The 'Ram temple' drama

The mix of Ram and history has come to be a potent weapon for the Hindu communal forces seeking to reap political dividends.

S.P. UDAYAKUMAR

FOR the young male kar sevaks, Ram is not only a favourite deity but also a communal rendering of Indian "national history". Having been brainwashed by the rhetoric of the "heroic heritage" of the past and the "pathetic situation" of the present, the "Hindu" youth are made to feel intensely the need for shunning "impotence" and "weakness". They are presented with a clear enemy and a visible symbol to destroy and establish their "strength and glory", and regain their "pride and hegemony". The preamble to the constitution of the RSS establishes that the organisation was created, among other things, "to make them (Hindus) realise the greatness of their past," and "to bring about an all-round regeneration of the Hindu Samaj."¹ V.D. Savarkar himself has clarified: "Hindutva is not a word but a history. Not only the spiritual or religious history of our people as it is sometimes taken to be by being confused with the other conjugate term Hinduism, but a history in full".²

History, myths and narrativity are integral parts of the holistic scheme of a people's past memories and present identity. Myths do create a particular discursive space for changes in the knowledge of the past, and this discursiveness gains a divine ordination when religious symbols and sensibilities are added to it. A semiotic analysis with emphasis on the narrative structure will lead us to concur with Iqbal Ansari that the (religion-tainted) communal perceptions of history have got entrenched in the collective psyche of many Indians as myths and symbols, and that this "mythic-psychic -folklorish" operant of the average Indian mind transforms ordinary events and incidents in the social and cultural life affecting Hindu-Muslim relations in hue and shape. This operant makes it possible for some politicians and bigoted religious leaders to manipulate and mislead people.³

India, as a matter of fact, is a "context-sensitive society" and people perceive "much of their behaviour against a background of social, religious, and historico-legendary contexts." The texts here are deliberately "framed" by authors - "that is, placed within contexts that provide the listener/reader with clues for interpreting its message." This kind of metacommunicative strategies employed in "cultural performances", which include folk dances and dramas, recitation of folktales by professional bands, telling of parables and jokes in everyday situations, religious sermons, construction of "street speech" and so forth, "have an ability to transform and enhance life, often by reference to impersonal values and experiences".⁴

GOPAL SUNGER
At one of the workshops in Pindwara, Rajasthan, pillars for the proposed Ram temple being carved out of sandstone blocks.

After all, as scholars agree, historical interpretation is a product of contemporary ideology, which encourages the adoption of certain attitudes and theories about the past. Contemporary ideologies, the historian's predilections, his choice of events, nature of his choice, his subjectivity, and his narrativity are all mutually inter-connected variables that give rise to the contemporary myth, often called "national history". When a mythological story itself becomes the focal point of this contemporary myth, we witness an inverted project of history writing. The Ramayana, a popular Indian epic which employs metanarrative strategies, is an important text to delineate this connection between the popular mythological version and Hindu communal rendition of Indian "national history".

With a "pervasive presence of Ram's name in North India" that is reflected in invocation in moments of distress, rural greetings (Ram-Ram), and in the pallbearers' chant (Ram nam satya hai-Ram's name is truth),⁵ it is no wonder that Hindu communalists try to appropriate the Ramayana and come up with claims of historicity. According to Savarkar, "Some of us worship Ram as an incarnation, some admire him as a hero and a warrior, all love him as the most illustrious representative monarch of our race."⁶ Another Savarkar-like contends that the Ramayana is "a scripture of the ancient Hindu Race" that reveals "picture after picture of fascinating beauty in the life of India in that period in our history." He claims that dharma was the essence of India then and interjects that "(f)or the sake of dharma, my countrymen of Sind have left their property, their lands, their native soil, and have migrated to India." This author's "picture" gets even clearer when he asserts that "pure-hearted Brahmins" who were poor in material wealth but rich in the wealth of the spirit were "the pillars of the state" during Ramayanic times.⁷

This allegedly homogeneous "Hindu" race, according to yet another Hindu communal writer, speaks many languages with a single "vital breath" and has a vast and variegated culture with a "central spring of spiritual strength": "the mystic spirit of India". When Judaic monotheism in its Islamic garb invaded the land of the Vedas and challenged the outer logic of superior revelations such as Valmiki's Ramayana, the inner coherence was quickly forgotten by its inheritors.⁸ This kind of myth is then projected onto the "national history" by the Hindu communalists, giving rise to subsequent socio-political myths.

