Ram and Rahim as Good Neighbors
Ram Puniyani
The leak and tabling of Liberhan Commission report has created a big turmoil in the country. While most of the sides have been shouting hoarse about their own position on the issue, not much has been talked about the future solution of this vexed problem.
We recall that the mosque built by Mir Baqui around five centuries ago has been deliberately dragged into the controversy. At the time of Independence it was a mosque, no political party had claimed anything to the contrary. As per the understanding in the constitution, the status of 1947 was to be maintained in cases of places of worship. The installation of Ram lalla idols by deceit in midnight of 22nd Jan 1949 sowed the seeds of controversy. Later in 1975 the dispute between two local groups was taken up by Vishwa Hindu Parishad and in 1989, BJP decided to make a political issue out of it. The tragic demolition and the making of makeshift Ram temple there have added new dimensions to the issue.
It is around this issue that Hindu and Muslim communalists raised the emotional pitch and the tragedies which followed, the demolition, the post demolition communal violence and communalization, polarization of society along religious lines are too well known by now. The court case regarding the same is dragging from last several years without any outcome so far.
Where do we go from here? Do we let this sore to continue on the body politic of the nation? This may act as the trouble spot for the future. It is time that we look at all the aspects of the issue and try to bring a peaceful solution to the issue.
The first step in the issue is to realize that it the communal forces from both communities which have claimed that they represent the community and so they will decide on behalf of Hindus or Muslims respectively. The fact of the matter and, this has been confirmed by Liberhan Commission report, is that these communal groups neither represent the community nor reflect the opinion the communities as a whole. It is imperative that we look forward to the liberal sections, leadership from these communities to come forward and talk in the language of reconciliation. The liberal sections are those who have so far been ignored, but they are the one’s who have talked of peace and accommodation. The election results have also shown that those claiming to represent the aspirations of a particular community have been routed in popular elections. The elected representatives of the area have a major role to play in bringing the consensus. We cannot undo the past but we can definitely chart a peaceful path for future. The peaceful talks between these sections along with the local people of Ayodhya are the central core for solution.
The people of Ayodhya have also been the victims of the demolition and other offshoots of the dispute. What they think should be done at the site has to be taken seriously. They have to be taken on board along with the liberal leadership of the communities. Today the most amicable solution has to veer around respecting Ram and Allah both. Both temple and mosque can be accommodated in the area, with equal importance and respect.
Along with temple and mosque in the same spot we need to bring up a museum dedicated to the great tradition of Ayodhya. Ayodhya has not only been popular for Lord Ram, but it had also been a place for Buddhists and also people of other faith as well. It has been a sort of ‘No War zone’ (A- no, Yudhya-War, Ayodhya- A no war zone), and that spirit has to be cultivated all around. The emotive and divisive appeals need to be rejected by the nation as a whole. In that light the museum-memorial has to be the one of syncretic traditions, of saints who were followed by Muslims and Hindus both, of Sufis who again were respected by Hindus and Muslims both. While the history has been made to degenerate into hoarse shouting, a cool reasoned archeological based understanding should help us to go further. The negotiations between the communities have to be encouraged to the last.
The second line of action has to relate to the court verdict. The court verdict should be final for all of us. The formulation that faith will decide the birth place of the Lord has no place in a society governed by law and reason. The community leaders must give undertaking to respect the court verdict and act accordingly. Those not having faith in the courts cant be the part of the process of reconciliation as reconciliation has to be done in the framework of Indian Constitution. We have invested too much in this issue and it is time that not only this but even other such issues are not given any importance to ensure that the country, nation, can focus on the issues related to bread, butter shelter, employment and health.
--
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Ghettoes in the making
Ghettoes in the making
Ram Puniyani
As per the report in a section of media recently (November 2009) UK based Muslim charities have warned the Muslims living in the relief colonies set up in the wake of Gujarat carnage, that they must abide with a code of conduct, no TV, no music, education only in Madrassa, particular type of cap and beard for men, hijab for women, etc. If these are not adhered to the Charity threatened that they will stop supporting the relief work. At the same time the members of Tablighi Jamat insisted on the similar lines, ‘Islamic Behavior’ or else! The Muslims living in these colonies are living a wretched life, totally bereft of any support from state and boycotted by the society at large.
