Whither Religion? Whither Democracy?

The Radha-yatra organized by the BJP in order to liberate the supposed birthplace of
Rama from the possession of Muslims, reminds me of a similar venture the Christians of the
Middle Ages embarked upon for freeing from the Turks the Holy Land, the birth place of Jesus.
The Crusades saw Christians, with cross in one hand and sword in the other, doing Turks to
death by the thousands, all in the name of Jesus who preached love for one’s fellow humans, as
the supreme law of life and the surest way to the Divine. Today the very memory of the Crusades
is a matter of shame for Christians and without exception they would hasten to disown that lurid
past. Salutary indeed is their shame. For, “shame is a revolution in itself.” (Marx)
What will coming generations think of us, were the Radha-yatra to end in bloodshed and
usher in a period of communal hatred and violence? Will they not hold us in contempt supreme,
for poisoning the very well-springs of India’s spiritual life? What is worse, are we not demeaning
ourselves before the eyes of our fellow humans all over the world, we who harness all our
energies to the construction of a temple to house the deity, when in reality, we don’t care a fig
for the millions of men and women rotting away in slums, unfed and unhoused? What deity will
care to dwell in a house, reeking with human blood? Even granting that the erstwhile Muslim
rulers had dismantled a temple to build a mosque in its place, can that wrong be righted by
another wrong?
Thoughts like these may not strike any sympathetic cord in the hearts of the organizers of
the Yatra who, presumably, can understand only the language of votes and political
maneuvering. The many studies that have appeared in recent times, claim that what is at stake is
not religion but economic and political interests, that political leaders and the elite are using
religion to promote what in truth are secular interests. While there is much truth in this
assessment, its deeper implications are often ignored.
If political leaders can manipulate their respective religious communities, it is proof
enough that they have thrown overboard all democratic norms or, worse, had never subscribed to
them. In fact, the crucial problem facing the country is the mismatch between culture and
societal structures. When in the wake of the French revolution, democratic structures came into
being in the West, there had also emerged a corresponding democratic culture based on the
recognition of the equality of all men and women, irrespective of colour, race, and creed, on the
responsibility of each individual for the good of society as a whole, and respect for the minority
views. In India where democratic institutions were implanted from abroad, undergirding them
there was no popular democratic culture. The claim of political analysts like Prof. Rajni Kothari,
whom otherwise I hold in high esteem, regarding “the overall Indian tradition of absorbing
different cultures, different religions, different traditions and making them part of a plural ethos”
and “the nice fit between the democratic idea and the Indian tradition of living with differences”
is, to say the least, highly exaggerated. Tradition has only absorbed such diversities as posed no
threat to the caste hierarchy, was tolerant only of such views as tolerated Brahman hegemony.
More importantly, the differential and discriminatory ethics, institutionalized in the caste
system contradicts the egalitarian ethics of democracy. If the ensuing cultural conflict has come
to a head today, it is because, unlike earlier national leaders, the ones now occupying positions of
power have by and large been cast in the casteist mould. Failure to recognize the dissonance
between culture and structures explains our colossal failure to gear the educational system to
instilling in the youth the perceptions and values that go to make up the democratic culture. The
problem is further compounded by the dichotomy between fact and value and the primacy of
science over ethics which we took over from Western modernity as the guiding principles of
education.
If political leaders and other sections of the elite exploit religious sentiments for
economic and political gains, the reverse also is true. What the Viswa Hindu Parishad (VHP) is
doing is to use the democratic practice of elections and the democratic principle of majority rule
in order to establish a Hindu Rashtra. For this it must first unify the diverse sects within
Hinduism. This can best be done by the emotive power of symbols. Hence the stress on
integrating symbols like Ayodya and Ramrajya. The advocates of Hindu hegemony employ the
technique of semantic annexation as is evidenced by the attempt to extend the scope of the term,
Hinduism, to include also Dalits, Tribals, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs, though these on the
whole would refuse to be called Hindus. The recent efforts at modernizing Hinduism by
assimilating it to a Church with teaching authority over its diverse sects, point in the same
direction. The consolidation of Hinduism poses no threat to the minorities particularly if it is
accompanied by religious renewal. If, on the contrary, Hinduism is identified with nationalism
and is aimed at the subjugation or, worse, elimination of religious minorities, the future of our
country is bleak indeed. It is still not too late for the BJP and Viswa Hindu Parishad to
reconsider their stand and fall in line with norms of democratic pluralism. A religion that lives
by the sword will die by the sword. For as the polarization around the Mandal Commission has
shown, the Brahmana-led Viswa Hindu Parishad is in reality a minority which will have to
confront the hitherto less vocal majority consisting of the backward classes, the Dalits, and the
Tribals, who have their own accounts to settle with history. Further, Hindu nationalist
aspirations will threaten the very survival of India as a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation as it
will fuel the demand, already voiced by many radical groups, that the nationalities, making up
the mosaic that is our country become each a sovereign nation.
What we are witnessing today is a crisis not only of democracy but also of religion. The
project of Hindu Rashtra, if realized, will mark Hinduism’s fall from authenticity. (Just as the
unholy alliance with the Roman Empire signaled Christianity’s betrayal of its own prophetic
origins, a betrayal which it has yet to completely disown.) Hinduism, understood in the
nationalistic sense, is Hinduism become worldly - that is what the term, secular, originally meant
- to the point of losing its own soul.
The challenge this poses to both Hinduism and the minority religions is twofold. First,
they must institute a radical self-appraisal, in order to rid themselves of the accumulated
deadwood of inane interpretations and practices, shed whatever absolutist, exclusive, totalitarian
claims they may entertain, and recognize each its own poverty and wealth, each its own
limitations and possibilities. This alone will pave the way for a new era of dialogue and
diapraxis.
Second, religions must return to their primal source which is the Divine encountered in
this our world, idam-sarvam - in the beauty and harmony of things earthly and heavenly, in the
diversity that unifies and in the unity that bodies forth into diversity of names and forms, in the
togetherness of humans rich with echoes of love and poetry, in the plasmic continuum of flesh
and spirit where “what we make of ourselves we take from one another’s hearts.” Here is the
point of convergence where all religions prophetic or priestly meet, where our common
humanness draws nourishment from.
As a Christian, I cannot conclude these reflections without registering my shock and
dismay at the criminal silence of the leaders of the Christian churches at a time when the country
is going through so portentous a crisis, when it looks as though the body politic is in travail to
bring forth a monster. One would have expected them to have enough moral and spiritual
authority to be able to mediate between Hindus and Muslims. Instead, all that they have done is
to appeal to the ‘flock’ to pray for communal harmony. This is what happens to any religion
when it is presided over, not by seers, saints and prophets but by managers of institutions. No
wonder Indian Christianity has bred its own version of communalism.
(Bangalore, 31 October 1990)