❈ ❈ ❈

The January 22 Ram Temple Inauguration Is a Political Event. It’s a Crucial Test for Indian Politics

Apoorvanand

“There is no god in that temple,” said the saint.

The King was enraged,

“No God? Oh Saint, aren’t you speaking like an atheist?

On the throne studded with priceless gems, beams the golden idol,

And yet, you proclaim that’s empty?”

“It’s not empty; It’s rather full of the Royal pride.

You have bestowed yourself, oh King, not the God of this world”,

remarked the saint.

– Rabindranath Tagore (‘Deeno Daan’)

[Translated from the original Bengali into English by Sandipto Das Gupta]

Thus would have responded Tagore to the invitation of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) to attend the opening ceremony of the Ram temple, which is not yet complete. He would have refused to even accept the invitation as it is not about Ram at all. It is a celebration of the victory of a deceitful and violent campaign of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to confuse the Hindus and present itself as the patron and guardian of Ram and Hindu interests, which could only be served by humiliating and violating Muslims.

So, Tagore would have to find stronger words of rebuke for those representing the Ram Temple Trust.

It is not only royal pride which drives the sacred spirit out of the ‘religious’ space. Can a stolen land host piousness?

The Congress party, which had once the great Tagore as its friend, seemed to be in great dilemma: whether to join the inauguration ceremony of the Ram temple in Ayodhya or not. However, on January 10 (Wednesday), it declined the invitation to the Ram temple inauguration ceremony, saying “it’s clearly an RSS/BJP ceremony”.

This is the same temple, which is being built on the land of the Babri Masjid after demolishing it in a criminal act, and then usurping the land through a judicial fraud. Many people were relishing the predicament of the Congress party. While some were applauding it as a masterstroke of the BJP: see how they have laid a trap for the Congress. However, with the Congress’s announcement, this dilemma seems to be have dissipated for now.

But, we all should question if this is only the problem of political parties or is it the problem of the entire country?

When we say country, then let us also honestly accept that this is a problem of all Hindus. Muslims do not care much about the construction of this temple, its date, who attends it and who does not. They have already paid the price for the construction of this temple. This temple would not have been possible without the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Moreover, the Ram temple campaign was intended to humiliate Muslims. If we remember the slogans of this campaign, they were more against Muslims than about Ram.

This temple will continue to remind Muslims of violence and bloodshed against them. And finally, Muslims cannot forget the ultimate injustice of the Supreme Court. They know that this temple is not so much a monument of reverence for Ram as it is a symbol of hatred against Muslims and an imagined victory of Hindus over them. They also know that almost all the political parties in this country are Hindu parties. That’s why it is not only about the non-BJP parties which are yet to take a stand on this matter. It is also about Hindus.

If you do not accept the invitation, there is a danger of the party losing sympathy of Hindus and if it accepts it, it will mean compromising its morality. However, it will also mean that there is still a sense of political morality left in this country. It is not about secularism in a superficial way, although that is also part of it. It is about the morality of justice in the broadest sense. We know that this temple is a symbol of a great injustice, and it is not appropriate to celebrate injustice. But before considering this aspect, some more questions crop up. The questions should be asked to those who do not see anything wrong with the temple and think that it is a sacred place.

We know that this temple is still incomplete. The construction work is going on. Then what is the hurry to inaugurate the sanctum sanctorum when the temple is still being built? Many times, the house warming ritual is performed in an incomplete house due to some practical compulsions. For instance, a special person from the family is going abroad, someone’s parents have become so old that one does not know if they would be able to see their children’s own home in their lifetime, etc.

However, why is there so much anxiety to install Ram Lalla in an incomplete temple? Is it because he is shivering in the cold? Or is it being done to protect Him from the rains? What is the reason for the hurry? Those who are sincere devotees of Ram, that is, not political devotees of Ram, are not going anywhere. They are not in a rush,

The BJP, however, is in a tearing hurry to install the minor Ram in the incomplete temple. Is it because another auspicious time will not come again for the next five years? We all, including those who call themselves true Ram devotees, know that there is only one reason for the rush: the Lok Sabha elections, which are expected to be held after three months.

The inauguration should be done now so that BJP can boast of its achievement of getting ‘minor Ram’ his home in this election campaign.

This is also because the photos of Narendra Modi doing the bhoomi pujan on the land of Babri Masjid have become slightly old, even if they are still being used. But more photos are needed, to establish Narendra Modi as the ‘first Hindu’ of India, him being the Purohit and the Yajman at the same time. He and his party need a constant supply of such photos. The photo of the prime minister consecrating ‘Ram Lalla’ in Ayodhya will promote Modi as the civilisational man, the ‘king’ who brought Ram back home. This photo has electoral significance.