There are cases where the residents of this ‘lesser world’ have opposed such dictates coming through local Maulanas, but they have been beaten to silence. The society at large is not permitting them to come out of the emotional and physical walls erected by the state and civil society around them. The orthodox elements, clerical etc., are not permitting them to live as they like, to endeavor for modern education and jobs, a life matching with our times. One recalls that in the aftermath of Godhra train burning and the riots engineered on the pretext of taking revenge of Godhra, took a heavy toll of the life of Muslim minorities. As the refugee camps were to be set up by the state, it reluctantly did part of the job and soon enough, even before the tears of trauma dried up and scars of the violence were healed, the state supported camps were wound up. The Gujarat Chief Mininster Narendra Modi said that there is no need to keep these ‘Child producing factories to go on’.
Other charities enlarged their scope of work and stepped up their activities to fill the vacuum left by the action of heartless state administration and a largely hostile civic society. The mosques which gave them shelter also imposed a version of Islam, a type of life style on them, which was alien to most of the Gujarat Muslims. The compensation by the state did not come up to the necessary and mandatory level. Once the total rehabilitation fell under the control of orthodox Muslim charities, they started imposing the retrograde norms on the community. The most glaring example of this was manifest in the housing pattern which came up in due course. One noticed that the dwellings were comparatively smaller while the mosques were bigger. One also noticed that the presence of Maulanas became more dominant in these communities. The Madrassas were the only type of schools available for these ‘children of the other God’.
One knows very well that prior to violence in Gujarat the Muslim community there was going more for trade, modern education and the like. The process has been reversed by the physical insecurity created by carnage and this has been topped with the total neglect of the plight of Muslims by the state. One is witnessing a very interesting sociological phenomenon in Gujarat. On one side the planned carnage left the minority community helpless and gripped by insecurity. On the other, since the state controlled by right wing politics bypasses the legal, social and moral norms, it left the victims to fend for themselves.
The popular perceptions accuse the Muslim minority of being conservative etc., but it never goes beyond this level of perception to understand as to why it is so. One concedes that what is going on so intensely in Gujarat today vis a vis Muslim community has been a widespread phenomenon in different Muslim majority areas, more so those areas which have seen communal violence. One also knows that in communal violence the percentage of Muslim victims is over 80%, while their percentage in population is 13.4%. The insecurity this creates is the root of conservatism in this community. One also knows that Muslim community is no uniform monolith. There are types and types of pattern of living. Till 1990 large sections of Muslims girls and boys were trying to come up and take to Modern vocations, teachers, professionals of various types and what not. 1992-93 Mumbai carnage came as a big damper and the Muslim youth got a big setback, economic deprivation on the top of insecurity. For sometime the large section of community could not recover from the trauma of the violence. As they began to recover, there was Gujarat baying at them.
A chicken and egg situation! The insecurity ghettoizes them and retards their path; the same is then used by the propaganda mills to demonize them. On one hand the myth is spread that Madrassas are a breeding ground for terrorists, on the other a situation is created where Madrassas remain the only option for Muslim children. While this Madrassa and terrorism is a total lie, barring of course those Madrassas which were set up with US-CIA link in Pakistan, where Muslim youth were indoctrinated to take the path of violence against Russian army. One can confidently say that the Indian Madrassas are just teaching Koran and not terrorism.
The condition of large section of Muslims can only be compared to the Shudras in Ancient India, where the society treated them as slaves and codified their slavery as their Dharma, Shudra Dharma. They were also ghettoized. The other example is the African Americans of US, where the Whites committed atrocities on them and pushed them to the ghettoes, depriving them of dignity and civic rights. The rise of Right wing communal politics in India from last three decades in particular, politics in the name of religion, which is seeping through different pores of state apparatus and social thinking, is achieving the same purpose, to create a set of second class beings at the mercy and service of the elites trying to impose retrograde politics on the society at large.
Ram Puniyani
As per the report in a section of media recently (November 2009) UK based Muslim charities have warned the Muslims living in the relief colonies set up in the wake of Gujarat carnage, that they must abide with a code of conduct, no TV, no music, education only in Madrassa, particular type of cap and beard for men, hijab for women, etc. If these are not adhered to the Charity threatened that they will stop supporting the relief work. At the same time the members of Tablighi Jamat insisted on the similar lines, ‘Islamic Behavior’ or else! The Muslims living in these colonies are living a wretched life, totally bereft of any support from state and boycotted by the society at large.
There are cases where the residents of this ‘lesser world’ have opposed such dictates coming through local Maulanas, but they have been beaten to silence. The society at large is not permitting them to come out of the emotional and physical walls erected by the state and civil society around them. The orthodox elements, clerical etc., are not permitting them to live as they like, to endeavor for modern education and jobs, a life matching with our times. One recalls that in the aftermath of Godhra train burning and the riots engineered on the pretext of taking revenge of Godhra, took a heavy toll of the life of Muslim minorities. As the refugee camps were to be set up by the state, it reluctantly did part of the job and soon enough, even before the tears of trauma dried up and scars of the violence were healed, the state supported camps were wound up. The Gujarat Chief Mininster Narendra Modi said that there is no need to keep these ‘Child producing factories to go on’.
