musings...

Joint Truth and Re-conciliation Commssion for India, Pakistan and Bangladesh

2011-08-16T19:48:00.000+05:30

Partition of 'British India' continues to haunt India, Pakistan and Bangladesh by way of myriad undercurrents. The violence that resulted in killing of over a million people hasn't ever been collectively regretted, nor the dead mourned collectively. The sub-continent needs a mammoth 'Truth and Reconciliation Commission', headed by Chief Justices of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to let multiple narratives of people flow forth in the public domain. The proceedings of this commission should be telecast live across the sub-continent.

Let truth and compassion heal.

The 'reconciliation', it should be made clear, is not about reconciling geographical or political borders, but about hearts.

It is necessary to exclude reconciliation of geographical borders, lest political parties across the region work themselves into hysteria over threat to national entities.

Such a commission should have sub commissions on, most critically, religion, history, culture and education polices and economic co-operation. Let all – including politicians, religious leaders, scholars, academics, experts and ordinary people -- make submissions.

Let the debate about concepts of democracy, secularism, religion and culture be engaged in, in an orderly and systematic manner.

The proceedings of such a commission -- and sub-commissions -- besides being telecast live, should also be webcast. Websites should also necessarily be created in multiple languages to allow for wider access to people. These web sites should also necessarily have a lot of interactivity where people can have a say.

Where Ram and Rahim belong to the same family

2011-05-27T17:32:00.004+05:30

Raman Nanda | TNN

( "We are Musalmaan, we are Hindu too". That’s the spirit the semi-literate villagers of ‘Cheetah Mehrat’ community embody. While the modern world struggles to define secularism, these villagers pray at mosques and temples, inter religious marriages are the norm. Religionists who try to foist singular Hindu or Muslim identity on the community are shown the door. Their politics too is instructive: they are muslim and have been voting for the saffron BJP during the last three elections. BJP’s candidate Ramzan Khan has their support. For them,the issue is neither BJP, nor the candidate’s religion. Khan, they say, is a helpful man. The Cheeta-Mehrat community lives in and around Kharkheri village, mid-way between Ajmer, home to the famous Dargah Sharief and Pushkar, a holy Hindu city. This story was published in the Times of India, Jaipur, Nov. 8, 2008; it being posted here for it has an abiding relevance.)

Om, the seed mantra for Hindus, and Ameena, Prophet Mohammad’s mother’s name, have obvious religious connotations. A man who answers to the name, Om, and a woman named Ameena are real brother and sister. Likewise, Seeta and Sakina could be sisters. Men answering to names Ram and Rizwan could be brothers.
    “We have been living a secular way of life for over four centuries,” says Chand, headman of Kharkheri village, 10 km from Pushkar. His community — Cheeta Mehrat — converted to Islam four centuries ago. They are as much at ease in a mosque as they are worshipping Hindu gods and goddesses. They celebrate Eid and Diwali with equal enthusiasm.
    The Cheetas, generally, are a poor lot. In Kharkheri, where about 400 of the 500 odd families are Cheetas, the land holdings are small. There aren’t any irrigation facilities and with rainfall being nonexistent or erratic, their small farms have not been giving much of an yield to them. Besides tilling, they work as labourers in stone quarries to earn Rs 80-90 per day. In Ajmer, the community also inhabits Masauda, Nausar and Nasirabad towns. With a sizeable presence in Pali, Rajsamand and Bhilwara regions, the population of Cheetas across the state is estimated to be about 4.5 lakh.
    The unique blend of Islam and Hinduism as embodied by this community is under attack from extremist elements of both the religions. Islamic and Hindu organizations come knocking at their doors to persuade them to fully embrace one religion.
    Says Chand: “When Muslim organizations try to persuade us to be more regular with rozas and namaz, we tell them that while we are Muslims, we are neither interested nor do we have the time to do namaz five times a day. Likewise, the Hindu organizations tell us that we should revert to our old religion, to which we tell them: Since we aren’t causing problems to others, just leave us alone.” However, in neighbouring Nausar, the Cheetas — under the influence of conservative Muslim groups — have, reportedly, been giving up on their Hindu practices.
    During election time, villagers say, candidates of different communities try to emphasise one or the other aspect of the life style of Cheetas. “However, we go only by the merit of the candidate,” say the villagers. Though, this particular village, has generally supported the BJP. One of the reasons was that in the past three elections, the BJP candidate, Ramzan Khan, was a very helpful man.
    The Cheetas are often looked down upon by Muslims as also the dominant Hindu castes even though they regard themselves as ‘Thakurs’ and trace their lineage to Chauhan dynasty. For, their lineage also includes a woman from the Meena community. As the oral history goes, hundreds of years ago, Jodh Lakha, a scion of the ruling family in Ajmer, had an extra-marital affair with a girl from the Meena community. Jodh, who refused to give up his relationship with the Meena girl, was thrown out of the palace and excommunicated. “We are descendants of Jodh of the Chauhan dynasty and Meena girl,” says Chand.
    Many generations later, one Karni Singh of this community carved his own little kingdom near Pali. Defeat at the hand of Rajput rulers drove the family to seek military support from rival Muslims, and, as a precondition for such support, Karni Singh converted to Islam. However, at the time of conversion, he accepted only some aspects of Islam and made it clear that his community will continue with its Hindu practices as well. “Since our forefathers favoured Hindu religious practices along with acceptance of Islam, we too are doing the same,” village elders say in a very matter of fact way.
    Among the Cheetas, the decision about marriage — whether it shall be the Hindu ‘pheras’ (circling round the fire seven times) or ‘nikah’— rests with the family of the bride. “If a girl from our village is married, it will be a nikah but when we take a girl from Rawat community, it will be ‘pheras’ and doli”, say the villagers.
    They don’t find their traditions all that unusual. “Don’t you see a lot of Muslims at Pushkar, and, a lot of Hindus at Ajmer Sharief ?”, they ask.
    The name — be it Sakina or Sita — does not matter. Form of marriage — be it ‘nikah’ or ‘phera’ — does not matter. Namaz is fine, as is praying to Lord Ganesha or Rama. Pushkar is a holy place, as is any mosque or the Dargah at Ajmer.

For Chand of Cheeta Mehrat community, at prayer time, Mecca’s Khan-e-kabaa and Hindu Gods and Goddesses are equally important. (R) Amjad Cheeta, looking distinctively Muslim, with his brother Mahendra Cheeta

In the name of God!

2011-04-25T12:42:00.003+05:30

While followers of Godman ‘Sathya Sai Baba’ say they are convinced that he will return as another ‘avtaar’, followers of another son of God, Jesus, have been celebrating the day of his ‘resurrection’. Jesus inspired many of his followers to a noble life (doesn’t matter some felt inspired to launch the inquisitions too), Sai Baba too – as Prime Minsiter Man Mohan Singh says – inspired many to a life of truth and love (doesn't matter that there are questions aplenty about Sai Baba's 'miracles'). No quarrels with noble impact those speaking in the name of God have on peoples’ lives. One is all for all kinds of inspiration that lifts humanity towards noble ideas of love and compassion. But – and I cannot rid myself of this but – does one have to accept the package deal offered by Godmen ? Wherein, one suspends ratiaonality? Must admit, feeling a bit lost in overwhelming adulation one is seeing all around! Surely, spiritual quest, a longing for feeling a sense of oneness of all humanity, indeed all life, can be rooted in quest for truth and rationality too?

Smear Campaign: Anna Hazare's letter to Sonia Gandhi

2011-04-18T16:53:00.000+05:30

Anna Hazare has hit back at the 'smear campaign' against leaders of the anti-corruption movement. Here's the full text of the letter released to the media today (April 18, 2011). Worth a read.

