Are Goan Catholics Culturally Hindu?

Ram Puniyani

Identity issues are at the fore in current times. Those basing their politics on the identity issues have lot of assertions about who the ‘others’ are. There is a constant ongoing attempt to assimilate them in the umbrella of their religion and culture. Current times, where religious nationalism dominates, the scene is that amongst all our multiple identities, the religious one is kept at the fore. In this attempt one recalls that it was Murli Manohar Joshi of RSS-BJP who coined the term Ahmadiya Hindus for Muslims and Christi Hindu for the Christians. Not only this is meant to assimilate the other religious minorities, RSS has also been saying that Sikhism is just a sect of Hinduism not a religion by itself. There are multiple assertions at different times; the goal is to somehow label all the people under the umbrella of Hinduism, to label most as Hindus, either on the ground of religion or culture. Sometimes Muslims are told that their ancestors were Hindus and so what has changed is just the mode of worship.

On the same pattern the Goan Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar is the latest one in this direction of appropriation of the ‘other’.  In an interview he put forward his take on the issue of culture of Goan Catholics. Talking to the New York Times India blog (06, Sept 2013) he said that Catholics in Goa are culturally Hindu and that India is a Hindu nation in cultural sense.

Sec Cathedral, Goa (Courtesy: Wikipedia)

What is this Hindu culture Parrikar is talking about? Let us understand there is no uniform Hindu culture. Amongst Hindus the cultural variations are vast; they are affected by the region, the area in which they live, caste and economic status amongst other things. The hall mark of the society is that culture is basically diverse and most affected by region, so culture generally is not labeled with religious prefix. Diversity is the core of culture of the society. Parikkar does say that culture of a Goan Catholic is different from the one in Brazil. Let’s remind him that culture of Catholics in every country is different. Within the same country it is again not uniform. To say that there is something like Hindu culture out there is an attempt to hegemonize, to impose some sort of homogeneity on something whose life breath is diversity.

There have been the theorists who argued that as different cultures meet they will merge into uniformity, what is popularly called as the ‘melting pot’ model. This is not what the society has seen. What has been observed is the ‘mosaic model’ or a ‘salad bawl’ model, where different shades, colors remain and add to the beauty of the whole. In cultural arena a dynamic interaction and some synthesis does take place while the different shades also continue to add their essence to the whole. There are many Hindus who will visit the Dargah of a Peer or Sufi saint and many Muslims who follow the Hindu saints of medieval times. Many a time’s food habits also become important ingredient of culture. While currently it is projected that eating beef is against Hindu practices there have been large number of Hindu communities eating beef. At personal level one recently came across a Hindu family on a tour to Europe, which was longing to relish beef. The tour operators had organized a vegetarian- non beef meal for the Indian tourists. This family made their own arrangement to eat beef somehow. Anthropological survey had identified large number of Hindu communities consuming beef. Now how will Parikkar handle the fact that Goan Catholics consume beef as well as pork, will he call it a ‘Hindu culture’? Currently cow is one of the major tool-symbol of Parrikar brand of politics, the one of Hindutva. How will Parrikar engage with Catholics eating beef?

Catholics of Goa may not have much in common with Catholics of other countries but that does not make them part of ‘Hindu culture’, if at all such a category can be coined. The core point is cultures cannot be restricted to religious categories. There are nearly 56 Muslim majority countries in the World, and their culture is as diverse as the cultural diversity within India. There is a vast range. Hinduism has been mostly restricted to India, there are Hindu communities in different parts of the World to be sure, but culturally they are as diverse as any other religious community.

www.indiamonuments.org

So why is RSS swayamsevak Parikkar trying to appropriate the Catholics into Hindu cultural fold? The idea is that RSS-Parrikar politics is founded on the premise that India is a Hindu nation. So something Hindu has to be tagged on to other religious communities to claim their support at electoral level. There is a complex policy towards minorities as far as RSS progeny is concerned. At electoral level their support has to be won over, so some sort of Hindu label is to be put on them. There is also an attempt to impose Hindu norms on them, so some times they are called Ahmadiya Hindus or Christi Hindus. This gives RSS politics a scope to force them to adopt Hindu deities over a period of time. At the level of Governance and social politics, the idea is to subjugate them through violence and marginalization. We have seen enough propaganda-blames on Christians and Muslims, blames about conversion, beef eating, loyalty to other nations etc., the propaganda which is the base of ‘Hate other’ ideology, and communal violence.  The burning alive of Pastors, rape of nuns, burning of Churches, violence against Muslims and Christians has been stalking the country. At the level of Governance, in the political arena the Parrikar parivar agenda is to oppose affirmative action for religious minorities or even to the socially disadvantaged people.

Indian Constitution and norms of United Nations do recognize and value the diversity of culture of people. The sectarian political tendencies all over, Parrikar included, begin with labeling them in their own hegemonic version of culture and politics and then go on to impose the same on ‘others’. The cleverness and shrewd maneuvers don’t end here. Simultaneously they can go on with anti minority propaganda and their marginalization in the social-economic terrain.

Read More

Kashmir: Let the People Decide

Jawaharlal Nehru

The house will remember that a few days ago I made a fairly lengthy statement in this House about the affairs of Jammu and Kashmir State. I do not propose to weary the House by a repetition of what I said then. But at this stage, I should like to emphasize certain aspects of this problem.

For the last five years nearly, the Kashmir problem has been one of the heaviest burdens that the Government has had to carry. It has been a heavy burden because it was a complicated affair and one in which our saying 'aye' or 'nay' was not quite enough. Other factors were involved. There are many things in this world which we would like to change but we cannot shape the world to our will. We live, as the House well knows, on the eve of what appears to be a tragedy in the world and we try-when I say 'we' I do not mean we in this House but people all over the world-to avert the tragedy and somehow to assure peace for this world. But nobody can control events completely. Of course, one tries to mould them to certain extent, tries to affect them in some way; but what the ultimate resultant of the various forces and passions and prejudices at work is likely to be, no man knows. The misfortune of the State of Jammu and Kashmir and our misfortune have become a part-perhaps a small part but, nevertheless, a part-of the larger picture of the world. And therefore the difficulties in our way have increased greatly. It is an international problem and would have been an international problem anyhow if it concerned any other nation besides India-and it does. Its international character was further emphasized because a large number of other countries took an interest in the problem and gave advice.

