learner's/ Driver's License without an agent/ driving school

Ask anyone, and I can guarantee that they will have a story (and in most cases, many stories) about their trip, or rather, numerous trips to the RTO for something as simple as getting a Learner's License (LL) or a Driver's License (DL). In this blog, I hope to make your life a tad bit easier by guiding you through the entire process, which may seem easy at first but is full of (overcome able) challenges if you know what you are doing. I turned 18 in January this year, and besides cutting a cake, I worked on my LL application online. I challenged myself to complete the entire LL to DL process by myself and without the help of an agent or a driving school, unlike what the majority do. The lengthy application process and multiple visits to the RTO, impressed upon me why most people decided to pay a little extra to get an agent to do it for them. Still, I was determined not to pay a single rupee more than the official cost. I succeeded.  Do note that this answer is concerning the K

Kicking off a 'political career' in an idea-based, grassroots level political party

Despite having been following politics for the longest time, and now studying it full time, I never joined a political party. When people used to ask me "who do you support?", my answer was standard, "no one". Luckily for me, ever since turning 18 and being eligible to vote, there hasn't been an election in which I'd be forced to cast my vote and tell people that I have made a definitive choice about a particular political party. At a time when politics has become ever so polarising and dirty, I couldn't be happier to associate myself with the BNP. It was in February 2020 that I was introduced to the Bengaluru NavaNiramana Party. I found their vision, leadership and ideas incredibly refreshing. Though I was aware of their launch/ kickoff meeting that took place in Freedom Park in early 2020, due to a friend's TEDx talk taking place simultaneously, I could not attend. Then, between Board Exams and the lockdown that took us all by surprise, I forgot ab

Unsettling Signs of Fascism - India

Let me begin by removing some misconceptions that you may have based on the title. I am not calling India a Fascist State. The ruling power is not a fascist party. The article has been largely written without any prejudice or bias (debate me if I am wrong) and includes only facts which have been backed by relevant sources. Lastly, the views are personal and have not been written with anti- ruling party/ pro-opposition party viewpoints but have been written as a private individual observing from a distance. If the article seems too long or you do not have the time, read the paragraph 'What is fascism?' as well as the last paragraph 'TL;DR' and refer back to an individual case study if you find it important or need a detailed argument. What is fascism? Fascism is a rightist-totalitarian ideology that was conceptualised by Benito Mussolini in Italy and also widely copied and renamed as Nazism by Hitler in Germany. Fascism can be broadly characterised by the presenc

Vélib Bikes | A firsthand experience of Paris' Bike Sharing Scheme

Micro-mobility has always fascinated me. Back in April 2019, I test rode various Yulus which left me amazed by the concept and the ease with which I could get across town (relatively) carbon-free and cost effectively. When I was in Stockholm on an exchange trip in late 2019, I couldn't help myself but try out Bird and Lime scooters despite it costing quite a bomb. Though I can't quite remember the exact amount I paid but I remember it being upwards of 50 kronas/5 euros/400 Indian Rupees for a short 10-15 minute ride; something that was very expensive considering that I had a public transport card that allowed me to take unlimited trips across the city and to most of suburbs an hour or two away. A Vélib stand a stone's throw away from the Eiffel Tower While Bangalore has cheap modes of transport to get around the city, be it the buses, auto-rickshaws, cabs the metro or even Yulus and Bounces, one cannot say the same about cities in Europe. A single use ticket in Stockholm co

Why shows like Shark Tank are extremely misleading

Shark Tank is an American reality TV show in which " Aspiring entrepreneurs from around the world pitch their business models to a panel of investors and persuade them to invest money in their idea." . It was started in 2009 and is currently in its ninth season. The show revolves around entrepreneurs who pitch their idea to a group of 4-6 investors and hope to secure an investment from at least one of them. While the idea behind this show is not only to provide a platform for entrepreneurs to win an investment but also improve and inspire young minds who watch this show, the show is extremely misleading. In each episode, about five startups pitch their ideas to the panel. Each entrepreneur begins by introducing themself, their venture and their ask (eg. $100,000 for 10% stake). This is followed by the panel of 'sharks' questioning them about their product/idea/revenue/future plans and likewise. After this, potential investors either agree to invest or

FUD! - RBI's Decision Sends Worldwide Crypto Markets into a Tizzy - What is the actual scenario like?

India's central bank, the Reserve Bank of India on 5th April, 2018 announced that all regulated entities such as banks will not be allowed to deal with cryptocurrencies (Virtual Currencies as they call them). Banks have been told to wind up all transactions with cryptocurrency exchanges within three months. Within minutes of this announcement, Bitcoin slumped 27%. Global markets attributed the fall in price to RBI's decision as India has a pretty large cryptocurrency investor market. However, RBI's decision is outdated and virtually has no effect on investors and exchanges. Source A few months ago, couple of banks like HDFC bank had voluntarily  withdrawn from dealing with cryptocurrency exchanges. I know this as a fact as when I started investing, I initially tried to deposit money on a cryptocurrency exchange using HDFC bank as I generally used their services, but due to them pulling out, I was forced to look at other options. This was around September, 2017. Duri