Other charities enlarged their scope of work and stepped up their activities to fill the vacuum left by the action of heartless state administration and a largely hostile civic society. The mosques which gave them shelter also imposed a version of Islam, a type of life style on them, which was alien to most of the Gujarat Muslims. The compensation by the state did not come up to the necessary and mandatory level. Once the total rehabilitation fell under the control of orthodox Muslim charities, they started imposing the retrograde norms on the community. The most glaring example of this was manifest in the housing pattern which came up in due course. One noticed that the dwellings were comparatively smaller while the mosques were bigger. One also noticed that the presence of Maulanas became more dominant in these communities. The Madrassas were the only type of schools available for these ‘children of the other God’.
One knows very well that prior to violence in Gujarat the Muslim community there was going more for trade, modern education and the like. The process has been reversed by the physical insecurity created by carnage and this has been topped with the total neglect of the plight of Muslims by the state. One is witnessing a very interesting sociological phenomenon in Gujarat. On one side the planned carnage left the minority community helpless and gripped by insecurity. On the other, since the state controlled by right wing politics bypasses the legal, social and moral norms, it left the victims to fend for themselves.
The popular perceptions accuse the Muslim minority of being conservative etc., but it never goes beyond this level of perception to understand as to why it is so. One concedes that what is going on so intensely in Gujarat today vis a vis Muslim community has been a widespread phenomenon in different Muslim majority areas, more so those areas which have seen communal violence. One also knows that in communal violence the percentage of Muslim victims is over 80%, while their percentage in population is 13.4%. The insecurity this creates is the root of conservatism in this community. One also knows that Muslim community is no uniform monolith. There are types and types of pattern of living. Till 1990 large sections of Muslims girls and boys were trying to come up and take to Modern vocations, teachers, professionals of various types and what not. 1992-93 Mumbai carnage came as a big damper and the Muslim youth got a big setback, economic deprivation on the top of insecurity. For sometime the large section of community could not recover from the trauma of the violence. As they began to recover, there was Gujarat baying at them.
A chicken and egg situation! The insecurity ghettoizes them and retards their path; the same is then used by the propaganda mills to demonize them. On one hand the myth is spread that Madrassas are a breeding ground for terrorists, on the other a situation is created where Madrassas remain the only option for Muslim children. While this Madrassa and terrorism is a total lie, barring of course those Madrassas which were set up with US-CIA link in Pakistan, where Muslim youth were indoctrinated to take the path of violence against Russian army. One can confidently say that the Indian Madrassas are just teaching Koran and not terrorism.
The condition of large section of Muslims can only be compared to the Shudras in Ancient India, where the society treated them as slaves and codified their slavery as their Dharma, Shudra Dharma. They were also ghettoized. The other example is the African Americans of US, where the Whites committed atrocities on them and pushed them to the ghettoes, depriving them of dignity and civic rights. The rise of Right wing communal politics in India from last three decades in particular, politics in the name of religion, which is seeping through different pores of state apparatus and social thinking, is achieving the same purpose, to create a set of second class beings at the mercy and service of the elites trying to impose retrograde politics on the society at large.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Liberhan Commission Report
Liberhan Commission; Painful wait for Justice
Ram Puniyani
Liberhan commission submitted its four volume report to the Government on 30 of June 2009. It might have been one of the longest times taken by any commission. Liberhan’s claim that the report got delayed due to non cooperation of leaders involved may have some truth as one knows Kalyan Singh avoided appearing before the commission for long time, and so was the attitude of many of those alleged for demolition. Still all the hearings were complete by 2004. Did it take 5 long years to write the report? Such a long delay in the report coming out, defeats half the purpose of the same. One of the minor reasons of delay has also been the differences in the approach of Justice Liberhan and its chief counsel Anupam Gupta. Gupta after he interrogated Advani, Justice Liberhan allrently told him to apologize to Advani for being harsh. While Gupta maintains that Justice Liberhan had been soft on Advani, despite his role of the chief mobilizer for demolition.
One awaits the report to be tabled and see what the commission has to say about things which have been reported in the media and seen on the TV by most. One also await to see the attitude of this Government towards this commission, is it going to be forthright objectivity or dictated by political exigencies. That apart, since the report was submitted some of the accused have been hiding for cover, and some others are saying that since already 17 years have lapsed how the report can be meaningful, if at all? Some of them have questioned the timing of the report.