Well, we have tried to fashion our actions in regard to this problem according to what we considered to be our obligations and responsibilities. What were those obligations and responsibilities? The first was to protect and safeguard the territory of India from every invasion. That is the primary responsibility of the State. Secondly, it was our duty to honour the pledge we gave to the people of Jammu and Kashmir State. And that pledge was a two-fold pledge. We were obliged to protect them from invasion and rape and loot and arson and everything that accompanied that invasion. That was the first part of the pledge. The second part of the pledge was given by us unilaterally and was to the effect that it would be for the people to decide finally what their future was to be. The third was to honour the assurances we gave to the United Nations and the fourth was to work for a peaceful settlement. That was not a pledge we had given to anybody but one that was implied in the policy we had tried to pursue right from the beginning. It is in the nature of things that we should pursue a policy of peace, since we are wedded to the ideals of peace. Apart from that, it was neces­sary that we should do so because the world in which we live appears to be on the edge of a precipice and one has to be very careful in taking any step which might, perhaps, cause the world to tumble over that precipice.

So, these were the four major considerations that we had to keep in view and sometimes it was difficult to balance them. Sometimes they seemed to lead in different directions. I t would have been an easy matter if all these factors had led us to the same conclusion. But since they pulled in different directions, our obligations and responsibilities lead us to think not only of one line of action but of several. Then, difficulties arose. Well, we have faced these difficulties and we have sometimes had a hard time deciding what we should do and what we should not do. I should like the House, therefore, to think in terms of balancing these very important assurances, pledges and the other factors in the situation.

In the course of these years, I have repeatedly placed the situation before this House and it is with the concurrence and support of this House that we have continued to pursue the policy that we have pursued. I t has been my belief that, in this matter more than in others, the great majority of the people of this country have approved of our policy. We have had evidence of this approval from time to time in this House and in the House that preceded it. We have received advice from innumerable people, friends and critics in this country and we have always welcomed that advice, even though some of it did not appear to be feasible or right. We have also received advice from innumerable people outside this country. We welcome their advice, too, when it is friendly' advice. vVe do not welcome it when it comes from unfriendly minds or is accompanied by threats or any hint of threats.

We took this matter to the United Nations four years and eight months ago, in the belief that thereby we were serving the cause of peace and in the hope that we would settle the question of Kashmir by means of an agreement. We have not settled it yet, in spite of the labours of the United Nations and its various organs. I would like to repeat what I said on the last occasion in this House when I paid a tribute to Dr Frank Graham, who has shown enormous patience and enormous perseverance in his pursuit of a peaceful settlement. So far as we are concerned, we shall help him to the end, even though people may get tired of our pursuing the same path. Peace is always an ideal worth pursuing, however tired we may get in the process. Many of our colleagues and friends in the country have perhaps got weary of this process and I can very well understand their weariness; but their weariness can hardly compare with the weariness of those who are in charge of the Kashmir affair. Day after day, week after week, month after month, we have had to carry this heavy burden. However weary we may have become, we dare not act in a hurry, we dare not act in anger, we dare not allow ourselves to be led by passion. The consequences of acting in passion are always bad for an individual; but they are infinitely worse for a nation. Therefore, we have restrained ourselves. We have restrained ourselves even when loud cries of war and loud threats have reached us from across the border. We restrained ourselves and I am glad to say that, generally speaking, our people and the press in this country also restrained them­selves. I have great sympathy and understanding for those who sometimes felt that we should do something more active and throw off restraint; but I was sure then and I am sure now that it would have been utterly wrong to do so. I am not referring to any minor step here and there but rather to the major trend of the policy that we pursued. We must keep these four major obligations in our minds as we have done in the past, even though we have put the matter before the United Nations. Some friends have advised us to withdraw it from the United Nations. I am not quite sure if they have studied this subject or considered how it is possible to with­draw this or any such matter from the United Nations, unless, of course, we withdraw ourselves from the United Nations. The United Nations concerned itself with this matter at our instance. And, in any case, if we had not brought the matter to the United Nations, others might have done so. If we say, 'we withdraw from the United Nations,' we shall only be showing impatience and temper without achieving the results that some people hope we will. Therefore, the question of withdrawal from the United Nations does not arise, unless, of course, this House wishes that the Government of India and the Union of India itself should withdraw from the United Nations. In the latter case, the House must be prepared to face all the consequences of such an action. I presume that the House does not wish this, just as I do not wish it.

I have ventured, in all humility, sometimes to criticize those developments at the United Nations which seemed to me to be out of keeping with its Charter and its past record and professions. Nevertheless, I have believed and I do believe that the United Nations, in spite of its many faults, in spite of its having deviated from its aims somewhat, is, nevertheless, a basic and fundamental thing in the structure of the world today. Not to have it or to do away with it would be a tragedy for the world. Therefore, I do not wish this country of ours to do anything which 'weakens the gradual development of some kind of a world structure. It may be that the real world structure will not come in our lifetime but unless that world structure comes, there is no hope for this world, because the only alternative is world conflict on a prodigious and tremendous scale. Therefore, it would be wrong for us to do anything that weakens the beginnings of a world structure, even though we may disagree with this particular organization and even though we may sometimes criticize it, as we have done. It is mainly for these reasons that I fail to understand this cry about our withdrawing the Kashmir dispute from the United Nations. It is not like withdrawing a case from one law court and taking it to another. The United Nations is not to be considered merely a forum dealing with the Kashmir question. The question is before the nations of the world, whether they are united or not and whether they are a forum or not. It is an international matter and a matter which is in the minds of millions of men. How can you withdraw it from the minds of millions of men? Surely not by a legal withdrawal. The question does not arise. We have to face the world; we have to face our people; we have to face facts and we have to solve problems.