The photo of Modi performing the ‘Pran Pratistha’ of ‘Ram Lalla’ is crucial in the campaign to solidify Modi’s image as the chosen leader in the Hindu mindset. You might have heard the statement from Champat Rai, the secretary of the Ram Temple Trust. He asserts that the king is the incarnation of Vishnu, and according to him, Modi is the king; hence, he is considered an incarnation of Vishnu.

Moral doubts

The BJP hopes that the images of the consecration of ‘Ram Lalla’ in this new Ram temple in Ayodhya will influence Hindu psychology more than any other slogan or promise. You don’t need to be an analyst to say that this will go a long way in hiding the other failures of the BJP government. This photo will also be proof of the rise of a ‘Hindu nation’. A nation which has finally washed all the stains of the outsider Mughal era.

We are aware of all this, and so are the Congress and other non-BJP parties.

In times of moral uncertainty, the Indian tradition of turning to what Mahatma Gandhi would have done still persists. Even for justifying questionable actions, big people take the name of Gandhi. Like the Chief Justice of India did recently to justify his public display of a temple visit in Gujarat.

What would he have told the VHP or the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh?

Had he been alive, the Temple Trust would have definitely invited Gandhi. This is ironic, because the person who assassinated Gandhi was a member of the organisations associated with this Trust.

If Gandhi were to receive this invitation, he would not have promptly rejected it. Gandhi rarely visited temples, and he didn’t need to prove his ‘Hindu-ness’ by visiting temples, wearing saffron, or smearing chandan and tilak on his forehead. Rather, he tried throughout his life to transcend his ‘Hindu-ness’ and enrich it with new experiences. He never needed approval from any Shankaracharya or any religious guru. He was a confident Hindu, unlike our present-day politicians who often appear insecure.

But Gandhi would not have said that since his Ram resided in his heart, he did not feel the need to visit any temple. It would have been a cowardly cover. Not for a brave man like Gandhi. He would have fought with his body and soul for this moment not to arrive. He would have started a movement for the demolished Babri Masjid to be rebuilt and returned to the Muslims.

In 1947-48, numerous mosques, tombs, and dargahs in Delhi were damaged and seized by Hindus and Sikhs. Even the Connaught Place mosque was captured, with idols placed inside it. Gandhi had consistently emphasised the need to vacate the mosques that had been occupied. He further insisted on the evacuation of Islamic buildings taken over by refugees, a stance that caused outrage among them. This insistence made life uncomfortable for his friends in the government, but he remained steadfast in his stance.

Obviously, Gandhi became unpopular among Hindus because of his stance. However, that fear could not make him change his stand or remain silent. Gandhi used to call a crime a crime and never let it go.

The Supreme Court has accepted that two crimes were committed to convert Babri Masjid into a temple. Were the people involved in that crime punished? Far from being punished, those who planned the crime were given the land of the mosque to build the temple. How can any reasonable person accept this? Even if circumstances were hostile, how can one compromise with a crime and live with it?

This entire event is organised by the BJP. The RSS workers are going from door to door, carrying invitations for the temple inauguration, with bundles of Ram Akshat, or yellow rice.

Why is it being suggested that on January 22, events should be organised to celebrate the opening of the ‘garbha griha’ of the Ayodhya Ram Temple in temples in every locality and street? Why is Narendra Modi telling Hindus that Diwali should be celebrated in every home? Why is he telling them that they had been waiting for this moment for 500 years? Do we not know that he is again using his dog whistle to make this moment an occasion to generate anti-Muslim feelings? Why is the VHP celebrating the inauguration of this temple on January 22 in 55 countries of the world? Why is this event being promoted at the government’s expense?

Four Shankaracharyas have refused to participate in this event. They have rightly said that this is not a religious event; it is a political event of the BJP.

The public is observing the unfolding events, but it also needs to be told that every step of the construction of this Ram temple is drenched in sin.

The BJP is influencing the mental and moral perspectives of Hindus, according to some critics. The Congress has to fight this. It also has to humanise the voters.

We can say with certainty that if Tagore had been alive today, he would have written a harsher poem on the BJP’s Ram temple in Ayodhya. Gandhi would have led a movement or sat on a fast to atone this crime.

We can say that January 22, 2024 is, in many ways, a test of the mettle of Indian politics. Let’s see who passes and who fails.

