Almost
all newspapers wrote editorials either on 10th or 11th
November on the unanimous verdict of the five judge bench of the Supreme Court
on the Ram Janma Bhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute on November 9. A plethora of
articles appeared in the newspapers expressing various views on the verdict of
the SC. One common wish or appeal expressed in almost all editorials and in
various articles is “Let us move on; let there be no repeat of 1992; India has
had enough”.
People
in general felt a sigh of relief, as there were no untoward incidents or
violence in any part of the country. The Central and the State governments had
taken extraordinary measures to deal with any breakdown in the law and order
situation. All political parties and leaders had appealed to the people to
maintain peace and calm and accept the verdict of the SC.
The Supreme Court judgement recognises the
Hindu claim over the disputed land, while directing the building of a mosque on
a suitable plot at a prominent place in Ayodhya. That gives the impression that
the judgement is a balanced one.
At the
same time, there are a few unanswered questions. Prominent among them is that t
he judgement accepts that the demolition of the mosque in 1992 and the
placing of the idols in 1949 were "serious violations of the law".
Then why does the court reward the serious violators of the law by handing over
the entire land to them? The editorial in ‘The Hindu’ on November 11
(Justice and Peace, Ayodhya Verdict), has pointed out this aspect. “
But what
is most disappointing about it is that the relief spelt out by the Bench may
amount to legitimising the very demolition it unequivocally condemns. Having
declared that the suits are representative of the two communities, organised
violence by one party ought not to have been ignored.”
A saving point in the whole exercise is
that the
judgment
enjoins the Central and the State government to abide by the Places of Worship
(Special Provision) Act, 1991, which forbids the conversion of any other place
of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. Hence the Ayodhya verdict cannot
be taken as a precedent for claiming the ownership of other worship centres
like Kashi and Mathura.
The SC in its
judgement also made clear that there is no proof to show that the mosque was
built after destroying a temple, although it has accepted the report of the
Archaeological Survey of India that a structure similar to temple was found
beneath the mosque.
While almost all political parties welcomed the verdict
and appealed to the people of India to do the same, many Muslims are not
satisfied with the judgement, although they have not rejected it.
Terming the decision of the Supreme Court to hand over
the disputed land to Hindus unjust, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board
said that the verdict is not satisfactory. The Sunni Waqf Board has said
that it will be making a decision on its position on the five-acre of land
granted by the Supreme Court in its Ayodhya land dispute judgment in the next
15 days. From the perspective of a lasting reconciliation between the two
communities, the Muslims may avoid review petition, though they are entitled to
it, and accept five acres of land offered to them through the SC judgement for
the construction of a mosque.
What is the way forward? Some commentators have pointed
out that through the judgement the Supreme Court tried to resolve an issue that
has vexed the nation for about seven decades and to initiate a process of
reconciliation. If genuine reconciliation is to take place and India has to
move on, certain favourable conditions are to be created.
First and foremost, the Hindu organizations, especially
the Sangh Parivar members,
should shun
all kinds of triumphalism and should not make use of the process of building
the Ram temple at Ayodhya another occasion of communal polarization. Some VHP
members have already declared that karsevaks will be brought from all over
India for the construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya. In an age when building
construction is highly mechanized, only limited number of labour force is
needed. Hence mobilizing karsevaks will be another political and communal
mobilization. The BJP and the Central government should prevent any kind of
mobilization of karsevaks for temple construction.
Secondly, the BJP expanded its political footprint all
over India and came to power in many States and at the Centre mainly through
communal polarization centred on Ayodhya Ram mandir issue. It has to resist the
temptation to use the same technique when it sees that power is slipping out of
its hands.
Thirdly, the BJP and the saffron parties must drop future
mandir-masjid agitations. Although some organizations have declared that they
have no plan to pursue the issues like Kashi and Mathura, the behaviour of
these organizations in the past does not guarantee that they would keep their
word. The government and the SC have to be firm on these organizations so that
they would not start another disastrous mandir-masjid agitation.
