Religion

  • Culture,  Politics,  Religion

    Politicising religion

    They are at it again! Yes, you guessed it right. Our esteemed representatives in and out of Parliament are fighting again. Making a mountain out of a molehill and inciting communal tension. With the Left politicising the US-India Nuclear Deal, the Congress government already had enough on its plate. Now, the BJP and its cronies are politicising what should be a normal development activity. And yes, I am talking about the much-delayed Sethusamudram Project. The BJP is up in arms, yet again, against the affidavit filed before the Supreme Court by the Archaeological Survey of India on behalf of the government yesterday. In the affidavit, the ASI has said that there is no historical or archaeological evidence that the Ram Sethu Bridge (Adam’s Bridge) was man-made, or more specifically, built by Lord Ram. The BJP, in its protests against the affidavit says that the ASI, and by consequence, the Central Government, has “hurt the sentiments of Hindus worldwide” by doubting the veracity of the Valmiki Ramayan and other Hindu scriptures.

    Now, this is getting ridiculous. The ASI has said that the said Bridge is simply a natural formation of shoals and sand dunes that have assumed the form of a bridge over the millennia. Should the ASI be made to back-track and apologise for stating an archaeological fact simply because the BJP thinks it hurts the sentiments of pious Hindus across the globe? Apparently, the ASI’s statement that there is no archaeological evidence for the existence of Lord Rama is blasphemous too. So what if there is no archaeological evidence? Are we going to believe any less in God because the ASI doubts its veracity. The Ram Sethu is a tricky situation. We leave the well-knows realms of history and travel into the hazy world of myths and legends. How can the ASI be blamed for wanting to stick to established fact? The ASI is called the archaeological survey for a reason, it relies on archaeological data and not on theology. How can the nation’s best historians be expected to accept the word of a centuries-old story of Ram, handed down to us through oral tradition, until it was finally written down by Valmiki, without question or concrete evidence? Being a historian is tough. Say it and you are damned; and don’t say it, and you are damned anyway.

    As for the BJP and its entourage, less said the better. I was once a sympathiser of the party, but now, am ashamed to admit I ever was one. Ram is not a national idol as Advani makes it his business to claim. He is simply another God in the Hindu pantheon. He is, no doubt, venerated and worshipped by Hindus across the world, but that does not mean a project as important as Sethusamudram can be stalled for him. It is time we learnt to distinguish myth from reality.

    That Ram built the Adam’s bridge is myth. That he defeated Ravan who has ten heads, is myth too. Well, maybe he defeated Ravan. But the said Ravan certainly did not have ten heads. That millions of Hindus across the world venerate and worship him as God is faith. That the BJP and Co. is mixing up faith, myth, reality, history, legend, development economics and politics is just plain dirty.

  • Economy,  Politics,  Religion,  Society and Institutions

    Temple of gold?

    This morning, NDTV, or was it CNN-IBN, ran a news story about the consecration of a new temple in Sripuram near Vellore in Tamil Nadu. So, what’s the fuss, you may ask. The fuss is that the said temple is built using 1.5 tonnes of gold. Yes, you read that right. 1.5 tonnes of gold. According to Chennai Online, the temple is built mainly from gold and copper. Except the walking path, the entire structure has been made of gold and copper. It has been built at a total cost of Rupees Six Billion ($15 million). My first reaction to this piece of news was that all the money spent was a royal waste. Just imagine! The money spent on the temple could have been used to build at least 10 hospitals with state-of-the-art equipment or schools with excellent facilities. Instead, it has been lavished in a building that is of no use to anybody, least of all those who really need help.

    I am a Hindu too. I believe in God too. But, I do not believe that 15 million dollars must be spent to keep Him happy. I firmly believe that any money spent for the welfare of those who really need it will make God happy. They say God is omnipresent and omniscient. Then, why build a temple of gold to house him? Are we not trying to confine him to a gilded cage? Is there any point in spending so much money to build something that will serve no larger purpose to society? I may sound like an atheist when I say this, but the fact remains that India’s temples are the richest institutions of the country today. The daily income of the Tirumala-Tirupathi Devasthanam is higher than the turnover of most companies. Granted that the TTD runs charities and uses the money earned for the greater good of humanity. But this temple at Vellore? How is it going to help those who survive with less than a dollar a day? How is it going to help those who walk tens of kilometres everyday to get a pail of drinking water?

