My thoughts stem from the sense of incompletion that seems endemic to field research, and is clearly illustrated in my own work. This summer's last big journey was
a trip to Ayodhya with the Singh family. Thanks to the hard work of Mr. Jaynardan Singh, I made it inside the contested site of the Ram Janambhoomi Mandir (birthplace of Ram)/ Babri Masjid (built by Babur in 1528) despite the coincidence of Independence Day and the end of Sawan monsoons which brought over 2.2 million Hindu pilgrims to Ayodhya. I circled the miles of gated foot passages next to thousands of disciples shouting "Jai Ram! Jai Ram! Jai Ram!" (Ram is Great) around the Mosque/Temple complex, expecting an elaborate palace at Lord Ram's birthplace similar to the Kanak Bhawan. The above photo (courtesy of the BBC) gives a good sense of this trek. Upon reaching the upper-most hillock, I had to blink to believe my eyes. With a result looking ever-so-much like a refugee camp, the faithful have pitched low tents of black tarp above a small, velvet-clad figure of Lord Ram. A few miles away stand replicas of the first Temple of Lord Ram, which many claim predates the Mughal ruler Babur's construction of the Babri Masjid in 1528. However this history remains widely contested. [Sidenote: Historian Romila Thapar presents the most convincing evidence I've seen. She refers back to the original story of Ram, as told in the sage Valmiki's Ramayan, set in approximately 3102 BCE. This contrasts with Survey of India archaeologist Lal's excavations, where the first evidence of primitive human habitation in Ayodhya dates to the 8th century BCE.]Yet today pillars have been hewn and stone platforms assembled for a temple to replace the mosque demolished by fanatics-cum-devotees of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in 1992. The violence (pictured below) began with a VHP-organized 'Shilla puja', where people came from across the Indian subcontinent with bricks to build a new temple for Lord Ram at the site of his birth. Supporters of a new Hindu temple remain steadfast that It Will Be Built despite the more than 900 deaths in the riots across the country that followed the destruction of the Babri Masjid, continued in 2002's equally horrifying set of riots in Gujarat.
In this context, I consider the Ram Janmabhoomi temple's incompleteness a very, very good thing.
Please forgive me for harping on such a devestating issue to make a few points about India today.
First, my time in Ayodhya emphasized how poorly I understand polytheistic Hindu culture. Walking barefoot through the streets of old Ayodhya, I saw devotees paying homage at the sites where they believe Gods walked the earth. In ancient palace retaining rooms, people flock to beautifully-painted locations where Ram and his divine consort, Sita, once spent their days and evenings together. In modern temples, people stop to pray near the swings that Ram and Sita supposedly enjoy every evening. Given my upbringing in the West's purely secular public life, I am surprised to see large numbers of people intertwine their daily behavior with their Gods'.
Frankly, I find some of this terrifying. For example, consider the transformation of Tulsidas' 16th century epic poem, Ramcharitmanas into a popular story now re-written many times under the title "Ramayan," which Ramanand Sagar made into a serial television show in 1987. All of this is well and good, but a sizable portion of the show's 100 million fans began worshiping the actors in the serial as Gods. Then-PM Rajiv Gandhi celebrated this fact, saying "[Ramayan] has imbibed the great Indian culture, tradition and normal values especially in the young." I hope that India's future will be argued over by a great many contradictory voices, rather than decreed by a single, made-for-television coalition of Hindu deities, but such events make me pessimistic.
Second, the government's response to the politicians who incited the violent riots of 1992 and 2002 has been abysmal. The top politicians in the VHP-BJP alliance who whipped up religious hatred have, for all intensive purposes, been rewarded with more votes, membership in ruling coalitions, and more leadership responsibilities. For example, India's Home Minister at the time of the Babri Masjid demolition, LK Advani, was present in Ayodhya at the time and at the very least did nothing to prevent the violence. However he is now the BJP's President.
I can't help seeing a connection between India's politics and its rampant public sector corruption. An article by JNU Philosophy Professor Pratap Bhanu Mehta discusses corruption in the context of Montesquieu's words:
If 'we inquire into the cause of all human corruptions, we shall find that they proceed from the impunity of criminals, and not from the moderation of punishments.'Rather than witnessing a progressive move towards social equality, it seems contemporary India is reinterpreting inequality as fundamental to its fractured social identity. In this context, laws meant to induce cooperation become a crutch for personal corruption - more specifically, inequality becomes legitimized by the reservation system, and laws based on inequality are poor catalysts for new equality. These laws are good at legitimizing personal hoarding of public wealth. Without any external accountability, criminals become the newly-empowered class, and their methods become not only accepted but legitimized as pushing society one step closer to a poor sketch of equality.
I believe there are many good things about contemporary India, but Ayodhya didn't emphasize them. You will have to trust that I will add a more optimistic chapter to my concluding thoughts shortly.
No comments:
Post a Comment