Mrs Sonia Gandhi,
Chairperson, UPA,
10, Janpath, New Delhi.

Dear Mrs Gandhi,

We entered the joint committee with the hope of jointly drafting a strong anti‐corruption law for the country. Your letter to me, just a day before I ended my fast, that ‘there is an urgent necessity of combating graft and corruption in public life’ and that ‘the law in these matters must be effective and deliver the desired results’, was reassuring.

However, the developments of the last few days have been a cause for concern. It seems that the corrupt forces in the country have united to derail the process of drafting an effective anti‐corruption law through the joint committee. Together we have to defeat their designs. One of their strategies is to smear the reputations of the civil society members in the committee.

Whereas I am of the view that the people working for public must be subjected to public scrutiny, however, when blatantly false accusations are made, fabricated CDs are planted, then one feels that the purpose is not an honest public scrutiny but to tarnish reputations. They have not even spared me, even though I have lived a simple life following on the path of truth. However, I am happy that despite all their efforts, the vested interests could not dig out anything of substance. This has only raised the reputations of civil society members in the eyes of public. The smear campaign of vested interests seems to be back firing. People can see through what is happening. We are receiving many messages from the people expressing solidarity and sending wishes from across the country that the vested
interests have struck back and we should not give up.

I was wondering what would be the outcome if the government nominees in the committee were subjected to similar scrutiny or witch hunt. Those in power have much more to explain. However, we don’t want to divert the attention of the people from Lokpal Bill to individual mud‐slinging, which seems to be the objective of the people behind this smear campaign.

One of the General Secretaries of Congress Party has been making many statements in the press in the last one week. I assume that he has the support of the party to make such remarks.

Most of these statements are factually wrong, which makes one believe whether his only intention is to create confusion, mislead people and derail the ongoing discussions in joint committee. Do you personally approve of his statements?

After the joint committee meeting, one of the ministers addressed the press saying that the meeting was good. Subsequently, according to many friends in media, he held a private “informal debriefing session” at his house and falsely accused us of having succumbed to government’s pressure within the committee and that we had diluted the law. This was a completely false statement because there were no discussions at all on the law within the committee. His “informal debriefing” created confusions in the minds of the people across the country. It appears that his debriefing was meant to send a message to the public that we had been “influenced”.

We had apprehended such mischievous conduct and that is the reason we have been demanding video recordings of the proceedings and their release immediately after each meeting. India has suffered immensely due to corruption. This is a historic moment when the whole country seems to have come together to demand effective action against corruption. I would urge you to advise your colleagues not to try to derail the process of drafting the law. The country is in no mood to wait any longer to have strong anti‐corruption law. People are very agitated. I fear of the consequences if the
process were derailed.

Warm regards,

(K B Hazare)

Of Manusmriti and Madhusmriti

2011-03-30T04:14:00.005+05:30

Mr. Manu [ yes, of the Manusmriti fame] did have the proper sense to pronounce that good karma was more important than biological lineage. He also emphasised that families and societies which demean women and make them lead miserable lives inevitably move towards destruction. He noted that truly prosperous families are only those in which women are honoured and happy.

So writes Madhu Kishwar, a prominent voice on the feminist landscape. Madhu interestingly argues:

I believe that Manu bhai would fully endorse my writing a Madhusmriti, no matter how much I differ with him. He would probably rejoice in the fact that many people of today prefer Madhusmriti to Manusmriti because Manu, like all other smritikars, emphasised that codes of morality are not fixed by some divine authority, but must evolve with respect to the changing requirements of generations and communities.

Much of the political grandstanding on caste, citing Manusmriti as an authoritative -- and avowedly immutable legal text -- happens without reading the text (I too haven’t read Manusmriti, though hope to get to it sometime) worthwhile reading a contrarian take on it. Here’s the link to Madhu Kishwar's article.

Religion and Sex

2011-03-13T18:37:00.000+05:30

Religion. Sex. These two words matter. And, much as the world is “modern”, “secular” and “liberal”, it shies away from a public discourse.

Here’s “What the Bible Really Says About Sex” by Lisa Miller in Newsweek.

New scholarship on the Good Book’s naughty bits and how it deals with adultery, divorce, and same-sex love.

The so-called "mainstream" christianity offers a puritanical interpretation which, many experts argue, doesn’t quite sit with the original passages of the bible. So argues Lisa Miller in her report cited above.

Here’s a piece on Hinduism and Sex rather taken randomly. Notwithstanding the tantric traditions, much of the so called ‘mainstream’ Hinduism’s – or certainly, ‘modern day’ interpretation of most groups – tends towards “conservative” approach!

Here’s also a radio programme titled ‘Sex and Spirituality’ that I ended up making with some youngsters during a radio training workshop a few years back. Listen to it here.

Religion, spirituality, sex. They matter. While religions seek to regulate sexual behaviour, the question is: do people follow norms laid down by their religions?

Marxist Historians' Fictitious Critique - I

2011-03-06T15:13:00.000+05:30

by Raman Nanda

Marxist historians' critique of the Ayodhya verdict is remarkable for the eminence of the critics and reliance on brazen lies about the verdict itself. It exposes fault lines of the secularist discourse; it also raises concerns about intellectual probity and writing of history itself.

Historians’ critique -- widely endorsed by mainstream media -- relies on inventive assumptions: the verdict “ignored” evidence and relied on “Hindu beliefs”. [1]

The Allahabad High Court, while unanimously pronouncing that Babri Mosque was built over temple(s), rejected historians’ narrative ruling out ‘Ram temple or any temple”. [2] Relying on Prof. D.N.Jha and others work, Muslim parties pleaded that Babri Masjid was built in 1528 on virgin land. [3] This argument collapsed. Excavations showed that Babri Mosque was built atop a previous structure, which was conceded by archaeologists of Muslim parties. Archaeological Survey of India said this structure, dated to 10^th -12^th century, had “distinctive features associated with temples of north India”. Professors Irfan Habib and Suraj Bhan came up with a new theory: the excavated structure could be a Sultanate period one-wall Kanati mosque or a roofless Idgah, presence of animal bones and use of surkhi-lime established exclusive Muslim presence. Muslim parties, significantly, did not plead this theory. Historians’ critique reiterates these formulations: the one that was conceded and another that was not even pleaded!

They alleged that Justices Sudhir Aggarwal and Dharam Veer Sharma’s inference of a Hindu temple (a) “takes no account of presence of animal bones and use of ‘surkhi’ and lime mortar” which are “characteristic of Muslim presence”; (b) relies on “manifestly fraudulent” inferences about “debated” pillar bases and (c) with “no proof” accepts Hindu “belief”. Historians also alleged that the verdict converted Hindu “belief” into an argument for property entitlement. Each of these allegations is baseless.

Prof Romila Thapar heads the list of “impartial” critics which includes several historians and archaeologists who deposed on behalf of pro-mosque parties.[4]

Animal Bones a ‘decisive’ evidence?

Historians have alleged that finding of animal bones -- “decisive evidence” that established Muslim presence and ruled out a temple -- was ignored by the verdict. Whereas, the verdict examines this evidence in abundant detail. The verdict cites Muslim parties’ contention that animal bones were found in “NBP, Gupta, post Gupta, Early Medieval, Medieval and Mughal levels”; that “bone fragments with cut marks are a sure sign of animals being eaten at the site and, therefore, rule out the possibility of a temple existing at the site at relevant time”; that “animal sacrifice has not been claimed for any Ram temple” and that ASI did not get bones examined scientifically, hence its report was tainted.[5]

Muslim parties’ claims were contradicted by their own archaeologists. Prof. Suraj Bhan and Dr. Jaya Menon deposed that animals were sacrificed in certain temples. Dr. R.C.Thakaran said he had read excavation reports on temple sites where animal bones had been found though, in those cases, there was no dispute about Idgah/mosque.[6] Dr. Supriya Verma said “bones are not associated with any particular community” and “tell us about the food habits of the society”.