Fourthly, as ‘The Hindu’ editorial on November 11 stated,
“There would be a real sense of justice only if those who plotted and executed
the demolition are convicted in
the ongoing trial in Lucknow. The rulers of the day owe this
much to the nation. And in the
spirit of the ‘new India’ put forward by Prime Minister Narendra Modi,
it would be in the fitness of things if the VHP and other organisations which
participated in the demolition are expressly excluded from the proposed trust
to build the temple.”
Fifthly, the people of India have to graduate from
religiosity to spirituality. This is a very difficult task, but not impossible.
The canny politicians will always try to make use of religion for accessing
power and remaining in power and the priestly class in all religions will try
to keep people subservient to blind faith and superstitions. Spirituality
requires the practice of the core values taught by the religions whereas
religiosity focuses on rituals, dogmas and traditions. The core values of all
religions are love, forgiveness, compassion, truth, justice and respect for the
other. When people start practising these values the worship centres will
become secondary. They will not give priority to build worship centres and lock
God in these worship centres. On the other hand, they will see God in the human
beings and in the whole nature. They will respect other human beings and be
compassionate to them. They will not kill another human being in the name of
God and worship centres; they will not pollute the nature or overexploit it.
Many gigantic churches built in Europe have become mainly
tourist centres. The people of Europe are in search of a higher level of
spirituality. Unfortunately, the religious leaders in Europe have failed to
satiate the spiritual quest of the people; they continue to offer the age-old
religiosity perhaps in new bottles. As a result, people are becoming
indifferent to religion. The religious and spiritual leaders in India have to
educate people to move from religiosity to spirituality. They should shun
building opulent worship centres, erecting huge statues and organizing mega religious
events that attract crowds. Let the focus be on learning the essence of
religion, the core values and practising them. Lord Ram will be happy if all
people in India enjoy righteousness and live in harmony. Jesus will be happy if
the disciples of Jesus follow the way he has enunciated in the Sermon on the
Mount. Prophet Mohammed will be happy if all people live in discipline and
fellowship. Will God be happy if people worship him without doing His will?
Will He not tell them, “I never knew you. Get away from me, you wicked people.”
(Mt. 7:23)
If India has to move on, it has to focus on the education
of the youth as Swami Vivekananda has envisaged. “We need an education that
builds character, increases strength of mind, expands intellect and helps a person
to stand on his feet”. What is severely lacking today is character formation
and expansion of intellect. The students are not taught to develop critical
thinking. As a result they are easily brainwashed by the political and
religious leaders. They easily become the voracious consumers of divisive
ideologies and ideologies based on hatred and revenge. A divided India cannot
become a strong India.
The BJP government at the Centre could achieve most its
Hindutva goals like making triple talaq illegal and criminal, abrogating
article 370 and 35 A and dividing the Jammu and Kashmir State into two Union
Territories, and preparing the way for constructing Ram temple in Ayodhya, even
though the last one came from the judiciary through a legal process. The BJP
may take the credit for the construction of Ram Temple in Ayodhya and use it
for electoral gain.
At the same time the economy is on the downhill. Lakhs of
people are losing jobs; there is no let up in the crisis in the farm sector and
people are losing faith in the banks.
Credit
rating agency Moody’s Investors Service changed the outlook on the Indian
government’s ratings from stable to negative even as it reaffirmed the existing
foreign and local currency ratings. The results of the assembly
elections in Haryana and Maharashtra have vindicated that people are more
concerned about the issues of bread and butter than the xenophobic nationalism.
The BJP should avoid triumphalism with regard to Ayodhya issue and focus on the
issues of governance. Harping on nationalism and exploiting the religious
sentiments of the people may bring electoral dividends in the short run; but in
the long run India will be failing.
Allow
India to move on.
(jacobpt48@gmail.com)
(Published
on 18th November 2019, Volume XXXI, Issue 47)