Some friends seem to imagine the easiest way to solve the question is to have an exhibition of armed might. They say, 'Let us march our armies.' That can never be a solution in this case or in any other case. The more I live and the more I grow in experience, the more convinced I become of the futility and the wickedness of war as a means of solving a problem. I consider it my misfortune that we even have to spend money on armaments and that we have to keep an army, a navy and an air force. In the world as it is consti­tuted today, one is compelled to take those precautions. Any person in a position of responsibility must take these precautions and if we take them, we have to take them adequately and effectively. Accordingly, we must keep a fine army, a fine navy and a fine air force. That is so. But to think in terms of throwing our brave men into warfare is not something I indulge in, unless circumstances force my hands as they forced my hands on a late evening in October 1947. It was only after the most painful thought and consultation that I decided upon our course of action. If I may say so in all humility and without sacrilege, I did so after consulting the Father of the Nation.

People say, 'A part of the territory of India has been invaded. It is held by the enemy. What are we doing to defend that territory of India? We have failed in our defence.' Such statements would be perfectly justified; such criticism of the Government would be legitimate to some extent. It was and is our duty to push out the enemy from every invaded part of the territory of India. That is where the conflict between obligations and responsibilities really begins.

As the House knows, we decided right at the beginning that we were agreeable to a plebiscite in which all the people of Jammu and Kashmir State would take part. It was a curious thing that in spite of having so decided, this war should have continued. The war continued for fourteen months or so-from the end of October 1947 to the end of 1948. It was for us to decide at the end of 1948 or the beginning of 1949, whether we should carry this war ·on to the bitter end and thereby recover the lost territory or whether we should call a halt to active military operations and try some other and more peaceful method. We decided and, conditioned as we were, I submit we decided rightly to put an end to active military operations and try other methods. These other methods have not brought a solution in their train thus far. And yet, I think it would be right to say that the mere fact that an extraordinarily explosive situation, such as the one that has existed in the State of Jammu and Kashmir for the last few years, has been controlled is itself no small achievement. We see in other parts of the world how other countries have got more and more entangled in all kinds of morasses and how the path of war becomes more and more difficult. We had the courage and, I say in all humility, the wisdom to pull ourselves out of continuing an unending war before it was too late, so that we might think more calmly, more patiently, more wisely. Whether it has yielded any result yet or not, the fact remains that we have not been having a war for the last three and a half years or so. This is not a bad result, although it may not be a satisfactory solution.

Later, we declared that any further aggression or attack - ­I say 'any further' because there had been aggression and aggression was continuing-or military operations in regard to Kashmir would mean an all-out war not only in Kashmir but elsewhere, too. That decision was not lightly taken but after serious thought and careful consultation. 'We said it knowing full well the consequences of what we said. We had weighed the consequences and yet had come to that conclusion. It was no threat but the statement of what was, to our minds, an absolute fact. There could be no further attack on Kashmir without this matter becoming a major war so far as India was concerned. Having made that perfectly clear, I think we succeeded in preventing many an attack that might have taken place in the hope that the aggressors would get away with it.

Two or three basic things follow from this. One is that, in so far as the United Nations is concerned, we shall continue unless this House decides to the contrary, to deal with it in the manner in which we have done in the past. We have tried our utmost to achieve a peaceful settlement without giving in on any vital point or trying to evade any of our responsibilities or obligations. We have resolved not to dishonour the pledges we have given to the people of Kashmir or to the people of India and, therefore, we shall pursue our policy accordingly.

The House is aware that we accepted certain resolutions of the United Nations and of the UN Commission that came here. We accepted them, not because we liked everything about them but because in our earnest desire for a peaceful settlement, we were willing to go to great lengths. Neverthe­less, we made it perfectly clear that we would not by-pass the pledges we had given or the responsibilities we had undertaken. At a much later stage, another resolution was passed by the Security Council which tried to impose an arbitration on us. We rejected that resolution or that part of it which was objectionable to us. It was one thing for us to agree to a certain proposal after having weighed all the consequences but we could not possibly give up our responsibilities, pledges and assurances; we could not put the matter in the hands of somebody else, whoever he might be. We could never do that because we had our own duties and obligations to consider. How could we hang the faith of the four million people of Jammu and Kashmir State on the decision of an arbitrator? Great political questions-and this was a great political question-are not handed over in this way to arbitrators from foreign countries. That is why we had to reject this particular resolution of the United Nations. We stand by that rejection and are not going to agree to anything which prevents us from honouring the pledges or the assurances we have given.