Justice Aggarwal observed that examination of animal bones – reported from fills brought from neighbouring areas to level the ground – will throw light “only about the area of their origin”, they will have “no bearing on the nature of the layers of the excavated site”, hence objections against ASIs inference on grounds of animal bones had “no substance”. Further,

“it is not the case of the plaintiffs (Suit-4) or other witnesses that bones in such abundance could have been found in Islamic religious place i.e. Mosque, Idgah etc. The Islamic scriptures clearly show place of worship cannot be used for residence purpose or for eating, sleeping etc. It is prohibited.” [7]

Justice Sharma observed:

“Bones have been found in and from the layer of the Gupta period when Islam had not come into existence from which fact it is crystal clear that the user of the flesh of those creatures if any were not the Muslims”. He further said, Lord Ram himself used to hunt; saints, cows, parrots etc. attached to a temple are buried in temple compound, hence bones can be found at a Hindu Shrine, but not at a mosque site, for, “building mosque over bones is strictly prohibited.” [8]

The judge also cited a Supreme Court verdict:

“In Rg. Vedic times goats, sheep, cows, buffaloes and even horses were slaughtered for food and for religious sacrifice and their flesh used to be offered to the Gods.” [9] Justice Aggarwal concurred: partaking animal flesh as prasad and depositing bones below the floor of temples where animal sacrifice was practiced was well known. [10]

Relying on a precedent[11] that documents collected incidentally during execution of a ministerial task do not constitute evidence Justice Sharma observed:

“ASI excavation team was not appointed to collect the bones from the different strata and get those bones chemically examined. ASI excavation team has collected bones and made inventory thereof which was not necessary for drawing the conclusion that whether there was any existing structure prior to 16th century or not. As such challenge to the ASI report on this superficial ground is liable to be rejected.”[12]

Historians’ allegation – animal bones ignored – is baseless; their claim that animal bones ruled out a Hindu temple is contrary to the deposition of their archaeologist co-signatories as also living tradition of animal sacrifice in several temples to celebrate Lord Ram’s return to Ayodhya.[13]

The ‘Islamic’ Surkhi-lime

Historians’ allegations that the court ignored surkhi and lime mortar are baseless, and, misdirected. Muslim parties contended that use of surkhi-lime mortar was a distinctive feature of Islamic construction and “no single example is offered by the ASI of any temple of pre-Mughal times having such a lime-surakhi floor”.[14] The Hindu parties’ countered: Lime-surkhi was used in temples from pre-Mogul, indeed pre-Islamic times. Pre-6^th century construction at the disputed site itself used surkhi-lime, brick temple of Gupta period in Bhitari (Gazipur, UP) used sand and lime in 6:1 ratio, 10th century A.D. Lingaraj temple at Bhubhaneshwar used lime plaster with 3:1 lime-silica ratio.[15] They also cited Marxist historian Prof. R.S.Sharma’s work according to which in Basti and Mathura “flooring was made of brick concrete mixed with lime” which “indicates the use of Surkhi” during “early centuries of Christian era”. [16] Pro-mosque experts conceded use of lime mortar in India from pre-Islamic times. Prof. D. Mandal said:

“Lime mortar was definitely used from Neolithic period." [17]

Prof. Suraj Bhan concurred:

“lime mortar was found to have been used in the 3rd century AD during the Kushana period in Takshshila and Pakistan, but its use was very limited.”[18]

“Whether lime mortar or lime plaster was from a particular period or not”, Justice Aggarwal observed, was a “subsidiary” question since the “experts of the objectionists parties” had admitted that the disputed structure was not built on unoccupied land and that there existed a previous structure whose walls and foundations were used by the disputed structure. [19] Besides, the judge observed, evidence on Kanati Mosque-Idgah theory – since it had not been pleaded before the court -- was impermissible in law.

Thus, the allegation that the court took “no account of” arguments about surkhi and lime mortar, besides being incorrect, is also misdirected.

Faulting Judges for ‘ignoring’ Idgah that wasn’t pleaded

The manner in which Professors Irfan Habib and Suraj Bhan propounded the hitherto unheard of Kanati Mosque – Idgah theory betrays their attitude to history. As Prof. Suraj Bhan told the court:

“I and Prof. Habib had given this statement that remains of old mosque or Eidgah had been found beneath the disputed site and not of any temple. If this propaganda that remains of temple were found at the disputed site, had not taken place, there would have been no occasion for me and Prof. Irfan Habib to give the above statement.” (Justice Aggarwal, Para 3826; emphasis ours)

A new theory concerning a sensitive temple-mosque dispute declared to the nation to counter media reports! Prof. Suraj Bhan conceded that he challenged ASI’s report “based on my knowledge existing prior to the submission of ASI’s report in court.” That Prof. Suraj Bhan challenged ASIs report without reading it did not go down well with the court. Justice Aggarwal, referring to Prof. Suraj Bhan’s allegations of bias and lack of professionalism in ASIs report, noted:

“We find on the contrary, predetermined attitude of the witness against ASI which he has admitted.” (Justice Aggarwal, Para 3826)

Deposition on this theory evidently led to an odd situation. Amidst opposition by Hindu parties to evidence on it, Dr. Jaya Menon said:

“It was Dr. Supriya Varma and myself, who, for the first time, said that there was an Idgah under the disputed structure. I did not know that the plaintiffs of OOS no. 4 of 1989 had not claimed any Idgah under the disputed structure."[20]

Justice Aggarwal recorded:

“Normally, it does not happen but we are surprised to see in the zeal of helping their clients or the parties in whose favour they were appearing, these witnesses went ahead than what was not even the case of the party concerned and wrote totally a new story. Evidence in support of a fact which has never been pleaded and was not the case of the party concerned is impermissible in law.” (para 3986).

Historians’ critique impliedly – and Prof. Irfan Habib, in his writings, explicitly – have assailed the verdict for “ignoring” Idgah-Kanati Mosque theory. Doesn’t matter that it was not even pleaded by the Muslim parties! None of the judges gave any finding on it. Historians’ allegation that the court – or rather two judges – “ignored” evidence about Idgah is misdirected and bizarre, to say the least.

Wishing away Pillar Bases

Contrary to historians’ allegations, their professorial archaeologist co-signatories affirmed the integrity of excavations and conceded pillar bases. "In my presence, nothing took place such as the said archaeologists building something secretly or forcibly, Prof. D. Mandal told the court.[21] Prof. Suraj Bhan concurred:

“The ASI Report had a feature not amenable to criticism. It was that they (the excavators) have discovered many walls and floors and some pillar bases beneath the Babri mosque, and all these constitute evidence.” [22]

Dr. Supriya Verma said pillar bases that form “part of the Z series of trenches are acceptable to me” [23], Dr Jaya Menon, on being shown Plate no. 36, 37, 38 of the ASI report said “all these photographs are insitu photographs of pillar bases”.[24]

Pillars hardly needed to be found. Fourteen kasauti pillars, with engravings of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, were used in Babri Mosque itself, they are detailed in narratives from late 18^th century onwards, their pictures were on record and are available online in annexures to the verdict. Some pillars and their fragments were also found. As Dr. Jaya Menon acknowledged: “The motif of Ghat (pot) is visible on this pillar…”[25]

The “debate”, if any, related to only four of the fify pillar bases excavated by ASI.[26] Justice Aggarwal, while not agreeing with allegations about creation of pillar bases, observed

“even if, for a moment, we assume” that the experts thought pillar bases in trenches G-2 and F-6 were created, “that will not be sufficient to belie and also cannot explain several other pillar bases found by ASI whereagainst no such complaint is there.” (Justice Aggarwal, para 3895)

Historians have chosen to orchestrate disproven – and rather dubious -- allegations of two of their archaeologist co-signatories. Dr. Supriya Verma and Dr. Jaya Menon alleged – on the basis of “close observation” – creation of pillar bases in trenches G2, ZF1, F3 and F6. On examining site records, the court found that the experts were not even present at the site on the days pillar bases were discovered in these trenches. Dr. Supriya Verma admitted:

“I do not know as to when the trenches referred in para 3 of objections dated 7th June, 2003 were excavated, since I was not present at the time of excavation of above referred trenches”.[27]

Justice Aggarwal also noted a pattern: allegations about creation of pillar bases mostly related to trenches where GPR survey had reported anomalies and there was a likelihood of finding pillar bases.

