Lord, Why Am I Banned from your Abode?

[email protected] (Ram Puniyani)
February 17, 2016

One is witnessing strange incidents where the women from Muslim and Hindu community are facing similar obstacles. This relates to the issue of entry into places of worship. While the women from Bhumata Brigade are struggling to get entry into Shani Shingnapur temple (Ahmadnagar Mahrashtra), the Muslim women are fighting a legal battle to restore their access to mazar of Haji Ali dargah in Mumbai. In yet another incident the women are trying to get the right of worship in Sabrimala temple. The Hindu women in an act of brave initiative landed up in many buses to the Shani Shingnapur temple, where they were denied the entry while police had to resort to some force to prevent their entry.

haji ali dargahIn case of Shani Shingnapur while men are allowed to the Chabutara (raised platform) it is believed that going to the Chabutara will be of bad omen for women as Lord Shani (Saturn) will cast an evil eye. So it is claimed that prohibiting women to enter is a matter of spiritual science. Sanatan Prabhat, the rightwing daily says that the movement of women must be prevented to save the Hindu traditions. In response to the agitation led by Trupti Deasai of Bhumata Brigade the spiritual Guru Sri Sri Ravishankar of Art of Living tried to mediate between the women’s group and the temple trustees. Interestingly he advised that neither women nor men should be allowed to the Chabutara. The matter is being negotiated; solution does not to be near the sight. Also the RSS mouth piece Organiser opines that while initiating any move to amend the existing regulations care should be taken to preserve tradition and prestige of these places.

In case of Sabrimala shrine, the argument is that Lord is a celibate and the women in menstrual age group will be distracting him. One recalls that one IAS officer, who happened to be a woman had visited the shrine for overseeing the arrangements in readiness for the pilgrimage in her official capacity. She was also denied entrance on the ground of her being a woman. In case of Haji Ali in Mumbai the local women’s group Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan has filed a writ in the court demanding the entry of women to the mazar be restored. The women’s groups have cited different clauses of the Constitution where one have equality before the law and that one cannot be discriminated against on the grounds of gender. The argument of Dargah trustees is on the ground of security of women, which to say the least is ridiculous. In case of Sabrimala the earlier argument that the path to the shrine is difficult for women on the grounds of security was later was clarified by the Devswom Board Travancore by stating the ‘real’ reason for denying entry to women is celibacy of Lord Ayappa.

Muslim women have a varying degree of access to the mosques, much lesser in South Asian Countries than in countries like Turkey for example. In Hindu temples the entry is again not uniform; there are different pretexts to prevent their full access to the places of worship. While in many countries the law for equality is very much there, the traditions and the controllers of these places have been preventing the women from having full access to the holy deity. The patriarchal control over access top places of worship is there in various degrees.

This does not apply to Churches in general, where access is not the issue, what is talked there is as to why women do not have the right to be on the higher levels of priest hood. In Hindu temples, Muslim mosques and shrines the women priests are practically not there, some claims of such positions will be more as an exception than as a rule or norm.

In case of India where the equality is guaranteed by law, these laws of equality don’t have entry into the places controlled by the conservative trusts. The controllers of institutions of religion are generally exclusively male bastion, the degree of control and its expression is varying though. In Hindu fold there is an additional factor is that is that of caste. One understands there is ‘caste in the practice’ of Muslims and Christians also, but so far as the places of worship are concerned they are accessible to all, irrespective of caste. One recalls the struggles of Babasaheb Ambedkar for temple entry, the Kalaram Temple agitation, before he decided to renounce Hinduism calling it as being Brahminic theology. As such most religions do have the hierarchical structure in-built into the institution of religion.

Talking of South Asia as a whole the Mosques, Dargahs and temples have lot of rigid rules as far as women are concerned. These are the norms which are imposed by traditions. Thus we see a bit of variation in different religions, different religions as far as treating women is concerned. As such it the differential treatment and this depends on the degree of secularization of the particular institution and particular country and region. By secularization we mean the extent of erosion of hold of landlord-clergy combine on the society. No uniform pattern is discernible but at the core there is the understanding which regards women as inferior beings, secondary to the men, being regarded as property of men so to say.

Earlier it was regarded that their secondary position is purely due to biological functions, with time and with the impact of women’s movement, it is clear that the gender roles are psychological and social, determined by time and location. In early matriarchal societies women had a predominant role in the family and social affairs. With the rise of slave society and later the feudal society, women’s subservient role came to be the norm. Again with Industrial revolution and the values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity gaining political ground, women started entering into social space and the social equations started changing towards those of equality. As degree of secularization is different the degree of success of women towards equality is different. The nations which saw Industrial revolutions, the path to women’s equality were paved by the underlining slogan of revolutions or social transformations. Still the equality of women has not been automatic, there is a path of struggle through which women expressed their aspiration; longings and struggled for new equations towards equality.