Subject to that, we shall go all out to seek a peaceful settlement. Among the assurances and pledges that we have given is the pledge which was implied in our policy, namely, that the people of Jammu and Kashmir State would decide their future. Let me be quite clear about this. There still seems to be a good deal of misunderstanding about Kashmir's accession to India. The other day, I said in this House that this accession was complete in law and in fact. Some people and some newspapers, mostly newspapers abroad, seem to think that it is only something that has happened in the last week or fortnight or three weeks that has made this accession complete. According to my views, this accession was complete in law and in fact in October 1947. It is patent and no argument is required, because every accession of every State in India was complete on these very terms by September in that' year or a little later. All the States acceded in three basic subjects, namely, foreign affairs, communications and defence. Can anybody say that the accession of any State in India was incomplete simply because they acceded in only those three subjects? Of course not. It was a complete accession in law and in fact. So was the accession of the Jammu and Kashmir State, in law and in fact, by the end of October. It is not open to doubt or challenge. I am surprised that anybody here or elsewhere in the world should challenge it. I was telling the House that when the first United Nations Commission, accompanied by their legal advisers and others came here, it was open to them to challenge it. But they did not, because it was quite clear to them and to their legal advisers that there could be no question about the legal validity of the accession. So, while the accession was complete in law and in fact, the other fact which has nothing to do with law also remains, namely, Our pledge to the people of Kashmir - if you like, to the people of the world - that this matter can be affirmed again or cancelled by the people of Kashmir according to their wishes. We do not want to win people against their will and with the help of armed force; and, if the people of Jammu and Kashmir State wish to part company with us, they can go their way and we shall go ours. We want no forced marriages, no forced unions. I hope this great Republic of India is a free, voluntary, friendly and affectionate union of the States of India. The people of Jammu and Kashmir State not only agreed to come to us as they did but it was at their request that we took them into our large family of States. I do believe that they have the same friendly feelings towards us as the other States have. I believe that on repeated occasions they have given evidence of this fact. Even in the election of this Constituent Assembly that took place nearly a year ago, they exhibited that feeling of friendship and union with India. I am personally convinced that if at any time some other method of ascertaining their feelings is decided upon, they will decide in the same way. But that is my personal opinion; it may not be your opinion or the House's opinion. The fact, however, remains that we have said to them and to the world that we will give them a chance to decide. We propose to stand by their ultimate decision in this matter. Within the limits of these assurances and pledges, we shall continue to pursue the policy that we have decided upon.

A short while ago, we met the representatives of the Government of Kashmir and they were not merely the representatives of the Government but, undoubtedly, the popular leaders of the people of Kashmir. We met .them, we talked to them and we discussed many matters with them. We did not go to them in a bargaining spirit or in a spirit of opposition. We discussed matter with them, with a view to solving our intricate problems, With a view to unraveling the knots and with a view to finding some way which would fit in with the various assurances that we had exchanged and with the policies they stood for and we stood for. Many of these policies 'were, of course, common to both. I placed the agreements we arrived at before this House on the last occasion. It is obvious that these agreements are not a final solution. Much has still to be done; much has to be thought out. But two or three facts remain. One is that, in the nature of things at the present moment, it is necessary to consider the case of Jammu and Kashmir State on a somewhat different footing from the other States in India. This is inevitable because Kashmir has become an international issue in the last few years. A different footing does not mean any special right or privilege except in the sense that it may mean a greater measure of internal autonomy. It is a developing, dynamic situation. One may gradually change it more and more but it is not right for us under the existing circumstances to try to do something by mental coercion or by pressure of some other kind. That would defeat our object and that would, indeed, be playing into the hands of those who criticize us.

Speech in the Loka Sabha, August 7, 1952

Courtesy: Jawaharlal Nehru’s Speeches 1949-1953 (Page: 100-109)

(First Published: January 1954, Fourth Impression: June 1967)

Publications Division

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting

Government  of India

Read More

Business of Faith

Ram Puniyani

Our society has seen severe turmoil’s in the name of religion during last three decades in particular. While on one side we see that issues related to religion’s identity are trying to occupy the center stage, we also are witnessing the emergence of thousands of self proclaimed ‘Godmen’, supposed to be having divine powers. They do also claim and sometimes the state, society does informally accord them some sort of a special status. This came to the light once again in the case of Asaram bapu, against whom the allegation of rape of a minor girl was lodged. In this case the arrest of the accused was warranted immediately, but the police force took its sweet time and with great difficulty and drama; could arrest the Bapu. Bapu did try to evade the arrest on various grounds, so many programs are lined up, am unwell, my relative has died, but finally some pressures did work and Baba was arrested from his Indore Ashram (31^st August 2013).

Courtesy: www.santabanta.com

Asaram bapu is amongst the leading Godmen, as far as the wealth, number of Ashrams and the number of followers is concerned. While he has many influential people amongst his followers, there is no dearth of political people blatantly supporting the likes of him or delaying their arrest under the pressure of ‘electoral calculations’. This is not the first time that criminal cases have been talked about against him, many a cases of land grab came to surface, but law of the land seems to be sleeping on that. The death of two boys in his Ahmadabad Ashram, and two in Chindwara Ashram got suppressed through the mechanisms which are a back up of these God men.

To be fair to Asaram Bapu, he is not alone in the game. There are hordes of Godmen who have acquired infinite wealth. Many of them have been linked to cases of murders in their Ashrams (Shankaracharay Jayendra Sarswati, Late Bhagwan Staya Sai), the listing of those involved in sex scandals of various types is a long one and the lead in this area goes to Nityanand Mahraj, who claimed that he is reincarnation of Lord Krishna. The life style of these Saints is the one of luxury and affluence, proving that while preaching renunciation etc.; one gets the best of what the World has to offer in the arena of material wealth.

Courtesy: www.thehindu.com

Using the word ‘Saint’ for these breed of Babas is also a bit problematic. We do recall the medieval saints of the genre of Kabir, Tukaram, Namdeo, Paltu, Raidas, who came from low caste, were working for their living, and rubbing shoulders with the poor and deprived. They criticized the evil practices in the society, questioning the social inequality in particular. They expressed the anguish of the deprived sections of society, the way Chokhmela, a saint from Maharashtra, talked of injustice in this world where ‘one that grows the grains is hungry, one that weaves the clothes does not have clothes and one who builds the houses has to sleep under the open sky’. These saints were away from the power centers and many of them had to face atrocities from those in power. Nizamuddin Auliya, a Sufi saint, refused to entertain the king to his hospice. Kabir talked against caste system, against the divisions in the name of religion and the social power structure. They had followers mainly amongst the poor and deprived.

