Political Diary
New Delhi, 8 August 2023
ShivBhakts Vs Rahim Abids
RASHTRA BHAKTI, ANYONE?
By Poonam I Kaushish
Why is it that religion always becomes
the political touchstone at election time? Be it Hindus or Muslims netagan who adopt a ‘holier than thou
attitude’ to protect their power bases. As using the intoxicating potent of temple-masjid
symbolism enables them to vet voters’ appetite depending on which side of the
template one is on. Both have just one faith — power. Nothing stands testimony
to this better than the on-going ‘jihad’ unleashed
over Varanasi’s Gyanvapi Masjid-Kashi Vishwanath Temple.
The case involves a dispute over the religious
significance and ownership of the Gyanvapi mosque built by Aurangzeb in 1669 after
demolishing the ancient Vishweshwar Mandir. The temple’s plinth was left
untouched and continued to serve as the mosque’s courtyard. In 1936, three
Muslims moved Varanasi’s District Court demanding the entire Gyanvapi complex
be declared the mosque’s part. The Court granted right to offer namaz alongside prayers anywhere in the
complex.
In 1991 Varanasi priests filed a petition in court
requesting permission to worship within the mosque complex claiming it was
originally part of the Kashi Vishwanath temple demolished by Aurangzeb, removal
of Muslims from therein and demanded land be returned to them bypassing the
Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991(PoW).
In 1998, the court ruled the suit was barred by PoW Act
citing Section 3 which prohibits converting a place of worship of a different
religious denomination or a different class of the same religious denomination.
Section 4(2) states all litigations, appeals or other proceedings relating to
changing the nature of the place of worship (which were pending till August 15,
1947) shall cease after the enactment of this Act and no fresh action can be
taken on such cases.
The petitioners contended that the 1991 Act did not
apply to the masjid as the mandir was partly demolished to construct the masjid.
Also, as change in nature of worship place had occurred after the cut-off date
of August 15, 1947 legal action could be initiated. The Ayodhya (Ram
Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid) dispute was exempted from the Act.
Based on this a revision petition was moved before the
district court which allowed it and asked the civil court to adjudicate the
dispute, afresh. The Anjuman Intezamiya Masjid Committee (AIM) successfully
challenged this in Allahabad High Court which stayed proceedings.
The court case remained pending for 22 years before the
1991 advocate re-filed another plea in 2019 requesting Archaeological Survey of
India (ASI) survey the mosque-complex on the same grounds: temple existed before being demolished by
Aurangzeb, which was proved by the continuous presence of Lingam in the pond used for “wasoo”
(purification) before namaz and,
questioning why Hindus were deprived of their religious right to offer water to
Lingam.
This was ceded by the city-court on 8 April 2021. Alongside,
a five-member committee comprising archaeology experts with two members from
the “minority community” was constituted to determine whether any temple
existed at the site, prior to the mosque. AIM challenged it in the Allahabad
High Court which indefinitely stayed the survey.
On 18 August 2021 five women filed a petition demanding
right to worship in Shringar Gauri temple daily without any restrictions
along-with other “visible and invisible deities within the old temple complex”.
Presently, devotees are allowed to worship only on the fourth day of Chaitra
Navratra.
In April 2022 Varanasi District Court allowed
videography. AIM moved Supreme Court stating it went against PoW Act which was
rejected. In July the Allahabad’s high court upheld Varanasi Court order ASI
survey to determine if the mosque was built upon a temple. Last week Supreme
Court refused to stop ASI continuing their “scientific investigation of the
mosque’s complex”.
Questionably, is the genesis of the dispute to rectify
history? Ensure BJP’s political future of Hindu consolidation? “Ayodhya to bas jhaanki hai, Kashi-Mathura
baaki hai?” Is it just about Shringar Gauri? What does that have to do with
the mosque? Or is it to drive a wedge between Hindus and Muslims?
To buttress its claim, a senior BJP
leader underscored Kashi Vishwanath Temple as Lord Shiva’s most significant
shrine and prominent among 12 ‘Jyotirlingas’
mentioned in Puranas. It is part of our national heritage and symbol of
nationalism which is at the core of Indian consciousness. We have given Kashi a political thrust for
installing Hindu nationalism as India’s dominant political credo.
Added
another diehard Saffronite, “The idea of communal harmony and unity flies in
the face of historical evidence even as Muslims use historic religious sites as
reference points to articulate their socio-political goals and build their
modern identities with different visions of a modern State.”
Musim clerics aver the Hindutva Sangh
has found its golden goose: Reclaiming temples by breaking mosques to get the
Hindu majority to keep bringing them back to power on an emotive
issue built on the foundation of aastha and badla from Muslim
invaders, who are history. The method is simple: instill a feeling of victimisation within Hindus that they had
been dealt unfairly by the Muslim minority, first by Mughals and now by
Congress and Opposition Parties which believed in Muslim appeasement.
Adding, “For the BJP it is a political issue for which they
will gain benefits in 2024 elections, more so, as it Prime Minister Modi’s
constituency. The Saffron Sangh wants to dip into their interest earnings from
Ayodhya and make fresh investments — basically go on an expansion drive, inject
fresh fuel in religiosity via Kashi
and Mathura which are part of a grand effort to undermine India’s Islamic
history. The motive is clear. Monuments that remind the presence of
Muslims ruling India must be destroyed.”
Already, there are four instances beside Varanasi where
the origin of various structures are being challenged before courts despite the
PoW law: Mathura, Agra, Dhar in Madhya Pradesh and New Delhi.
Basically, it all boils down to a desire for political power.
The repeated finger pointing between Hindus-Muslims reveal for power both will
adopt diabolical machinations to create a secular-communal divide. There is no
desire to uphold equal respect for various faiths. Instead unashamedly use
religion to increase their so-called popularity with voters.
In this milieu wrought with friction our leaders need
to understand that by playing Hindus- Muslims against each other they are only
serving their vested interests. At the end of the day, when our polity does a
cost-benefit analysis, they need to answer a simple question: Is there
vote-bank politics really worth the price the country is paying? Who will bear
the cross and answer to Gods?
Also, in a sense, the dispute with its political
undertones, underscores the nemesis of depending wholly and pathetically on the
judicial process to tackle an issue of faith. Perhaps a way forward is to learn
from the Ayodhya verdict. The judgment went a long way in becoming a catalytic
agent to integrate India and make it a cohesive whole.
It strengthened people’s confidence, especially
minorities, on the judiciary’s independence
and rule of law. People showed inherent maturity. There were no untoward
incidents, fiery and inciting speeches, celebration or despondency.
Clearly, as the Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi temple is related
to faith posturing of assertion is not the best formula for amity. In a
pluralist society, with multiplicity of religions, Hindu-Muslim religious
leaders need to sit together and work on a solution. For starters why don’t ShivBhakts and Rahim Abids evoke the spirit of Rashtra
Bhakti. What gives? ----- INFA
(Copyright, India News & Feature
Alliance)
|