“It can easily be appreciated that the mind of two experts instead (of) working for the assistance of the Court in finding a truth, tried to create a background alibi so that later on the same may be utilized to attack the very findings.”[28]

The experts did precisely that. [29]

Converting possession into ‘belief’

Historians have, rather mischievously, argued that the verdict offered “no proof” of antiquity of “Hindu belief” in Lord Ram’s birth-site being the disputed site. The relevant issue, as framed by the court, was: “Have the Hindus been worshipping the place in dispute as Sri Ram Janam Bhumi or Janam Asthan and have been visiting it as a sacred place of pilgrimage as of right since times immemorial?”[30] This, obviously, was an issue of evidence, not belief per se.

Evidence on Ayodhya, and indeed Lord Ram’s birthplace, as a pilgrimage pre-dated Babar’s arrival in India. Such evidence included Sikh religious records on Guru Nanak visiting Ayodhya in 1510-11, bathing in Saryu river and having darshan of Lord Ram (i.e. Ram’s idol). [31] The tradition of pilgrimage, judges note, continued despite demolition of the temple and construction of a mosque at the site.

* Excavation of a 10^th-12^th structure with distinct temple features at the site and discovery of a ‘Vishnu Hari Temple’ inscription, authentically dated to that period, discovered at the site. [32]

* William Finch, in India from 1608-11, mentions reverence for Lord Ram’s birthplace in ruins of his ‘castle and houses’, presence of Brahmins and practices associated with major Hindu pilgrimages: Brahmins recording names of visitors who bathe in river Saryu. This custom, Finch records, was said to be continuing for four lac years.[33] (Finch, judges note, makes no mention of mosque)

* Austrian Jesuit priest Joseph Tieffenthaler, sometime during 1766-71, observed Hindus worshiping at the ‘three-domed Mohamadden temple".

“On the left is seen a square chest, raised, five inches from the ground covered with lime… The Hindoos call it Bedi, the cradle; and the reason is, that there formerly stood here the house in which Beshan (Vishnoo) was born in the form of Ram …They still pay a superstitious reverence to both these places; namely, to that on which the natal dwelling of Ram stood, by going three times round it, prostrate on the earth.”[34] (This account, Justice Aggarwal notes, is the earliest mention of a mosque at the site)

*Tiefenthaler also wrote:

“On the 24th of the month Tshet (Choitru), a large concourse of people celebrate here the birth-day of Ram, so famous throughout India.”

*Gazetteer of India -- published in 1854, republished in 1858 – says: a ‘quadrangular coffer of stone’, pointed out as “the cradle in which Ram was born” is “accordingly abundantly honoured by the pilgrimages and devotions of the Hindoos.”[35]

* P. Carnegy, Commissioner, Oudh, wrote: “Hindus and Mahomedans alike used to worship in the mosque-temple” upto 1855 when violent clashes occurred. British rule put up a railing “within which in the mosque the Mahomedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they make their offerings”, Carnegy wrote in his report in 1870. [36] (This is the earliest reference cited by Muslim parties on namaz being offered at the site, Justice Aggarwal notes.)

*Disregarding the Iron-grilled partition put up in 1856-57, Hindus and Sikhs installed the ‘nishan’ of Lord Ram and were performing puja inside the mosque, Mohammad Asgar, alleged keeper of the mosque, said in his complaint dated 30^th November, 1858. The complainant wanted the ‘nishan’ and those praying inside the mosque to be removed. Judges note that there is no evidence of any eviction having taken place. [37]

*From 1856 to 1934 too there is evidence of Hindus worshipping in the inner courtyard. Further, there is “no evidence on record” suggesting any restriction on praying inside the building. “It was the admitted case of Muslim parties and their witnesses that the doors of the iron grilled dividing wall were never locked until December 22, 1949”, Justice Aggarwal observed.[38] Interestingly whereas Justice Aggarwal observed that from 1855 till 1934 there is “no evidence whatsoever that Namaz was actually offered in the inner courtyard”, Justice Khan concluded that “till 1934 Muslims were offering regular prayers”.

* Post-1934 riots till 1949, Hindus were worshiping in the inner courtyard on a regular basis, Muslims were offering namaz “only on Fridays”, Justices Sudhir Aggarwal and S.U. Khan inferred. [39]

Yet, historians claim that the verdict offers ‘no proof’ of antiquity of Hindu ‘belief’! Lest the word ‘proof’ cause any confusion, the verdict cites Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, which says:

"A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it the Court either believes to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition with its existence." (emphasis ours)

Evidence cited by the verdict, as is obvious to any prudent person, more than adequately measures up to legal test.

Flawed assumptions about law

Marxist Historians then proceed into the legal terrain on erroneous assumptions about the facts of the verdict as also law. They voice concern that “such belief” was “converted” into an argument for property entitlement. Firstly, the court did not go merely by “belief”; it went by evidence of possession/use of place for worship. Secondly, it did not go by evidence of possession by Hindus alone, but by both communities. Thirdly, possession is an eminently valid legal argument in a suit for title. The bench unanimously inferred that none of the litigants could prove their title, the property was ‘nazul’, i.e. government property, and, since the state did not stake its claim the court went by well established principle, ‘possession follows title’. Justices Sudhir Aggarwal and S.U.Khan’s majority verdict – on evidence of possession – ordered a three-way division. Outer courtyard was undisputedly in possession of Nirmohi Akhara; in the inner courtyard, including the building, Hindus and Muslims had been praying. The court’s order that the area worshiped as Lord Ram’s birth-site[40] under the central dome be included in the 1/3^rd share of Hindus is consistent with Supreme Court verdict which held:

"Places of worship of any religion having particular significance for the religion stand on a different footing and have to be treated differently and more reverentially".[41]

Incidentally, the Supreme Court judgment – delivered on an appeal in connection with this very case – was relied upon by all the three judges. One is at a loss to figure out which aspect of three-way division is contrary to evidence, law or “secular values”.

Historians’ allegation that the verdict -- which is on a civil suit -- gave “legitimation” to demolition of Babri Mosque in 1992 and did not affix liability for the demolition is wide off the mark for that was beyond the scope of the civil suit.

Let’s also briefly look at the larger picture from the standpoint of “Hindu values”, wherein, desecration or demolition of places of worship is abhorred. It can well be argued that the judges unanimously held that Babri Mosque was built over temple(s) with two judges categorically ruling that a Hindu temple had been demolished to build the mosque. The bench also unanimously held that Hindus have been continuously praying at the site. The judges who inferred that Muslims too prayed at the site observed that they did so intermittently. Pro-temple lawyers argued that the Hindu temple was usurped by Muslims and used for prayers on the strength of Mughal/British rule. From the standpoint of equity – and secular respect for all communities right to their places of worship – the inference should be obvious. A speculation: What if the Supreme Court decides that the site legitimately belongs to the Hindus? Would that, then, be a blow to “secular values”? Or a recognition of rights of all religions to their places of worship consistent with secular values?