The current genre of the Saints, have big following amongst affluent, receive huge donations from those who are drenched in wealth and the powers that be are on their side. These saints have built up their empires of wealth, affluence and power over a period of time. It is interesting that in India there has been a long tradition of people associated with religion. The dominant category is that of the clergy, like the Shankaracharya tradition. There are Mutts, there are ashrams and there are centers where theology and philosophy of religion is discussed at length. Incidentally the current series of Godmen have not much to do with the theology or philosophical debates around religion. In contrast the medieval saints were rooted in the society and talked of social issues, struggle against social evils, like Kabir comparing Chakki (grinding mill) with the idol of lord or reprimanding Mullah for loud bang (Azan).

Courtesy: santabanta

Such social issues are not the concern of present Godmen. There is a vast variety of them and it is not easy to generalize them and their methods. Still some major features of the present ones can be outlined. Their rooting in philosophy or social issues is skin deep. They have picked up some formulae which are elaborated with song and music or they deliver discourses which probably soothe the tense nerves of the section of society, a section facing social dilemmas and anxieties. Some of these Godmen are outright frauds like Nirmal Baba, advising the solution to the problems e.g. through change of color of Chatni (Sauce), which is eaten with the popular Indian snack, Samosa. Meditation and yoga is a major method apart from discourses. Some of them like Morari Bapu have the luxury of preaching Bhagwat (Sacred Narration) while taking devotees on the Sea cruise around the world.

So the prefix saint has a totally different meaning with these two divergent set of people, the genre of Kabi-Nazamuddin Auliya on one side and Asaram Bapu-Nirmal Baba on the other. There is a fundamental difference in their grouping. In his famous sentence, Karl Marx says "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people". And this sentence seems to answer this difficult question in categorizing the complex variety of saints. On one hand we have Clergy (the official –unofficial upholders of the rituals and institution of religion), in the form of Pundit, Maulana, Granthi, and Padri. On other hand is the vast array of medieval saints, coming from different religions, Bhakti saints, Sufi saints who while talking in idiom of religion, were not associated with the power structure or performance of rituals. And then we have this vast array of present saints, proliferating dime a dozen from the most well known like Asaram Bapu, Baba Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravishankar to the small time operators in different cities.

The clergy was definitely part of the power structure, accompaniment of the feudal lord and the Kings. In Maharashtra the phrase ‘Shetji-Bhatji’ (Landlord-Brahmin) sums it up very well. There is Raja-Rajguru, while the ‘Nawab and Shahi Imam’ is another association and the most structured one in this category comes in the form of ‘King and Pope’. They stood for status quo in a society, where the poor peasants were being exploited to their bones. They acted a sort of opiate for the masses to keep them tied to their hard labor. One can say that in contrast the medieval saints were the sigh of oppressed in this heartless exploitative World.

Coming to the Asaram Bapu-Nirmal baba series they are again like the opiate for the masses. Unquestioning the system, blind to injustices, quiet on social evils in the name of religion and at the same time cultivate strong bonds with social powers and have political patronage. While BJP currently may be coming forward in a bit more forthright manner to defend the Babas in the name of Hindu religion, even the others political tendencies also do not have enough courage to criticize the babas. These babas do fulfill the need of the opium to calm the tense nerves, and assume the larger than life image for themselves under the garb of religion. They become ‘more equal’ in the eyes of powers that be so it becomes difficult to get them arrested for criminal charges in the routine course and they can defy the law to some extent or the great extent. So unless the charge is very blatant, like as in case of Asaram, most of them get support from the political class and their blind supporters. One recalls Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Asaram Bapu sitting on a Dhrana in Delhi to oppose the arrest of Shankracharya Jayendra Sarswati in Shankar Raman murder case. One also recalls the soft peddling of murder of children in Asaram Bapus ashrams or other times when influential politician speak out of turn to protect these Babas.

The irony is that the rise of these babas is in parallel with the rise of politics in the name of religion. Many a times there is a subtle and overt association between these babas with the religious nationalist discourse, which they defend and propagate. Many of them also talk about the values of Manusmriti, the hierarchy of caste and gender in a more sophisticated ways. At social levels the current babas are for status quo of social relationships, like talking about caste harmony (Sri Sri Ravishanker) in contrast to Ambedkar’s ‘caste annihilation’.

One knows that a section of population treats them like God; a section does need them to allay their mental pressures. One also knows that they have emerged due to the rising insecurities in the society due to the economic and political factors. They all operate under the garb of religion and faith so it becomes difficult to question their methods. Such a garb of faith lifts them above the ordinary and gives them some immunity from the laws of the land. The need for respecting people’s faith and knowing its limits without denigrating reason and law of the land was never felt more desperately!

Read More

Who Killed Narendra Dabholkar?

Ram Puniyani

The brutal killing of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar (20th August 2013) is a big jolt to the social movement against blind faith and superstitions. During last few decades the tendency for promotion of rational thought parallel to social change came up as Popular Science movement. In Maharashtra it took shape in the form of a movement, Andh Shraddha Nirmoolan Samiti (Committee for Eradication of Blind faith), where it became a powerful campaign for popular awareness, under the leadership of Dr. Narendra Dabholkar. There were those who were uncomfortable due to Dr. Dabholkar’s work against blind faith and superstitions and so he started getting threats to his life. Before his death he got several threats, one of which said, they will give him the same fate as that of Gandhi. After his killing Sanatan Prabhat, a Hindutva ideology paper, which constantly spew poison against him, commented that ‘one gets what one deserves’.

The practitioners and supporters of blind faith surely know that their art is a hoax, were sure that their blind magic can’t kill the pioneer of a rationalist movement, so they did hire assassins to kill Dabholkar. He was recipient of regular abuses from the Hindutva organization, Hindu Janjagruti Samiti, on their web posted claims that they have exposed anti Hindu conspiracy. In their publications they put across abuses for him in gay abandon, one of which read, ‘Dabholkar’s group” should permanently make their faces black for their misdeeds against Hindu religion.”