    My heart bleeds when I think of the colossal waste of money that this temple is. It bleeds when I realise that the temple is a symbol of everything that is wrong with India today. It symbolises the growing divide between the rich and the poor. It symbolises the harsh reality that the Indian diaspora all over the world is more willing to contribute to the construction of this pointless and extravagant temple in the hope that they will be relieved of their sins, than to contribute to the establishment of a school in a remote village in India. India ranks 126th among 177 countries in the UN Human Development Report. How is India to attain the status of a developed country by 2020 as our esteemed former President Dr. Kalam hopes, if this waste is to continue? It is time we wake up and realise that building temples and other places of worship at massive costs is going to get us nowhere. It is time to sit up and take note of the fact that the money thus spent is needed elsewhere. Think about it. 15 million dollars could have contributes to schools for the entire district. It could have meant better irrigation for the arid lands of the country. Or, it could have meant better health care for the millions who cannot afford private health care. We need to sit up and protest. Otherwise things will never change.

  • Politics,  Religion

    Freedom of expression and religious sentiment

    This is a continuation of my previous post on the attack on Taslima Nasreen. As I said before, the attack is simply outrageous. So, you can imagine my outrage and disgust when I read that the Hyderabad has slapped a case against Ms. Nasreen for hurting Muslims’ religious sentiments. The way the Hyderabad police is handling the case is worth protesting against.Why should Ms. Nasreen not speak out against the perceived ills of Muslim society? I can understand it if the person who speaks out is an outsider. As a Muslim herself, does she not have the right to question what is wrong with the religion in which she was raised? Does freedom of expression mean nothing today? Where is the famous tolerant spirit we Indians are so fond of telling the world about?

  • Literature,  Politics,  Religion

    Right to free speech?

    Yesterday’s attack on controversial Bangladeshi author Taslima Nasreen speaks volumes about the increasing intolerance in Indian society. We, as Indians, pat ourselves on the back about democratic tradition in our beloved homeland and pride ourselves on the inherent tolerance of the Indian people. But, where has that tolerance gone now? Ms. Nasreen was in Hyderabad to release the Telugu version of her new book Shodh, when activists of the All-India Majilis-E-Itihadul Muslimeen attacked the gathering. Not only is the attack worth condemning but the words of a local AIMIM MLA on CNN-IBN are simply outrageous. He claimed, in full view of television cameras, that the “punishment” meted out to Ms. Nasreen was insufficient and she should have been killed to teach a lesson to all other presumptuous Muslim women who dare to speak out against oppression. The new book Shodh explores the life of a woman wanting to break free and live life on her own terms.

    The AIMIM claims that the book is anti-Islamic and that Taslima Nasreen is a kafir for daring to express herself. The attack against Ms. Nasreen is just one example of the growing intolerance in Indian society. In fact, the incident reminded me of the annual anti-Valentine’s Day vandalism carried out by the Shiv Sena. It is not just religious fundamentalist groups who indulge in such acts. A few years ago, about 20 young couples were arrested by the Chennai City Police at a park in Anna Nagar, one of the posher areas of the city. When the parents of the arrested arrived, the police claimed to have arrested them for indecent exposure in public. Apparently, holding your boyfriend’s hand in broad daylight is considered indecent exposure. As usual, the local Hindu Munnani activists and other fundamentalist outfits, both Hindu and Muslim, condemned the behaviour of the poor couples and blamed the decadence on the West.