(Apoorvanand is an academic and an author. Courtesy: The Wire.)

❈ ❈ ❈

Why Congress Clearly Saying January 22 Is Part of RSS/BJP’s ‘Political Project’ Matters

Ajoy Ashirwad Mahaprashasta

After almost two weeks of indecisiveness, the Congress on Wednesday (January 10) decided to boycott the consecration ceremony of the new Ram Janmabhoomi Temple on January 22. The party released a statement, saying that Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, and former president Sonia Gandhi, who were invited to attend the ceremony, have declined the invitation to what, according to them, “is clearly an RSS/BJP event”. (Statement is given below.)

“Lord Ram is worshipped by millions in our country. Religion is a personal matter. But the RSS/BJP have long made a political project of the temple in Ayodhya. The inauguration of the incomplete temple by the leaders of the BJP and the RSS has been obviously brought forward for electoral gain. While abiding by the 2019 Supreme Court judgment and honouring the sentiments of millions who revere Lord Ram, Shri Mallikarjun Kharge, Smt. Sonia Gandhi and Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury have respectfully declined the invitation to what is clearly an RSS/BJP event,” the statement read.

For many, who viewed the construction of the temple atop the dome of the demolished Babri Masjid as the most stark symbol of injustice in democratic India, the Congress’s decision will come as a delayed but welcome relief. It was surprising that the Congress, which had been politically critical of both the Ram Janmabhoomi movement led by the Sangh parivar and the subsequent demolition remained so much in doubt before eventually declining the invitation.

Its indecision over the last two weeks came across as not merely unethical and inconsistent with its own politics of multiculturalism but also displayed a sheer lack of courage among the party leaders to take on the choreographed publicity blitzkrieg around the Ram Janmabhoomi temple by the BJP.

It was amply clear from the very beginning that the hype around the consecration ceremony of a temple, which is fated to remain a polarising symbol even in the future, was a blatant attempt by the Narendra Modi-led BJP to consolidate its own ranks and manufacture a mass hysteria to deflect attention from the more pressing issues of common people.

That the saffron party had decided to perform the consecration ceremony even when the temple construction is not even fully complete was a clear indication of how the BJP was trying to milk the epochal event for its own electoral gains. Why the Congress could not point that out to the public persuasively is a question that many may continue to ask even now.

In fact, the whole hype generated by the Modi government around the Ram Janmabhoomi temple appears to be repetitive at best. In September 2023, the prime minister used a special session of the Parliament to inaugurate a similarly incomplete Parliament building and table the historic women’s reservation Bill which had no scope to be implemented before 2029. The grand posturing came months ahead of five crucial assembly elections.

Now, when the 2024 Lok Sabha elections are months away, the prime minister is all set to be the principal jajmaan (patron) in the consecration ceremony. Electioneering is written large all over the optics created by the BJP.

The Congress seemed to cower under the fear of offending Hindus if it took a principled stance against the hype created around the temple – something that only showed the opposition in poor light. This, when the party lost miserably in the recent elections held in the Hindi heartland despite adopting a soft-Hindutva approach. The indecision appeared even more cowardly at a time when Congress leader Rahul Gandhi will soon embark on the second leg of the Bharat Jodo Yatra, centred around communal harmony and constitutional values.

However, after much deliberation, the party has now done what is consistent with its own positions. It now needs to take its decision forward by mounting an ideological opposition to the palpable communal frenzy that is sought to be advanced with the success of its Ram Janmabhoomi movement, aided and abetted by judicial sanction. There are already strong voices within the larger Sangh parivar that the demolition of Babri Masjid was merely a beginning in the long list of mosques that will be targeted in the future. Sangh parivar leaders have already started to advance communally polarising narratives around mosques across India. The Gyanvapi mosque controversy in Varanasi, the case against Mathura’s Shahi Idgah mosque, and Baba Budangiri Idgah in Karnataka, Sunheri mosque in Delhi, and many similar Islamic shrines have become suitable sites to keep India perpetually polarised along religious lines.

Who else but the biggest opposition party can counter such a narrative? The Congress needs to own its politics unapologetically, display an ethical strength to oppose BJP’s majoritarian narrative, and give voice to the voiceless of Modi’s Naya Bharat.