As such Dabholakar was not against religion or faith. He strongly condemned the practices of blind faith and superstitions, promoted and practiced by Babas and their ilk, who proactively practiced and propagated retrograde practices.  Some of these practices like and Karni, Bhanamati are the ones’ in which magical rites are performed in the name of supernatural power. Some other practices are like offering of ash, talisman, charms etc. for the purpose of exorcism and to drive out evil spirits or ghosts. These Godmen and their types claim to be in possession of supernatural powers and advertise this claim. Many a times they claim to be reincarnation of a particular Saint or God, and this way they cheat the gullible and God-fearing simple folks. They do perform so called black magic and spread fear in society. The act which Dabholkar was campaigning for, which the Government adopted after his assassination, makes such practices as an offence under this act. Just a reminder that when this act was first brought up for discussion BJP-Shiv Sean combine strongly opposed the same. He was critical of these irrational practices, and for this he was labeled to be anti Hindu.

Apart from these upholders of politics in the name of Hindu religion other conservatives were also against the activities carried out by his organization. Faith is a complicated phenomenon, true it is needed by a section of society. Faith in supernatural power, faith in institution built around the names of prophets and individuals operating in the name of some religion or God have to some extent provided an emotional support to many in this cruel World with gross deprivations and inequalities. Recognizing this weakness of humans many a religio-entrepreneurs have systematically converted the faith into blind faith, a series of rituals, acts, which are deliberately used to exploit the gullible.

The battle between these two tendencies is old enough. Reason on one side and faith on the other. Reason believes in questioning the existing beliefs and to keep going beyond the prevalent knowledge. Faith, particularly the one constructed around the ‘institutions of religion’ begins with unquestioning subservience to the prevalent norms, beliefs and rituals. Many individuals who go in to establish their enterprises around these rituals, claim to be having divine powers. Incidentally, most of the founders of religions, the prophets, had questioning mind and they questioned the existing norms, values and practices. It is precisely for this that many of them were tormented and punished by the powers that ruled. The clergy, which built institutions around the names of these prophets or supernatural powers, developed rituals in the names of these prophets. The clergy and their practices were most static. Such tendency promotes status quo not only of knowledge but also of social situations and relations.  Clergy promoted the social status quo and so demanded unquestioning loyalty to their interpretation of religion and social norms as dictated by them.

There are many incidents in the history, where those who came up with rational thought were not only killed but sometimes harassed to no end. We know the fate of Charvak in India, who questioned the supernatural authorities of Vedas, he was condemned, and his writings were burnt. In Europe, Copernicus and Galileo’s plight at the hand of clergy is another chapter, while the scientists like Bruno, Servatus who argued that diseases are due to Worldly reasons and not due to the wrath of God, were burnt alive by the machinations of clergy. The idea here was very simple, if people start understanding that the diseases are due to bacteria or other etiological factors, the earlier practices of pleasing God through the clergy for healing will come to a halt and clergy’s social power will decline.

In India as the secularization process, the land reforms plus reduction of the hold of clergy remained incomplete, the power of clergy in social field continued. Indian Constitution talks of promotion of scientific temper and people like Nehru kept promoting the inculcation of this scientific temper. Meanwhile the political tendencies operating in the name of religion, kept opposing scientific, rational thinking and kept uncritically glorifying the ancient past, ancient practices cultivated by the clergy to exploit the gullible society, society in the grip of uncertainty and deprivation.

India did witness the rational movements to promote the scientific temper, but its impact in the society remained marginal. With the rise of communal politics from the decade of 1980, the blind faith took a massive leap with hoards of Babas and acharyas, setting up their religious enterprises, enterprises which probably turned out to be most profitable by any standard. One hopes that the business schools are able to calculate the returns on the investments in such enterprises some day. In addition many such Babas extracted the additional bonus of physical pleasures of another kind, the way currently Asaram Bapu is being accused of and so many of them have had their fill. In a crass manner many of the small and high level players also incorporated magical tricks like producing ash and gold from nowhere as their trademark of divine powers. It is these tricks which were being exposed by Dabholkar’s groups. 

The practitioners of blind faith and these hoards of five-seven star babas, get their legitimacy and appreciation from leaders of different hues. While those coming from RSS stable are firmly with them at all the levels, even politicians from other tendencies also personally support and follow these tricksters, Babas, Godmen and their whole tribe. The communalists stand to support them ideologically the way Sanatan Sanstha, while abusing Dabholkar also talked of his work being ‘anti Hindu’! A similar trickster, Benny Hynn did public performances for faith healing, and there is no dearth of the ‘Baba Bangali’ series indulging in such trade.

It took Dabholkar’s sacrifice for Mahrashtra Government to pass and bill against blind faith for which Daholkar was struggling from decades. He had collected data that it is women who are the biggest victims of those practicing black magic. He had been talking of taking on the highly rewarding trade of gems and their magic powers, in due course. Alas, that was not to be! Will other state Governments follow suit and try to bring a control on the flourishing trade of blind faith, black magic and its ilk? Will the progressive social movement take up the cause of the major victims of these abominable practices and take the society forward to the path of rational thought, rational culture and rational politics, away from the trappings of the faith based blindness. While our ‘scientific establishment’ has made giant strides the scientific thinking still lags behind as science is being practiced mostly as an instrument and not as a way of life. That’s how in many of science and technology institutions, on Dussera day, computers are worshipped with flowers and by putting vermillion on the forehead of the monitors! Can sacrifice of Dabholar wake up our policy makers to such a serious lacuna in our teaching and practice of science? We seem to have liked the benefits of technology and have been undermining the scientific way of thought and practice, more so after the politics-nationalism has started wearing the cloak of religion.