(To be continued)

[1] Joint statement by 45-odd intellectuals including historians Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib, D.N.Jha, K.N. Panikkar K.M. Shrimali and Arjun Dev, published in several newspapers.
[2] Justices Sudhir Aggarwal and Dharam Veer Sharma inferred that a Hindu temple was demolished to build Babri Mosque, Justice S.U.Khan inferred that the structure beneath the mosque was a temple, but could “also” be a Buddhist temple and that this structure was not demolished.
[3] D.N.Jha, Suraj Bhan, R.S.Sharma and Athar Ali’s booklet, ‘A Historians Report to the Nation’ in 1991was, as the verdict records, “heavily relied upon” by Muslim parties. The authors claimed: “1. No evidence exists in the texts that before the 16^th century (and indeed before the 18th century), any veneration attached to any spot in Ayodhya for being the birth-site of Rama. 2.There are no grounds for supposing that a Rama temple, or any temple, existed at the site where Baburi Masjid was built in 1528-29.”
[4] The critics who deposed before the court are: historians Suvira Jaiswal and Shireen Moosvi and arhcaeologists Prof. Suraj Bhan, Prof. D.Mandal, Dr. Supriya Verma, Dr. Jaya Menon, Dr. R.C.Thakran, Dr. Ashok Dutta and Dr. Sita Ram Rao.
[5] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3960
[6] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3969.
[7] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3968
[8] Justice Dharam Veer Sharma’s verdict Pg 82-83
[9] Supreme Court verdict in Mohd. Hanif Quareshi v. State of Bihar AIR 1958 cited in Justice Sharma’s verdict on Pg 82-83
[10] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3969-70
[11] Jagat Bhai Punja Bhai Palkhiwala & Ors. v. Vikram Bhai Punja Bhai Palkhiwala & Ors, Gujarat, 1985.
[12] Justice Sharma’s verdict, Page 50;
[13] Animal sacrifice in temples on Diwali continues to be reported from Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan and Tripura. During four-day celebrations, cattle, goat and sheep are sacrificed in temples amidst singing of mantras in Ani and Nirmand (Kullu district), Shillai (Sirmaur) and Chopal (Shimla) district in Himachal Pradesh where this festival, interestingly, commences on the dark ‘Amavasya’ night, a month after Diwali in the rest of India; news of Ram’s return to Ayodhya, according to folklore, reached here later (Deccan Herald, December 4, 2011) . Animal sacrifice in connection with Diwali continues in Udaipur in South Tripura, where buffaloes, goats and pigeons are sacrificed at night in the presence of thousands of devotees at Tripura Sundari Temple (Hindustan Times, Oct 17, 2009), this practice continues in Kartarpur near Jaipur, Rajasthan (The Hindu, Nov 1, 2010). Sacrifice of animals in temples and public places during ‘Ayudha Puja’ continued till recently in Karnataka, where it was banned in 2007 (The Hindu,Oct 19, 2007)
[14] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3991, 4.5 and also in Annexure 3, Pg 56
[15] "Town planning,building and building materials" by H.C.Bhardwaj, cited in Justice Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3991, X-XV
[16] Perspectives in Social and Economic History of Early India by R S Sharma, Pg 181, cited in Justice Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3991, IX
[17] Prof. D. Mandal deposed: “I agree with the observation of Prof. H.C. Bharadwaj at page 73 of his article that gypsum mortar/plaster was used in the Harappan period. I agree with the observation in the latter part of this para that gypsum was used as mortar in the Kalibangan period also. . . . Lime mortar was definitely used from Neolithic period." (Justice Aggarwal, Para 3799)
[18] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3799
[19] Justice Aggarwal’s verdict, para 3986
[20] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3983
[21] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3799-b
[22] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3719
[23] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3737
[24] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3738.
[25] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3959
[26] Of these four pillar bases, according to Justice Aggarwal’s verdict, three were in trench F-6 and one in trench G-2.
[27] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3715
[28] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 3990
[29] Dr. Supriya Verma and Dr. Jaya Menon, writing in EPW Dec. 11, 201, implied that they were present at the site when they claimed to have made close observation but did not sign the register. However, Dr. Supriya Verma, has deposed that she was “not present” at the site when pillar bases were excavated. The experts have also erroneously claimed that Justice Aggarwal upheld their allegations about creation of pillar base in trench F6 whereas the judge clearly said “we are not agreeable to the allegation”, but “even if, for a moment, we assume….”.
[30] Issue No. 14, OOS 4 of 1989
[31] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 4384
[32] The inscription was deciphered by Epigraphist Dr. K.V. Ramesh, whose expertise was accepted by rival parties. Justice Sharma saw the inscription as evidence of Ram temple at the site; Justice Aggarwal said the inscription, though authentic, “by itself” was not conclusive evidence that such a temple existed at the site itself. For, the inscription had been found among the debris on Dec 6/7, 1992.
[33] Finch wrote: “Heere are also the ruines of Ranichand [S] castle and houses, which the Indians acknowled[g]e for the great God, saying that he tooke flesh upon him to see the Tamasha of the World. In these ruines remayne certaine Bramenes, who record the names of all such Indians as wash themselves in the river running thereby, which custome, they say hath continued foure lackes of yeeres”
[34] Justice Sharma’s verdict, Pg 55-56
[35] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 4224
[36] Justice Sudhir Aggarwal’s verdict, Para 4258
[37] The context is spelt out in a letter by a local thanedar to his superiors on October 28, 1858: “Today Mr. Nihang Singh Faqir Khalsa resident of Punjab, organised Hawan and Puja of Guru Govind Singh and erected a symbol of Sri Bhagwan, within the premises of the Masjid. At the time of pitching the symbol, 25 sikhs were posted there for security.” (para 2961-62)
[38] Justice Aggarwal, para 1903
[39] Justice S.U.Khan’s verdict, Pg 231
[40] Justices Aggarwal and Sharma held that on the portion of the site believed and worshipped as Lord Ram’s birth place since time immemorial stood the central dome of the mosque, Justice Khan held that it was so worshipped only since recent times.
[41] Dr. M. Ismail Farooqi Vs. Union of India, SC 1994

Political experimentation with Financial Stability?

2010-07-12T19:56:00.000+05:30

Finance Ministers, as clichés go, perform “balancing acts”, “tight rope walk” and “juggle” with numbers. Pranab Mukherjee and his team – the annual numbers exercise, the budget having been done with -- are now playing magicians. Here’s the rabbit they have pulled out of nothing. FSDC: Financial Stability Development Council.

Good name, for sure. The council is about financial stability. Just that it has sent alarm bells ringing in Mumbai, home to the country’s central bank. RBI Governor D Subbarao has gone on record about “delineating the specific roles and functions of the FSDC vis-à-vis the existing framework".

The proposed council may, as reports say, have Finance Minister as ex officio chairperson. Which have sparked off apprehension that the council may give the executive/political leadership direct, hands-on leverage over the financial system. It need be asked: what prompted Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee to announce the setting up of this council?

The rationale for the FSDC, as Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee enunciated in his budget speech is that the global financial crisis of 2008-09 has “fundamentally changed” the structure of banking and financial markets “the world over.” With a view to “to strengthen and institutionalise” “the mechanism” for maintaining financial stability in the country, he announced that an “apex level” Financial Stability and Development Council would be set up. The proposed entity will “monitor” macro prudential supervision of the economy, including the functioning of large financial conglomerates, and address inter-regulatory coordination issues.”

Finance Minister hasn’t quite been able to make out a case for the proposed council.