Prafulla Ketkar, editor of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s mouthpiece Organiser, candidly pointed out in his latest editorial that the celebrations by the Sangh parivar for the pran-pratishta (consecration ceremony) of Ram Lalla in Ayodhya were not simply the culmination of the decades-old Ram Janmabhoomi movement, but the beginning of a “reconstruction of national consciousness”, a process where economic growth is necessarily accompanied by the so-called Hindu cultural resurgence. In other words, Ketkar believes that the consecration ceremony was a surefooted step towards “reclaiming” Indian civilisation from the clutches of Enlightenment values on which our founding fathers sought to build an independent India.

It was India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, who dived into the values of Enlightenment ~ rule of law, liberty, equality, fraternity, progress, tolerance, constitutional government pursuit of knowledge, and most importantly, separation of state and religion – to dream of a truly modern India. The religious polarisation around the Ayodhya event may be an appropriate moment for the grand-old party to reconnect with its roots and stand up on its own feet – at least for the 60% of Indian people who did not vote for the majoritarian politics of the BJP.

The decision of the topmost Congress leaders to decline invitation to the pran-pratishtha ceremony in Ayodhya has shown that the grand-old party can still think beyond narrow electoral politics, and can build and consolidate an ideological opposition to mindless majoritarianism of the Sangh parivar.

(Ajoy Ashirwad Mahaprashasta is Deputy Editor at The Wire. Courtesy: The Wire.)

Press Statement, January 10, 2024

Statement of Shri Jairam Ramesh, General Secretary (Communications),

Indian National Congress

Last month, the Congress President and Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Shri Mallikarjun Kharge, Congress Parliamentary Party Chairperson, Smt. Sonia Gandhi and the Leader of the Congress Party in the Lok Sabha Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury received an invitation to attend the inauguration ceremony of the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya to be held on January 22nd, 2024.

Lord Ram is worshipped by millions in our country. Religion is a personal matter. But the RSS/BJP have long made a political project of the temple in Ayodhya. The inauguration of the incomplete temple by the leaders of the BJP and the RSS has been obviously brought forward for electoral gain. While abiding by the 2019 Supreme Court judgment and honouring the sentiments of millions who revere Lord Ram, Shri Mallikarjun Kharge, Smt. Sonia Gandhi and Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury have respectfully declined the invitation to what is clearly an RSS/BJP event.

❈ ❈ ❈

Gandhi, Vivekananda, Tagore, and Temple Consecration

S.N. Sahu

The January 22 consecration of the Ram Temple will take place exactly at the same place in Ayodhya where the 500-year-old Babri Mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992. Ironically, the Supreme Court, while allowing construction of the temple on that spot, had held that the mosque’s demolition was an egregious violation of the rule of law.

Swami Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore and – above all – Mahatma Gandhi would have been deeply anguished and ashamed to see the lofty ideals they advocated now being contravened through the consecration of a temple.

Gandhi’s vision of temple consecration

Eighty-five years ago, on March 18, 1939, Gandhi inaugurated the famous Lakshmi Narayan Temple (popularly known as the Birla Mandir) in Delhi, and explained to the huge crowd gathered there the meaning and significance of a temple in terms of respecting religious pluralism and rejecting communal hatred.

“It must be the daily prayer of every adherent of the Hindu faith,” said Gandhi, “that every known religion of the world should grow from day to day and should serve the whole of humanity.” Explaining the significance of shrines, he fervently expressed optimism by saying, “I hope that these temples will serve to propagate the idea of equal respect for religions and to make communal jealousies and strife things of the past.”

Can the “egregious violation of the rule of law” – represented by demolishing the Babri Mosque and consecrating a temple in the exact same place – ever be in tune with Gandhi’s aforementioned vision?

Vivekananda’s pride that Hindus built shrines for people of other faiths

Much before Gandhi articulated those lofty utterances, Vivekananda delivered a speech in Madras in 1897 after returning from his historic visit to America, where he participated in the World Parliament of Religions, among other events. He took pride in the fact that “it is here in India that Hindus have built and are still building churches for Christians and mosques for Mohammedans.”

What he said represented the practical ideals of universal toleration and acceptance. In fact, he went on to add, “The world is waiting for this grand idea of universal toleration.” He firmly asserted, “No civilisation can grow unless fanaticism, bloodshed and brutality stop. No civilisation can begin to lift up its head until we look charitably upon one another; and the first step towards that much-needed charity is to look charitably and kindly upon the religious conviction of others.”

Vivekananda proceeded further: “Nay more, to understand that not only should we be charitable, but also positively helpful to each other, however different our religious ideas and convictions may be. And that is exactly what we do in India as I have just related to you. It is here in India that Hindus have built and are still building churches for Christians and mosques for Mohammedans. That is the thing to do.” These words form part of his book, Lectures from Colombo to Almora.