Read More

Modi Phenomenon: an Attack on Indian Democracy

Ram Puniyani

Currently (August 2013) Narendra Modi is trying to dominate the media, print social and TV through his carefully constructed propaganda machinery and his potential of being nominated as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate by RSS-BJP. Modi has openly used the words like puppies dying under the car wheel, while referring to the victims of Gujarat carnage of 2002. He has also asserted that he is a ‘Hindu nationalist’. While most of the older allies of NDA, are deserting NDA, RSS-BJP hope that he will be able to win the 2014 elections due to his image of a non corrupt, efficient administrator who has taken Gujarat to the heights of development. In social media and other platforms the polarized section of Hindus and the section of middle class are very appreciative of Modi and are creating a delusion of his becoming the next prime minister.

All this is mostly a pipe dream. One knows that Modi is totally disliked by the victims of communal violence, most sections of religious minorities  Those who have gone deeper to the issue of Gujarat development model point out that it is more of a propaganda than reality. We still need to understand as to why ‘Modi phenomenon’ has arisen on the Indian scenario and the dangers of ignoring the politics represented by Modi as such. Even though he may not be able to be the PM after 2014 we need to realize that politics represented by Modi and his ilk is the politics of ‘Communal Fascism’, which at surface looks to be just against minorities, but as a matter of fact, aims to abolish democracy after usurping power through democratic means. Its agenda is to do away with the human rights of the dalits, Adivasis, workers and women in Indian context.

RSS-BJP: Rise in 1980s

Modi is a trained Pracharak (propagator) of RSS, deeply soaked in the ideology of Hindu nationalism, working for the agenda of Hindu nation. In the decade of 1980 multiple factors at global and local level led to the rise of conservative middle classes, the petty industrialists, the rich farmers, the affluent professionals, who are always for the politics of status quo. During this time the global changes, the creeping globalization was on and the attacks on working class movement were stepped up. RSS-VHP during this phase started promoting the religiosity all round. Using the Shah Bano judgment as the pretext, RSS launched the tirade against secular values by putting forward the word ‘Pseudo secularism’ and phrases like appeasement of minorities.

The"Ratha Yatra" of Advani, 1990

In this backdrop Advani started his Rath Yatra for Ram Temple. In the country where the dire need of basic amenities for life and the need for protection of the human rights of weaker sections of society are paramount, the RSS combine deliberately brought forward the issues related to identity of a section of Hindus. At the same time their propaganda targeted the religious minorities, a mix of distorted version of history, and presenting the victims as culprits. The rath yatra of Advani created the atmosphere of ‘Hate towards minorities’ and this led to series of acts of violence.

The major outcome of this campaign for Ram Temple was that the issues related to human rights and the bread, butter, shelter and employment issues got relegated to the background and social-political scene started revolving around the identity issues. As a part of the communal politics unleashed by RSS combine, the anti Christian violence in Adivasis areas also got stepped up. In these areas the corporate giants want to have a free hand and have been able to encroach the lands of Adivasis.

 

RSS Combine: Epitome of Communalism

 

RSS began in India during the freedom movement as an organization opposed to the freedom movement, opposed to the concept of Indian Nationalism and harping on the glory of ancient Hindu kings, era of pastoral Aryans and ancient Hindu scriptures. RSS began as a response to the struggle of dalits for their land rights and the rising opposition to the values of Brahminism prevalent in the society. The non Brahman movement was inspired by Jotiba Phule and Dr. Ambedkar. As the average people started coming up in the society, started participating in the freedom movement, the elite-upper castes sections felt threatened and they came together to form Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). This organization began by holding shakhas, and developed a training module according to which this (India) is a Hindu nation from times immemorial. The freedom movement’s values of incorporating people of all the religions in the movement were not acceptable to them. They trained the young boys into swayamsevaks, who took oath to work for Hindu nation. They also kept totally aloof from freedom movement. RSS was founded by the Chittapvan Brahmins and is an exclusively male organization.

RSS went on to form various subordinate organizations like Rashtra Sevika Samiti (for women). In this name the word swayam is missing as RSS being a male dominated patriarchal organization, it believes in the inherent subjugation of women as secondary beings. Later RSS went on to form Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad, (Student wing), and then in collaboration with Hindu Mahasabha it formed Bhartiya Jansangh, the previous avatar of the present BJP, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (for bringing together different Hindu sects under the control of RSS) Vanvasi  Kalyan Ahsram (to work amongst Adivasis to Hidutvise them), Bajrang Dal as its foot soldiers (for unleashing street violence against religious minorities) and many other organizations like Durga Vahini etc.

On similar lines it began many an institutions to propagate its views (weeklies like Panchjanya and Organizer), started Sarswati Shishu Mandirs and Ekal Schools for Adivasi children. Its ideological spread was achieved through spread of brahminical norms through various channels. Infiltration of its RSS swayamsevaks into the state apparatus, police, military, bureaucracy is also very deep. 

The ideological indoctrination

Through its shakhas it started spreading the hate for minorities, opposition to the values of secularism and Indian Constitution. This relentless opposition went on through many other channels also. It also made inroads to the IT professionals by the web meetings called IT milans (Gathering). The social media also was and has been used by RSS combine in a very effective way. To add to all these many a Godmen of the likes of Pandurang Shastri Athwaley, Asaram Bapu, Baba Ramdev, Sri Sri Ravishnkar etc. started propagating the social concepts of RSS, the values of Hindu Nation through their subtle and direct activities. The result has been that the social scene has come to be dominated by the conservative thinking. Meanwhile RSS also popularized the word, Hidnutva. This word Hindutva stands for the politics based on Brahimincal values of caste and gender hierarchy. Mistakenly the politics of Hindutva is supposed to be ‘a way of life’ by many.

 Throughout the decades of 1960 and 1970 there were sporadic episodes of violence. This led to polarization of the religious communities and provided the ground for rise of electoral strength of communal party. In the decade of 1980s, with the Ram Temple campaign picking up, the intensity of violence also started going up. Major episodes of violence took place in various cities of North India. All this was dwarfed by the communal violence Post Babri demolition. The violence in cities like Mumbai, Bhopal and Surat was too horrific for words. The violence unleashed in Gujarat on the pretext of Godhra train burning shamed the nation as a whole, beyond all previous acts of violence.