The Hindu communal forces' invocation of Ram and Ramayana along the lines of Eurocentred taxonomies facilitates not just the evocation of monolithic Hinduism and homogeneous "Hindu" samaj but also the eradication of the Other, Islam and Muslims. This composition of the inner cosmos makes sure that the "pure old glory" of Hinduism prevails and the "polluting and invading" Islam becomes simply non-existent. This kind of tales "continue to mould existence for their assenting possessors" and initiate a process of acculturation in which the legatees absorb the possessors' legacy, namely, their "historical knowledge and consciousness".⁹

Constructing a Ram Temple

Inevitably, monumentalising this historical consciousness becomes the logical next step of the so-called Ayodhya movement. Now that the major impediment, the Babri Masjid, has been demolished, and now that significant headway has been made on the political front, (the BJP's capturing power both in the State of U.P. and at the Centre), it is only a matter of time before the temple is built and the glorious "Hindu" history is inscribed.

The Sangh Parivar laid the foundation for the temple by digging around the Babri Masjid and filling the area with 10-foot-thick layer of reinforced cement concrete in July 1992. Even as Kalyan Singh's BJP Government called it a "platform" for performing bhajans, the VHP declared that it was the foundation for the future Ram temple. The blueprint of the temple, which would stand 128 feet tall, occupy an area of 37,520 sq ft, and last for 1,000 years, had been prepared almost a decade ago and was widely advertised during the Ayodhya campaign. The VHP expedited the temple work, which was going on at a sluggish pace, as soon as the United Front Government fell in November 1997 and the political situation seemed to favour the BJP.

Launching the party's election campaign in Faizabad on February 6, 1998, Advani reiterated the party's resolve to build the temple. He reasoned: "The BJP has put the Ayodhya issue in its election manifesto. We cannot overlook the popular sentiment for the construction of a Ram temple at the birthplace of Lord Rama."¹⁰ Even as the BJP-led Government has avoided putting the temple issue on the "National Agenda for Governance", the VHP has been pressing ahead with the pre-fabrication of the temple. As the pace of the stone-cutting for the 212 pillars of the temple was not satisfactory, the VHP selected sites in Kojra, Ajari and Pindwara villages of Sirohi district in Rajasthan, another BJP-ruled State, to expedite the work.¹¹ Ashok Singhal told The Week recently that 1,75,000 cubic feet of pre-fabricated material was needed to build the temple and 40,000 cubic feet had already been prepared.¹²

When Opposition parties protest against secret moves for the construction of the Ram temple, Advani, the Union Home Minister, simply assures the Parliament that "this Government will see to it that no court order is flouted,"¹³ and Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee announces that "my Government will not allow any organisation to violate the sanctity of the judicial process."¹⁴ Neither of them agrees to the Opposition parties' demand for Government intervention in the matter. It is also important to remember that both these leaders along with their party colleagues had given similar assurances in December 1992 just before the mosque was demolished in their very presence. Despite all these "assurances", the RSS leader, Rajendra Singh, has proclaimed that the temple should be built at the "very place where the disputed structure was demolished." According to him, those who opposed the temple construction had "perverted minds" and were "appeasing Muslims" to get their votes.¹⁵

Living true to its "family" legacy of various "brotherly" organisations pursuing a "parallel agenda" and a "fractured agenda", the Sangh Parivar persists with the Ram temple project in order to concretise "Hindu" historical knowledge and consciousness and to usher in the Hindu millennium with all its old glory and pomp. The mix of Ram and history has come to be a potent weapon for the Hindu communal forces to reap much-desired political dividends. In fact, Ram has been utilised in this capacity once before. Albrecht Weber quotes Talboy Wheeler in his book On Ramayana (1873) claiming that the "Rama legend represents the victory of Hinduism over Buddhism." When Buddhism and Jainism held sway in the subcontinent, the Vedic Hinduism realised the need to accommodate the "common folks".¹⁶ Srivastava claims that it was during the 15th century that "the rituals and traditions of Rama bhakti (devotion) were elaborated along orthodox Vedantic lines in the Adhyatma Ramayana". When the Rama story "wove its way inextricably into the fabric of rural culture and religion" in the 16th century, the "growing popularity of Rama forced Brahminism to accept him as an avatar (incarnation)"¹⁷

The brahmanical orthodoxy could spread the message that it would condescend to honour and worship a dark-complexioned non-Brahmin practising certain ideals, and condemn a Brahmin scholar (Ravana) as demon if found guilty.¹⁸ Ram is wooed once again to help consolidate the brahmanical orthodoxy's political power base. The Hindutva forces prefer a militaristic manly Ram to a non-violent baby Ram. The lone warrior Jayaram standing out in the field with bow and arrows is liked better than the benevolent King Rajaram sitting in his court with Sita and others. While the physical materiality of Ram is highlighted, the pervasive spirit of Ram-ness is deliberately downplayed. Seen from the Hindutva angle, Ram is more of a historical hero than a mythical god.