Those controlling the state apparatus in India today often invoke Vivekananda. But they should be mindful of his stirring words, which assume greater relevance in the context of the forthcoming consecration and the mindless religious frenzy being generated all around that puts the values of religious tolerance at stake.

Tagore’s poem on a temple

Had Tagore been alive now to see the Ram Temple’s consecration in Modi’s Naya Bharat, he would have recited his poem, ‘Deeno Daan’, composed in 1923. His rhythmic lines serve as a conscience-keeper for the nation and for Hinduism.

Through his poem, the poet interrogates a king through a saint and boldly denies the presence of God in a shrine consecrated by the king. Tagore’s stanza is worth reproducing.

“There is no god in that temple”, said the Saint.

The King was enraged,

“No God? Oh Saint, aren’t you speaking like an atheist?

On the throne studded with priceless gems, beams the golden idol,

And yet, you proclaim that it is empty?”

The saint persisted in telling the truth and asserted,

“It’s not empty; rather, it is full of royal pride.

You have bestowed yourself, oh King, not the God of this world”.

The saint spoke the truth in the face of the king’s anger and boastful claims that he spent two million gold coins in building the sky-high temple and consecrating it after performing all rituals. The saint, with composure, told the truth to the powerful king that the temple was built when millions suffered due to drought and became pauperised without food and shelter. The king’s empty religiosity, devoid of any traces of spirituality, enraged God, who responded by outlining the basic elements of his shrine. As Tagore puts it in his stanza:

“My eternal home is lit by everlasting lamps,

In the midst of an azure sky,

In my home the foundations are built with the values:

Of Truth, Peace, Compassion and Love.

The poverty-stricken puny miser,

Who could not provide shelter to his own homeless subjects,

Does he really fancy he can give Me a home?”

The enraged king banished the saint who upheld the true values rooted in charity and empathy to look upon all faiths as done by Vivekananda, and later, Gandhi. That is the true meaning of the consecration of a shrine or temple devoid of the pride and grandstanding of a ruler.

Is it beyond the capacity of our rulers to learn these lessons from Vivekananda, Tagore and Gandhi?

●●●

[Editorial addition: In another article published in Newsclick, titled ‘When Gandhi Visited Ayodhya and a Rama Temple in 1921
’, S.N. Sahu adds (extract):]

Gandhi’s Idea of Shrine and Prayer Hall

Mahatma Gandhi would have been shattered by the massive mobilisation in the name of the Hindu faith that ended in the demolition of the Babri mosque and the legal sanction to build a temple there. 
Gandhi was deeply spiritual and often invoked Ram in public prayer meetings and numerous other occasions. He would have interpreted the demolition of the mosque as the destruction of the sacred and holy. He would have despaired at the unfolding spectacle and grandstanding of the rulers of India in connection with the consecration of this temple. He would never have approved of the rancour and acrimony displayed in today’s India towards the Muslim and other minority communities.


Recall that in 1930, Gandhi rejected a proposal to erect a shrine and an idol for the residents of Sabarmati Ashram to offer prayers. Gandhi argued that the open space of the Ashram constituted their prayer hall and that no enclosure or closed space was required to express faith. He said that the sky was the ceiling of such a prayer hall and the four directions—North, South, East and West—were its walls. He said that the objective of praying in such a limitless hall could aim to transcend the limits of religion, nationality and all that can foster narrowness. 
Gandhi’s despair would have known no bounds to hear claims, which the Prime Minister of India has echoed, that Lord Ram finally has a pucca house in Ayodhya in the form of a temple where a mosque stood. 


Gandhi’s Expansive Idea of Rama

Also, recall what Gandhi said in his speech at a prayer meeting in Delhi on 4 April 1946: “My Rama, the Rama of our prayers, is not the historical Rama, the son of Dasaratha, the King of Ayodhya. He is the eternal, the unborn, the one without a Second.” While stating that he saw no reason why a Muslim should object to taking His name, he made it clear that a person pursuing the Islamic faith should not be bound to recognise God as “Rama-nama”.


Tolerance and acceptance defined Gandhi’s understanding of prayer and belief. He would not have been able to relate to the ongoing events in India, for they do not represent the ideals, history shows, Gandhi cherished. But it is those ideals for which he stopped his assassin’s bullets of hatred with his final words, “Hey Ram”. 


(S.N. Sahu served as an officer on special duty to President K.R. Narayanan. Courtesy: The Wire.)