Firstly, Mukherjee has, so to say, pulled the rabbit out of virtually nothing. India’s financial sector emerged largely unscathed from the financial crisis. This, it need be emphasized, came about thanks to the fact that Reserve Bank India – with whatever limited autonomy it is able to exercise – had already adopted a cautious approach as regards capital flows. (The monitoring of financial conglomerates though requires to be addressed, which we will revert to.)

Secondly, to cite “fundamental” changes in banking and financial markets “the world over” as rationale for the proposed FSDC is bizarre to say the least. In the wake of the global crisis, in the UK for instance, there are moves afoot to restore the supervisory powers to the Bank of England. The issue is not fundamental change per se, but the direction of change. Even if new global thinking is what is inspiring the Indian Finance Ministry, it seems to be moving in the opposite direction. For, the FSDC’s mandate clearly overlaps with the existing role of the central bank and other autonomous regulators.

Thirdly, reiteration that the proposed council is not a “super regulator” isn’t convincing enough. The Financial Stability Council, envisaged as an “apex level” body, reportedly to be headed by Finance Minister, armed with an overarching mandate and backed by full time secretariat is obviously envisaged as powerful institution that will have the central bank and other regulators as members. Mukherjee’s public affirmation that the FSDC will function “without prejudice to the autonomy of regulators” hasn’t quite removed public apprehension.

The new entity’s mandate clearly provides it supervisory powers over what is presently the domain of RBI, other regulators and more. The FSDC, it seems, will act as a referee of sorts on conflicts among regulators, which, are quite often company specific. It may, in practice, have leverage over mutual funds, insurance companies as also multi-sector companies if one of the sectors they operate in is in the financial domain.

Finance Ministry officials have – perhaps naively? Or mischievously? -- argued: since the Government hasn’t even decided on whether the FSDC should be a statutory body, there’s no basis for apprehensions that it will subsume the role of other statutory regulators. Really? As real politics goes (and matters financial are political as well!) ideas are floated, and depending upon the reaction fine tuned. If the idea of such a council finds acceptance, surely it can, over time be institutionalized through a statute as well. Moreover, don’t we all know that even as things stand, it is the Government that calls the shots in the appointment of regulators, some of who, in any case, are looking for plums post retirement! Do we really expect them to exercise their “autonomy” against the decisions of the FM headed council ?

It’s really about Accountability v/s Autonomy. It’s about balancing these twin, objectives while pursuing growth in an increasingly complex financial system.

Should the role of the final arbiter in the financial system be institutionally assigned to the executive/political leadership ? The universally accepted wisdom that monitoring of financial systems should not be the domain of the executive/political leadership has sound basis. In democracies, political leadership – which has the compulsions of raising funds for elections -- is vulnerable to pressures from huge financial conglomerates.

In this context, speeches by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh – who headed RBI in the eighties – and Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee offer an insight into government’s thinking. Mukherjee, while reiterating the need to strengthen the central bank as an institution, said this ought to be done “with an appropriate balance of autonomy and accountability in the context of a modern democracy. Our aim is to move towards establishing a modern, financial and monetary system in India with appropriately strengthened and autonomous regulators and the central bank”.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh endorsed “caution in the pace of opening capital account”, a “constant feature of our policy”, as worth continuing with and rightly underscored the need to develop the banking and financial system to support higher rates of growth that the country is aiming it. No one can quarrel with that.

However, what is interesting is that Dr Singh also endorsed “experimentation”. He said: "I sometimes hear that our insulation has served us well and we should therefore avoid experimentation and further liberalisation in this (financial sector). This, I fear, would be a wrong lesson to learn from the crisis."

What then are the lessons learnt from the crises?

Well, “crisis-crisis” – a favourite and believe you, a serious game played out in think tanks taking a peep into the future – does not lead to action on non-existing crisis! Nor can such an exercise – useful though it is – provide “lessons” contrary to established facts! There is no rationale for “fundamental change” in

India

when the country’s built in institutional safety mechanisms have stood the test of global crisis. In fact, even elsewhere there is reversion back to the primacy of the central bank and insulating financial system from direct intervention by the executive.

The FM chaired FSDC ostensibly seeks to “strengthen”, “the mechanism” – presently there is the RBI chaired High Level Financial Co-Ordination Committee (HLCC) on financial markets comprising various regulators. Going by the details on FSDC available thus far in the public domain, it will clearly subsume the existing mechanism. The dangers of a political leadership taking on direct interventionist, supervisory powers are all too obvious.

There certainly is a case for monitoring huge financial conglomerates – activities of some of whom range from financial sector to many other diverse sectors. Such conglomerates – more powerful conglomerates will emerge -- escape the regulator’s eyes. There is need for monitoring. Sure. Just that handing this role to the executive is not the answer. In fact, on the contrary, it calls for further strengthening of the regulators.

Surely, in a democracy political leadership is accountable to the people but as surely it alone cannot be the sole equivalence of accountability. Ministers – have hardly ever been held “accountable” for the losses caused to the exchequer by their acts of indiscretion. Mature democracies need multiple layers of accountability. The notion being advanced – that elected political leadership should be the final arbiter in the hugely complex financial system – is in fact retrogressive.

Is the National Development Council a model worth looking at in the context of managing financial stability? Perhaps yes. The Financial Stability Council could be just be a council that gives counsel. No direct day to day “monitoring” the “monitors” or supervision of financial conglomerates.

The government proposes to shortly put out a position paper on FSDC in public domain. So, to come back to where we began. Would the magician transform the rabbit into something else? Or simply make it vanish into thin air?

(This was published in Sahara magazine in the first week of April, 2010)

Vignettes from the Kumbh

2010-01-05T21:40:00.000+05:30

The Kumbh is an experience. Shared by millions. As I discovered at the Mahakumbh in Prayagraj in 2001, it can be an intense experience.

Namaste
It was a bright afternoon. Sunshine gloriously gushed into our tent on the banks of Ganga. We were lazing around, exchanging notes on what the Kumbh Mela had meant for each of us. The conversation veered towards God. An ideal subject in the setting we were in.

There were three of us: Barret Standboulian, a Russian born Jew, who lived in the UK and was at the Kumbh as part of the Channel 4 team; Asra Nomani, a Muslim, was born in Mumbai, had grown up in the middle east and lived in America. She was reporting for the Wall Street Journal. I, aware of being a Hindu (though religious identities were subdued for all of us) wondered aloud: “Religions divide humanity. Why can’t there be a religion that gives primacy to human beings?”

“Namaste”, Asra interjected and joined her palms.
“What do you mean?” I asked.

“Well, it’s your religion that regards humans as God”. Seeing me perplexed, she held forth, “Don’t you know what the word Namaste means? It means I bow to the divine in you”.

Oh! I remember lapsing into silence for a long time, oblivious of the rest of the conversation. There was a time – aeons ago – when people of this subcontinent consciously invoked and evoked Godliness in one another. This gesture of greeting surely must have created an atmosphere of humility, respect, love and harmony. ‘Namaste’ is a philosophy by itself, a complete guide to wellness all around!

Indian Policemen are so well Behaved

Walking in the Kumbh mela one evening, we came across a five year old child crying as he had been separated from his parents. A policeman was consoling him, as lovingly as a father would. The policeman, noticed an old woman having problems crossing the road. Holding the child by with one hand, he walked to the woman to guide her to safety with the solicitous concern of a son towards his mother. “Man, your cops are angels compared to our Bobbies”, remarked Barret.

I found that remark most ironical. I recalled the friendly smiling face of a British police officer -- armed only with a small T shaped wooden contraption rather than pistols that our officers wielded – who gave me directions from Victoria Railway station on my first visit to London. I remember telling colleagues at the BBC that the British police was very civilised compared to our police back in

India

However, Barret was right. There was something about the energy of the Kumbh – the calmness, the serenity, the humility – that Indian police acquired angel like qualities. Violence is very relative. On a major bathing day, when crowds were jostling for every square inch of the space, mounted police waved their batons in the air to clear the way for a caravan of Sadhus. Not a soul was touched. And yet, the gesture of cops waving a baton in the air seemed violent. Such were the vibes that one soaked at the kumbh.