Presenting a fantastic linear account of the past that had no Muslims, no privileges to the weaker sections of society, and no politicisation, Ram becomes, to borrow Savarkar's phrase, "history in full". Homogenising Hindu samaj with one God, one temple and one book, Ram is also "religion in full". Bringing the Akhand Bharat (Greater India) that was overrun by invaders down to a specific location (Ayodhya) where the invaders' "descendants" and their intrusive mosque could be pushed aside, Ram becomes "geography in full". When all these sentiments are combined and consolidated under the Sangh Parivar's leadership, the unholy secular India turns into sanctified Rama-sthan, and the Ram temple becomes the manifestation of true and sincere patriotism. If you are not part of this self-construction, you are part of the Other-destruction.

Having translated mythical lore into modern mobilising metaphors and ideology, Hindu communalists transform the resultant frenzy into retaliatory corrective measures, and in the process they emerge powerful with added strength to the accentuated status quo. The Hindutva forces' interpretation of Hinduism and history and their understanding of "greatness" and "regeneration" are all deceitful and opportunistic.

In sheer desperation, they misappropriate Indian heritage, misrepresent Indian legends, and manipulate the people. With these careful selections and calculated slips, the brahmanical orthodoxy plays up the symbolic terrains of contest. The communal drama unfolds. Both Hindu and Muslim communalists play their roles religiously, the rest of the political entities participate as helpless side-actors, and civil society functions mostly as silent spectators. There is one collective villain and no hero in this drama.

(Concluded)

S.P. Udayakumar is Research Associate and Co-Director of Programmes, Institute of Race and Poverty, University of Minnesota, Minneapoliis, United States.

Dina Nath Mishra, RSS: Myth and Reality. New Delhi: Vikas, 1980. p. 207.
Quoted in T. C. A. Raghavan, "Origins and Development of Hindu Mahasabha Ideology: The Call of V. D. Savarkar and Bhai Parmanand," Economic and Political Weekly 18/15 (April 9, 1983), p. 597.
Iqbal Ansari, "Hindu-Muslim Conflict in India: Causes and Remedies," in Ansari, The Muslim Situation in India. New Delhi: Sterling, 1989. p. 173.
Philip Lutgendorf, The Life of a Text: Performing the Ramcharitmanas of Tulsidas. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1991. pp. 23, 18, 33, 34.
ibid., p. 413.
Quoted in Tapan Basu, et al., Khaki Shorts and Saffron Flags: A Critique of the Hindu Right. New Delhi: Orient Longman, 1993. p. 9.
See T. L. Vaswani, Sri Rama: The Beloved of Aryavarta. Pune, India: Gita Publishing House, n.d. pp. 5, 7.
Sita Ram Goel, "Rama-Man, or God?" Organiser, October 14, 1963. pp. 12, 14.
See G. W. Trompf, "Macrohistory and Acculturation: Between Myth and History in Modern Melanesian Adjustments and Ancient Gnosticism," Comparative Studies in Society and History 31/4 (October 1989). p. 625.
"Advani reiterates resolve to build Ram temple", The Hindu, February 7, 1998.
J. P. Shukla, "VHP plan for Ram temple at Ayodhya on schedule?" The Hindu, May 24, 1998.
"Opposition dissatisfied with Advani's statement," The Hindu, June 6, 1998.
ibid.
"Vajpayee says Govt. will go by court order," The Hindu, June 8, 1998.
Inder Malhotra, "Mandir takes heat off n-issue," The Hindu, June 10, 1998.
P. S. Sridhara Murthy, Rama, Ramayana and Babar. Bangalore: Dalit Sahitya Akademy, 1988. pp. 9-13
Sushil Srivastava, The Disputed Mosque: A Historical Inquiry. New Delhi: Vistaar Publications, 1991. p. 42.
Murthy, 1988, pp. 9-13.

Table of Contents

Home | The Hindu | Business Line | Sportstar