    All this brings us to one fundamental question. Since when is speaking your mind taboo in this country? Why should Ms. Nasreen be attacked simply because she chose to say out aloud what many of us think privately anyway? A more pertinent question would be why nobody does anything when such incidents occur? Everyone from the AP Chief Minister to the Prime Minister to the press condemns the attack on Ms. Nasreen, but the attackers were let off on bail almost as soon as they were arrested. Chances are the case will be forgotten over the next week. Why does nobody think it fit to arrest the man who practically called for Ms. Nasreen’s assassination and slap a charge of inflammatory speech on him? All this makes me wonder whether the right to free speech is not merely a politically correct thing to accord in this country. Do we really have the right to free speech without fearing reprisal? I don’t know.

  • Religion

    Revisiting Hinduism

    I realised a few months ago that most Hindu temples do not allow non-Hindus to enter the temple premises. A few years ago, I would not have stopped to think about this issue. Today, it takes on an entirely different dimension. Maybe because it appeals to my sense of justice, or maybe because I have scores of non-Hindu friends who would like to learn about Hinduism. During my conversations with Ana on Hindu mythology and culture sometime in mid-May, I emphasised over and over again, the absence of an organised church in Hinduism. I told her that Hinduism was an all-accepting, all-inclusive religion. I told her that there was no conversion ceremony, no proof required that you were, indeed, a Hindu. But today, I find myself unable to defend that thesis any longer. Thanks to the behaviour of temple authorities in India. Why is a white American denied entry into the temple even if she is the wife of a Hindu? How does one prove that one believes in all that Hinduism has to offer? A more pertinent question would be this. Why does anyone not ask me whether I am a devout Hindu? Does my having brown skin guarantee my belief in the religion? For the first time in 24 years, I find myself wondering if Hinduism is indeed as inclusive as it claims to be.

    I may be ranting, but let me give you an example to make my point clearer. I believe in God, but not in the insane and illogical separation of the castes that some of my co-religionists like to label as shaastra (religious edict). I believe in the power of the almighty to give me the strength to overcome problems but not in going to a temple on a specified day of the week to prove my faith in Him. I frankly think that rituals and rites make religion more difficult to practise for the common man and that we would all be better off without them. Does that make me a heretic? If it does, then why am I never asked to prove my faith in the religion before I enter the temple premises? Does my brown skin and typical “Brahmin looks” (Don’t ask me what that is; I have no idea) guarantee my religion? Why do temple authorities insist on getting a certificate from random official if I want to take a white foreigner into the temple? What if the said foreigner is not related to me but still is a Hindu? How exactly does one prove one is a Hindu? Are we going to hold a exam to determine his/her religion? If so, I can guarantee most brown-skinned “Hindus” would fail the test. I find this attitude appalling. Just who is a temple official, appointed to ensure maintenance of the temple premises, to determine my religion? What gives him/her the authority to pronounce a judgement on my religious beliefs? To be brutally honest, it is none of his business. He doesn’t have the right to say whether person X or Y is a Hindu or not.

    To go back to the basics, no Hindu religious text worth its salt prescribes the rituals that must be carried out to become a “good Hindu”. In other words, there is no such thing as a good Hindu. I spent 14 years of my life in a Hindu religious school and I retained only this. In verse 66 of the 18th Chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, the Lord says,

    “Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya maamekam sharanam vraja,
    aham tvaa sarvaa paapebhyaha mokshayishyaami maa shuchaha.”

    Translated, this means,

    “Relinquishing all ideas of righteousness, surrender unto Me,
    I will deliver you from all sinful reactions, do not despair.”
    (Taken from http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-18-62.html)

    If a person decides to surrender unto that God almighty and decides to visit a temple for whatever reason, who is a random officer to deny him/her that right? Why do we assume we know what God wants and needs? If he is really omnipotent and omniscient, is he not capable of deciding who is a true believer and who is a mere tourist? We are not the custodians of Hinduism. Nor are the temple authorities. It is time they stopped throwing their weight around and harassing people who really want to learn something from visiting a temple. It is true that I find myself unable to defend my thesis that Hinduism is all-embracing when faced with such behaviour. But, I stand by my thesis. After all, we only believe what we choose to believe.