Footnote

Back in Delhi, as I related my experiences at the Kumbh to a group of friends I became the butt of jokes. “He says Cops at the Kumbh are civilised!” I was chided at at a gathering a friends that included an IPS officer. “O.P” – as we called him – had a done a stint as Superintendent of Police at Allahabad. He said: “We conduct special training for policemen in crowd management. Besides, the serenity that pervades the Kumbh has a profound impact on the psyche of the police!”

... From Friend to Sage

2010-01-02T20:53:00.000+05:30

After an amazing fluke meeting our correspondent Raman Nanda recounts the personal story of a Sadhu...

As we sat talking to a group of Sadhus, I was acutely aware of this awesome looking one -- tall, white robes, beard touching his knees and wild Naga-like matted hair. He called me by my name. I turned to him in wonder and amusement. “God! One of those Sadhus, who are supposed to be divine and all!”

We were soon hugging each other. Meet Acharya Devendra Chaitanya, a former Delhi based journalist friend, who has taken to the life of a Sadhu. He now answers to the name his Guru has given him. Wandering in the foothills of Himalayas and other parts of India, long hours of meditation , study of Hindu scriptures, very little by way of income and celibacy has been his life for over a decade. “You seem happier as a Sadhu than as a journalist”, I remark as we settle down in his personal tent at the Agni Akhara, the Sadhu sect of which he is a member. The floor is covered with straw. A blanket placed in the middle is his bed. Next to the pillow are his possessions - a small mirror that can be held in the palm, a comb, toothpaste, a stainless steel glass and a small handbag.
It did not take long to figure out how Sadhus like him have their basic needs attended to. We had had a reasonably good food served by volunteer devotees at the Akhara. One of them (who had come all the way from Assam, about 1,500 km away) went out and bought us tea from a roadside stall.

“I was very dissatisfied as a journalist and felt that I needed to do something worthwhile”, he said. His journey towards being a Sadhu began with a journalistic assignment: editing the biography of another Sadhu. The project triggered his interest in the Sadhus enough to become one himself. He is based in a Ashram near Gangotri, the source of the river Ganges in the Himalayas. His day normally begins at three am. After his meditation and wash, he bathes the deities and is absorbed in prayers till noon. He has the afternoons free to read, meet up with devotees or visit people. He retires a little after sunset. Chaitanya also talks about what is happening in the media. “So, any thoughts about coming back?” I ask him. His answer startles me: “ Yes, I may team up with some people to launch a television programme or a channel...may be a website”. So, how will he reconcile the life of a Sadhu with that of a man of the world? Does he want to come back to the world he left earlier?

His initiation into the Agni Akhara sect, he explained, embraced asceticism and a spiritual way of life. He wears white robes. Which, as he explained, means that he can return to the material world. He says Sadhus accept that change is the essence of life. He saw nothing wrong in using television as a medium to propagate religion and spirituality.

Taking advantage of the relaxed pace of conversation, I asked him whether he felt drawn to women, and if, many years down that road, he had achieved much by way of spiritual upliftment. And realise I had irritated him by such a line of questioning. He continues to be polite, but more Sadhu-like. “Raman, why do you talk to a Sadhu? Are you looking for some knowledge? Or do you wish to gossip? Gossiping with a Sadhu is a waste of your time and his.” I was suitably rebuked.

I reckon for the time being, that’s about as far I as I can get to understanding what it means to be a Sadhu.

(Published on Channel 4's website on the Mahakumbh Mela in 2001)

Kumbh: Is it a transformative experience?

2009-12-27T18:02:00.000+05:30

Millions of people are making their way to the banks of Ganga in Haridwar for the Kumbh mela, often described as the largest gathering of humans on the planet for a shared objective. They will take dips in the river on auspicious dates beginning January 14, 2010 convinced that it will grant them salvation, ‘moksha’. My thoughts go back to the Mahakumbh 2001 in Allahabad where I finally ventured a dip in the dirty, freezing cold waters for – if not salvation – a transformative experience.

While living on the banks of Ganga and filing reports on the event, I was reluctant to take a dip. The water was dirty. People defecated along the banks of the river. The sight of turd was revolting. During strolls in the tent city that sprung up in the plains of Allahabad, one could see only two kinds of people. One stream of people – sullen faced, weak and with a tense defeated look could be seen headed towards the river. The other stream of people – contented, beaming, glowing faces – in a relaxed manner walking away from the river after a dip in the so very dirty waters! That perplexed us journalists.

I asked a pujari about the holy bath and how should one approach it? “Stand in the river and do ‘aachman’ – collect some water with joined palms and throw it back over your head as an offering to your ancestors. When you dip your head under the water, think about your loved ones. Do take a few dips in the name of friends and relatives who have not been able to make it to the Kumbh!”. Seemed simple.

So, on an auspicious bathing day on a freezing cold January morning, I joined the stream of innumerable human beings headed for the river. Wedged by humanity from all sides, I felt I was being carried to the river.

I managed to find standing space in the freezing cold flowing waters. I collected water in my palms and threw it back over my head. I thought of my mother who died many years ago. I remembered accompanying my father to Haridwar to immerse her ashes in Ganga. As I stood there shivering in the freezing cold water I also felt a surge of warmth in my heart as I recalled my mother’s smiling face. I took another dip, this time thinking about my grandfather. I recalled how as a child I used to snuggle in his bed to hear enthralling stories. His ashes too had been immersed in this very river thirty years ago. By now I was feeling the warmth of love from my ancestors, dead years ago, in the flowing water of Ganges. The water ceased to be cold or dirty.

My thoughts moved further back in time – from Grandfather to his ancestors, to their ancestors along a lineage that obviously stretched back infinitely. The awareness that I am just a speck – across history – was very real.

While underwater, I thought about loved ones: my father, wife, son, daughter, friends and my crush. My father, it dawned on me, will depart one day. I will bring his ashes to these very waters. I will depart. My son will bring my ashes here. My son - only a teenager – too will die. It came through so clearly that we all, after all, are just specks in the continuum of life. It was overwhelming to feel the warmth of love from ancestors across centuries and those near and dear, alive around me.

Every time I raised my head over water, I noticed thousands others taking dips. I felt even more dwarfed, even more of a speck. For, I was such an insignificant one among millions. I thought to myself: they too must be remembering their ancestors and loved ones. Are they also sensing that warmth of love from those who departed from their lives? I also felt a connect with thousands of people who were taking a dip at that time.

And, while feeling very much a part of a mass of humanity in a world of love, I felt small, but not vulnerable. I was comfortable with the thought that I, like my ancestors, will perish, as will all whom I love. It also dawned on me: how does it matter whether my endeavours in professional life succeed or fail? Life will go on, as it always has, with a vast flow of love that exists all around us, that has existed within us, for ages. I felt light, almost levitating.
(Forthcoming in the Times of India)

Indian Media: A moment of Introspection

2009-12-25T18:29:00.000+05:30

Indian journalism has a reason to be grateful to Outlook and its editor Vinod Mehta for the cover story on ‘Paid News’. That the sanctity of news was being violated - for years - was known to everyone in the profession. Most journalists felt violated in the very core of their being. They mourned about it. Endlessly. Yet this did not become a story. For, any number of newspapers, magazines and TV channels were in the game. Even the ones that were above board were eyeing the new “revenue stream”.