To expect that those involved in demolition will own up the crime and honestly confess to that is something not to be expected. Still Uma Bharati was honest enough to say that “I definitely wanted Ram temple to come up (in Ayodhya) and I definitely wanted that building (Babri Mosque) to come down but not in that manner. But I am not going to apologize. I am ready to be hanged for it.” It was the same Uma Bharti, who along with Sadhvi Ritambhra was exhorting the Kar Sevaks by saying, Ek Dhakka Aur Do: Babri Masjid Tod do”. (Give one more push, break the Babri mosque) She also expressed her joy after the demolition by hugging another accused, Murli Manohar Joshi who was sharing dais with her. Amongst others who shared the dais, when the demolition work was in progress, were Lal Krishna Advani, Ashok Singhal and ex- RSS chief K. Sudarshan himself.
How do people respond to the crime after executing it, is a matter of great variance. Same Murli Manohar Joshi, who before the demolition had said told his followers "…demolish the masjid, nature of Kar Seva will be determined by Sants and not by courts/demolition is prerequisite for temple building", in the hearing of the commission he said that “With all humility, I say that the incident was never remotely conceived by us”. This despite the fact that Vinay Katiyar, the then Bajrang Dal chief had asserted that "Masjid will be demolished and debris will be thrown in river Sarayu". During the deposition he distracted form the main issue and doubted the need of commission and said that Ram Lalla is the owner of the place. While Lal Krishna Advani had stated the Kar Seva will done with Bricks and shovels, kar sevaks are not going to Ayodhya to sing Bhajan and Kirtans, later he declared that the day of demolition was the saddest day of his life. Which is the real Advani is difficult to say.
K.Sudarshan, who later became RSS Sarsnghchalak, stated that he heard Nirmala Deshpande saying that Mosque fell due to the explosion inside. Nirmala Deshpande disowned the statement. Kalyan Singh takes the cake as for as turn arounds are concerned. Before the demolition he committed to National Integration Council and through a sworn affidavit to Supreme Court, that he will protect the mosque. When demolition began he did not deploy 20000 central forces stationed barely 10 minutes from the place. Later he was imprisoned for a day and he proudly justified his inaction in the path of Ram Temple. He filed a 300 page affidavit, taking a line, which was in accordance with his the then Party’s line, stating that it was a spontaneous act by uncontrollable Kar Sevaks. With his problems beginning with BJP, he hit out at A.B.Vajpayee, Advani and Joshi saying Babri was destroyed on the instructions of senior BJP leaders.
The then Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot.
It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political necessities. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words.
And now with report on the table of the Congress Government can one expect justice? The experience so far is far from optimistic. Congress weighs the issues on the scale of political advantages or otherwise. On one hand it tries to put a show that it will do justice and when the crunch time comes one finds it wanting in resolve to stand firmly for secularism and justice. Political calculations have been its guiding load stones. So even now one is not sure about the real justice coming through after 17 long years of wait.
BJP on its part is a divided house. It has used the Ram Temple agitation and the consequent demolition and the violence for politically strengthening itself. It is around this agitation, demolition and violence that it came to occupy the major position on the political scene in India. Now having been in power and having seen that Lord Ram cannot eternally help it to keep coming to power, some of its major leaders have been rethinking the political line to be adopted. What one sees around is the total opportunism for the sake of power. They realize the necessities of such issues to be in power, they also see that beyond a point it can be counter productive. Now it’s up to them to keep adopting double standards or to come to adopt democratic issues as their political base. Can BJP shift away from such issues and take up the issues of the poor and downtrodden? This is a million-vote question. This is also a question related to the goals of its political father, the RSS. How does RSS evaluate its future role in Indian political chessboard? Indications are RSS will stick to Hindutva and Ram temple type of issues, come what may. One only hopes in despair that people concerned have honesty to own up their acts and face the legal consequences for their commitments!
--
Ram Puniyani
Liberhan commission submitted its four volume report to the Government on 30 of June 2009. It might have been one of the longest times taken by any commission. Liberhan’s claim that the report got delayed due to non cooperation of leaders involved may have some truth as one knows Kalyan Singh avoided appearing before the commission for long time, and so was the attitude of many of those alleged for demolition. Still all the hearings were complete by 2004. Did it take 5 long years to write the report? Such a long delay in the report coming out, defeats half the purpose of the same. One of the minor reasons of delay has also been the differences in the approach of Justice Liberhan and its chief counsel Anupam Gupta. Gupta after he interrogated Advani, Justice Liberhan allrently told him to apologize to Advani for being harsh. While Gupta maintains that Justice Liberhan had been soft on Advani, despite his role of the chief mobilizer for demolition.