  

Modi: Gujarat Violence and After

The post Godhra violence was a sample of the way state can actively promote violence. So far in the communal violence in India, the police, the state had been by and large an onlooker, mostly police siding with rioters. In Gujarat the equation was worsened much further with state, led by Modi actively promoting violence. Though it is claimed that Special Investigation team has given the clean chit to Modi, the fact is that based on the same report, the Supreme Court appointed Amicus Curie Raju Ramchandran feels the report has enough evidence to prosecute Modi for his role in 2002 violence. After the violence the state of Gujarat totally washed its hands off the responsibility to rehabilitate the violence victims. The process of marginalization of religious minorities went quite far. A large section has been living in ghettoes in Ahmadabad itself, while their civic and political rights have been trampled and they are living like second class citizens. There is an intense propaganda that Gujarat is most developing state, the fact is that Gujarat was already amongst the more developed states, the claims of huge investments through Vibrant Gujarat summits have little substance in them, promises have been more than the actualizations. The real indices of social development are lagging behind. The rate of employment generation is very low, Gujarat is low on the per capita spending, the Hemoglobin level of pregnant women is on the lower side and sex ratio has also fallen during last one and a half decade.

Hindutva: electoral Strategy

RSS combine has been entering into the electoral arena by and by. While in 1984 elections when it was giving the slogan of Gandhian socialism, it had only two MPs in Lok Sabha. In 1996, it went on to more than 150 MPs and it emerged as the largest single party. That time no other electoral party was willing to ally with it. The BJP government fell. After going through couple of ‘third-front’ experiments, BJP managed to cobble up the coalition, National Democratic Alliance. For this it had to give up the core issues of Ram Temple, abolition of Article 370 in Kashmir and Uniform Civil Code. This strategy worked and BJP led NDA ruled for nearly six years. During this time it communalized the text books and recruited RSS volunteers in to various government schemes and supported many NGOs with RSS agenda and RSS got a big boost in the political arena and its dominance was painfully perceptible in different walks of life.

The Hindutva combine knows that it was so far not able to come to power on its own. Now it is hoping that it will go with aggressive Hindutva agenda and by coming to power on its own it will bring in Hindu Rashtra.

 

Agenda of Hindu Rashtra- Hindutva Politics

Modi is the aggressive form of Hindutva agenda. He has openly started saying that they believe in Hindu nationalism. This is a subtle and open hint at the communal fascism which RSS combine, of which Modi is the major leader, wants to bring in. The major support base for RSS combine, more so with Modi at the helm is the corporate sector on one hand and the middle level corporate employees, the Information Technology-MBA groups on the other. Modi has demonstrated in Gujarat that he can open all the state coffers for the industrialists, land, loans and necessary paraphernalia. This has impressed the corporate sector and they are pitching for him in a large way. The corporate media has uncritically propagated his claims about development. The social welfare schemes have been kept in abeyance, due to which the poorer sections are suffering. As for as minorities are concerned all the central schemes related to Sachar Committee are not being implemented, the scholarship funds for the Muslim students is being returned back year after year. Modi in this sense is ruthless as for as schemes related to religious minorities are concerned.

He is the choice of corporate, middle classes, the traders and the RSS support base. Each of these has their own understanding of Modi and he fits in to the bill of these all. Corporates think he will give them a free hand to plunder, the middle classes know Modi is the best guarantee against social change for betterment of the deprived sections and religious minorities. The RSS, discarded Advani on two grounds, one that he made that statement about Jinnah being secular and other that he is on the wrong side of the age. RSS, the real controller of BJP and other affiliated organizations see in Modi a ruthless swayamsevak out to bring in Hindu Rashtra.

Way Ahead

While Modi and RSS agenda is being projected and Modi’s rise is being anticipated it is clear to most that Modi’s coming into the top of power ladder will instill an autocrat who will soon follow the path of Hitler. Our country is rich of diversity with varying interest groups, who know Modi-RSS are going to impose Hindu Rashtra a synonym for communal fascist state. This diversity of the country and the realization of this sort amongst large sections of Indian voters should wake up to this danger to our democracy and ensure their defeat in the electoral area. While RSS combine and corporates will try their best to prop him up, the large section of Indian electorate should not be taken in by such propaganda, as Modi’s reality is too well known to most by now. Though Modi is trying to project as if he is changing his profile and becoming liberal, one knows that a leopard cannot change its spots. And that is the reason as to why Modi’s tricks on the electoral arena should be made to fail in the coming elections.

The responsibility of ensuring that mishap of Modi’s victory does not take place will also rest on the progressive sections of society, the sections who are getting affected by the agenda of communal politics and the religious minorities who have experienced the Modi’s deeds of commission and omission. The realization of this sort will be in the center stage of the progressive sections of society and it is crystal clear that they have to come up to fulfill this historic responsibility to understand the Modi phenomenon and to make the large sections of population aware about this truth. This truth they are trying to mask by the propaganda unleashed by Modi and his minions. Some facts are known and others will have to be made known to the struggling masses, which is the need of the hour for democratic movement in the country. While we have to intensify the struggle for human rights of all, we may have some differences, we also have to come together on this common goal of saving democracy which is being attacked by the communal fascist forces as represented by Modi and those who are prostrating in front of him.

Some people, ideologues try to argue that more violence has taken place in non BJP ruled party, that other parties are not truly secular. What we have to remember is that BJP as a party cannot and should not be compared with any other party, as BJP is not just and electoral party, it is basically the electoral wing of RSS, whose agenda is opposed to the agenda of secular democratic India, the dream of Indian nationalism, the dream of those who contributed to the ‘Making of the Nation-India’, the diverse streams represented by Gandhi, Bhagat Singh and Ambedkar!

Read More