The debate sparked off by the Outlook may well be the proverbial storm in a tea cup. The sceptics may well view the expression of “shock” and “concern” by the Editors of Guild of India – whose members obviously should be aware of the practice of paid news – as public posturing. The ‘Ethics Committee’ set up by the Editors Guild of India comprises members whose integrity as media professionals is unimpeachable. One is also aware of the limitations of the guild itself. It can only make recommendations to the editors. The editors themselves – even if they want to implement the recommendations of the guild – do not have a decisive say in the management of media entities.

Despite reasons for scepticism, there is also a reason to rejoice. For, saner voices still exist. And, such voices may gather momentum. Or so one hopes.

Relationships, love and freedom!

2009-12-25T14:02:00.000+05:30

Relationships affect us all. They make life meaningful, they help us soar, they also bring us down in pain and anguish. As Sauma Varughese writes in 'Life Positive', " None of us are free because we are all pulled and pushed by the relationships in our lives. They determine our moods, motives and actions. How then are we to be free of these factors and sail into relationships that are loving and beautiful, but not coercive? How can we relate to people in freedom?... " Read on.

Forgive. For your own sake!

2009-12-24T14:31:00.000+05:30

Forgive, not as a charity to the one who harmed you. Forgive, for your own sake!! "Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned." So said Lord Budha, as quoted in a marvellous discussion initiated by Daniel Woo.
Of late, I am full of angst - bordering on hatred - against somebody. Find myself so obsessed with this that I am unable to do much else. I came across this discussion on forgiveness on LinkedIn which I found very helpful. Here’s Daniel Woo’s writing, titled, ‘ An Aspect of Forgiveness Related about HH The Dalai Lama’.

“ Earlier today my friend Tom called me. Tom and I share a liking for kirtan music, meditation and certain mystery authors.

More than six years ago, we were introduced to a woman who had just returned to Seattle from India after volunteering with Mother Theresa’s organization. Later while in Dharamsala, she had an interview with The Dalai Lama.

This is part of what she told us:

“I asked The Dalai Lama about forgiveness. I asked him what was I to do with someone who had truly abused me. The Dalai Lama moved his face inches from mine, squinted his eyes and in spacious silence, looked into my heart. After the passage of some indeterminate time, The Dalai Lama said that I must turn to my abuser and say ‘I forgive you’ and then turn around and run away as fast as I could.”

Forgiveness is not an invitation to be abused or to continue to be abused or to condone harming actions. Forgiveness is ultimately one of the steps to freedom and to live presently not snarled by the past. It is an opening of the heart and movement into the Heart.

As a very young deputy prosecuting attorney decades ago in King County, Washington, I handled cases involving horrendous crimes committed by adults or by juveniles. In the juvenile system, we also get reports on the family history and conditions of those charged. It was not hard to see the links in sexual or other violent abuse against juveniles and the charges against the juveniles for their own crimes.

Forgiveness is not the same as the accountability of the transgressor for his/her own actions and the fruits of such action. Often the two are confused.

Some Mohandas K. Gandhi quotes are relevant:

“I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. When I despair, I remember that all through history the ways of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants, and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall. Think of it – always. You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty. Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong. You must be the change you want to see in the world.”

Nelson Mandela worked for reconciliation to end the cycles of violence. I his Address to the People of Cape Town on the Occasion of his Inauguration as State President [Grand Parade, Cape Town (May 9, 1994)], Mandela said:

“We place our vision of a new constitutional order for South Africa on the table not as conquerors, prescribing to the conquered. We speak as fellow citizens to heal the wounds of the past with the intent of constructing a new order based on justice for all.”
(http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/truth/inauguration.shtml)

The Navajo approach justice as “peacemaking”:

“In 1982, the judges of the courts of the Navajo Nation consciously revived and institutionalized the traditional Navajo justice system, hozhooji naat'aanii (Bluehouse & Zion, 1993; Zion, 1985). It is called "peacemaking" in English. Peacemaking is an indigenous Native American form of dispute resolution and a leading example of restorative justice. Restorative justice, unlike adjudication and the prevailing patterns of world criminal justice systems, views crime and offending as a conflict between individuals that results in injuries to victims, with a process that seeks to reconcile parties and repair the injury caused by a dispute through the active participation of victims, offenders, and communities to find solutions to conflict (Hudson & Galaway, 1996).”
(http://www.iirp.org/library/nacc/nacc_zio.html)

Hatred is literally deadly for the person holding onto hatred. Medical, psychological, neuroscience and clinical research and literature describe this fact. Two excellent books that include such information are “Emotional Awareness – A Conversation between The Dalai Lama and Paul Eckman, Ph.D.” (2008) and “Deadly Emotions – Understand the Mind-Body-Spirit Connection that Can Heal or Destroy You,” by Dr. Don Colbert (2003).

Here are some excerpts from the Mayo Clinic about forgiveness (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/forgiveness/MH00131)

“Generally, forgiveness is a decision to let go of resentment and thoughts of revenge. The act that hurt or offended you may always remain a part of your life, but forgiveness can lessen its grip on you and help you focus on other, positive parts of your life. Forgiveness can even lead to feelings of understanding, empathy and compassion for the one who hurt you.

Forgiveness doesn't mean that you deny the other person's responsibility for hurting you, and it doesn't minimize or justify the wrong. You can forgive the person without excusing the act. Forgiveness brings a kind of peace that helps you go on with life. Forgiveness can lead to:

Healthier relationships
Greater spiritual and psychological well-being
Less stress and hostility
Lower blood pressure
Fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety and chronic pain
Lower risk of alcohol and substance abuse.”

Almost 2600 years ago, the Buddha said:

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned."

Miserable? Watch this!

2009-12-24T01:10:00.000+05:30

It's up to us to feel better about what we have, or feel bitter about what we don't have. Watch this on You Tube. Cheers!

Media and Spirituality

2009-12-15T13:45:00.000+05:30

Why is it that the mainstream media in India looks down upon spirituality? Exploration of such themes is either a categorical, “Oh No”, or, at best, is relegated to an occasional weekly column. Worse still, a lot of TV channels – at least in India – have been focussing on religious/ritualistic themes superficially with an eye on viewership ratings. While doing so, the channels focus on the quaint and the exotic. They rarely look at the deeper import of such practices.

The reality is that vast multitudes are practitioners of religion and spirituality (the two are not necessarily the same, though, for the religious, religion is one of the paths to spirituality). It does hold a lot of meaning for them. There is also no doubt that the mainstream media does not reflect this reality, does not even explore it! How come?

My intuitive understanding of “journalistic attitude” to spirituality is that most of us who are in this profession have had “modern education” and, in our formative years, cultivated a “scientific temperament”. Also, in a world scarred by all too obvious inequality and injustice, the notion of a just, benevolent, fair playing God held little appeal. Which, in turn, made us distrustful of religion, God and spirituality? Which, in turn, led to a condescending attitude to ordinary Indians who believed in God and religion? Throw in a dose of “liberal”, western influences – wherein idol worship by the religious Hindus is seen as “irrational” – and you get a modern mindset that abhors exploration of religion in mainstream media. Of course, while there is a general disinclination to themes religious and spiritual, there is a condescending tolerance of minority religions. For, it fits in well with our notion of “secularism”.

While having been a mainstream journalist for many years, I have, of late, been wondering if there are others in the profession too who think that the media has erred in shying away from religion and spirituality? Have we explored with an open mind if and whether those who do the ‘snan’ (holy bath) in the ostensibly – objectively speaking – dirty waters of Ganges feel “purified”? Isn’t the oft repeated saying “mind over matter” relevant? And, if spirituality helps you evolve a more harmonious attitude to the world – and thereby alter ‘your reality’ for the better – doesn’t it deserve a more serious examination?

Would love to hear from you! Take care.