One awaits the report to be tabled and see what the commission has to say about things which have been reported in the media and seen on the TV by most. One also await to see the attitude of this Government towards this commission, is it going to be forthright objectivity or dictated by political exigencies. That apart, since the report was submitted some of the accused have been hiding for cover, and some others are saying that since already 17 years have lapsed how the report can be meaningful, if at all? Some of them have questioned the timing of the report.
To expect that those involved in demolition will own up the crime and honestly confess to that is something not to be expected. Still Uma Bharati was honest enough to say that “I definitely wanted Ram temple to come up (in Ayodhya) and I definitely wanted that building (Babri Mosque) to come down but not in that manner. But I am not going to apologize. I am ready to be hanged for it.” It was the same Uma Bharti, who along with Sadhvi Ritambhra was exhorting the Kar Sevaks by saying, Ek Dhakka Aur Do: Babri Masjid Tod do”. (Give one more push, break the Babri mosque) She also expressed her joy after the demolition by hugging another accused, Murli Manohar Joshi who was sharing dais with her. Amongst others who shared the dais, when the demolition work was in progress, were Lal Krishna Advani, Ashok Singhal and ex- RSS chief K. Sudarshan himself.
How do people respond to the crime after executing it, is a matter of great variance. Same Murli Manohar Joshi, who before the demolition had said told his followers "…demolish the masjid, nature of Kar Seva will be determined by Sants and not by courts/demolition is prerequisite for temple building", in the hearing of the commission he said that “With all humility, I say that the incident was never remotely conceived by us”. This despite the fact that Vinay Katiyar, the then Bajrang Dal chief had asserted that "Masjid will be demolished and debris will be thrown in river Sarayu". During the deposition he distracted form the main issue and doubted the need of commission and said that Ram Lalla is the owner of the place. While Lal Krishna Advani had stated the Kar Seva will done with Bricks and shovels, kar sevaks are not going to Ayodhya to sing Bhajan and Kirtans, later he declared that the day of demolition was the saddest day of his life. Which is the real Advani is difficult to say.
K.Sudarshan, who later became RSS Sarsnghchalak, stated that he heard Nirmala Deshpande saying that Mosque fell due to the explosion inside. Nirmala Deshpande disowned the statement. Kalyan Singh takes the cake as for as turn arounds are concerned. Before the demolition he committed to National Integration Council and through a sworn affidavit to Supreme Court, that he will protect the mosque. When demolition began he did not deploy 20000 central forces stationed barely 10 minutes from the place. Later he was imprisoned for a day and he proudly justified his inaction in the path of Ram Temple. He filed a 300 page affidavit, taking a line, which was in accordance with his the then Party’s line, stating that it was a spontaneous act by uncontrollable Kar Sevaks. With his problems beginning with BJP, he hit out at A.B.Vajpayee, Advani and Joshi saying Babri was destroyed on the instructions of senior BJP leaders.
The then Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot.
It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political necessities. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words.
And now with report on the table of the Congress Government can one expect justice? The experience so far is far from optimistic. Congress weighs the issues on the scale of political advantages or otherwise. On one hand it tries to put a show that it will do justice and when the crunch time comes one finds it wanting in resolve to stand firmly for secularism and justice. Political calculations have been its guiding load stones. So even now one is not sure about the real justice coming through after 17 long years of wait.
BJP on its part is a divided house. It has used the Ram Temple agitation and the consequent demolition and the violence for politically strengthening itself. It is around this agitation, demolition and violence that it came to occupy the major position on the political scene in India. Now having been in power and having seen that Lord Ram cannot eternally help it to keep coming to power, some of its major leaders have been rethinking the political line to be adopted. What one sees around is the total opportunism for the sake of power. They realize the necessities of such issues to be in power, they also see that beyond a point it can be counter productive. Now it’s up to them to keep adopting double standards or to come to adopt democratic issues as their political base. Can BJP shift away from such issues and take up the issues of the poor and downtrodden? This is a million-vote question. This is also a question related to the goals of its political father, the RSS. How does RSS evaluate its future role in Indian political chessboard? Indications are RSS will stick to Hindutva and Ram temple type of issues, come what may. One only hopes in despair that people concerned have honesty to own up their acts and face the legal consequences for their commitments!
--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)