The movement for gender equality again has highs and lows; ups and downs. Currently one understands that the politics in the name of any religion, fundamentalism-communalism, is a politics of status quo to begin with and then it aims to throw back the society to the earlier feudal values of caste and gender hierarchy. Talking of recent times world witnessed this first in the form of rise of Christian fundamentalism in America in the decade of 1920, in the face of the rise of industrial society with modern education and industrialization coming to the fore. In the societies which had to undergo the painful experience of Fascism, Nazism, there also the role of women were defined to be in the confines of ‘Kitchen Church and Children’ by the political ideology, which can be regarded as the close cousin of religious nationalism. With coming of Islamic fundamentalism again the attempt was made to further subjugate the women to lower positions in society. The cover of Islam was used for this social-political agenda. Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan are few examples of that.

Here in India we saw the rise of majoritarian and minoritarian communalism. Both these again try to push back the women, to restrict their social space, all in the name of religion. With the rise of religious nationalism in India, various issues came up which gave a glimpse of the attitude towards women. Many of these are not the fully blown up pictures, but they have in root the goal of subjugation of women, in the language of Sharia or a sophisticated version of Manu Smriti. In India while the secularization process; the overthrow of the hold of landlord-clergy combine; remained half way through. With the assertion of religious nationalism primarily Hindutva, the striving of women for equality is being countered strongly.

In the ideology of dominating Hindutva the subordination and secondary position of women is asserted by invoking the noble traditions. In literature from Gita Press Gorakhpur, the major publication promoting traditional conservative values amongst Hindus which is generally the base of Hindutva politics, one can see millions of books being distributed which advise the home making role, the ideal of Sati (women being burnt on the funeral pyre of their husband), the stree dharma(duties of women as ordained by their religion) are propounded. Instructions to women about dress code and choice of life partner are handed down. One of the major agenda of the divisive love jihad campaign is to restrain the Hindu girls, to do away with their choice in matters of life and choice of life partner.

Overall the role of religious institutions has been to maintain the social status quo, And the issues related to priesthood in holy places, the entry to these shrines do reflect the same in varying degrees. It seems that despite the obstacles, the women from different religious communities are making their statement loud and clear that their march towards equality cannot be halted by these institutions, and that’s is the portent of these moves for entry to the abodes of the Lord!

Comments

shaji
 - 
Tuesday, 23 Feb 2016

I could not understand why few Muslim women who are tryng to be moderate are so eager to visit tombs and Masjids whereas it is not preffered as per the religion. For a woman, her home is more sacred than Masjid. Woman is given facility by the Creator and they are not willing to take it and wish to show their beauty on the road. Few woman are trying to mislead the others. May i ask such women if they would like a man also to deliver baby. Why are these women wasting their time and trying to be more religious in public. they have to be practical first.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
August 9,2020

Contrary to present impression that Muslims are separatists due to whom the partition of India took place, the truth is that Muslims contributed to freedom movement and upheld India’s composite culture in equal measure. The partition process, mainly due to British policy of ‘divide and rule’ well assisted by Hindu and Muslim communalists is being hidden from the popular vision in India and Muslims in general are held responsible for the same. Not only that the communal historiography introduced by British to pursue their policies has become the bedrock of communal politics and worsening of the perceptions about Muslims is in progress in India.

Yet another example of this has been a series of tweets by the bureaucrat, who is close to retirement, K. Nageshwar Rao. Contrary to the service rules he has made statements, through his tweets which are appreciative of RSS-BJP and demonise the stalwarts Muslim leaders who not only contributed to the freedom movement but also later gave valuable service in laying the foundation of Independent India. As per Rao, his tweets he accuses Maulana Azad and the other Muslim Education ministers of “deracination of Hindus”. After naming “Maulana Abul Kalam Azad — 11 years (1947-58)”; “Humayun Kabir, M C Chagla & Fakruddin Ali Ahmed — 4 years (1963-67)”; and, “Nurul Hassan — 5 years (1972-77)”, he posts: “Remaining 10 years other Leftists like VKRV Rao.”

He points out that their policies were meant to “1. Deny Hindus their knowledge, 2. Vilify Hinduism as collection of superstitions, 3. Abrahamise Education, 4. Abrahamise Media & Entertainment, 5. Shame Hindus about their identity!  and 6. Bereft of the glue of Hinduism Hindu society dies.”

Then he goes on to praise RSS-BJP for bringing the glory back to Hindus. These statements of his on one hand promote the Hate and on the other tantamount to political statement, which civil servants should not by making. CPM politburo member Brinda Karat has written a letter to Home Minister Amit Shah to take suitable action against the erring bureaucrat.

Rao begins with Maulana Abul kalam Azad. Surely Azad was one of the major leaders of freedom movement, who was also the youngest President of INC, in 1923 and later between 1940 to 1945. He opposed the partition process tooth and nail till the very last. As the Congress President in 1923 he wrote a remarkable Para, symbolizing the urge for Hindu Muslim unity, “If an angel descends from heaven and offers me Swaraj in 24 hours on condition that I give up Hindu Muslim Unity, I will refuse. Swaraj we will get sooner or later; its delay will be a loss for India, but loss of Hindu Muslim unity will be a loss for human kind”. His biographer Syeda Hamid points out “He spoke without an iota of doubt about how debacle of Indian Muslims has been the result of the colossal mistakes committed by Muslim League’s misguided leadership. He exhorted Muslims to make common cause with their Hindu, Sikh, Christian fellow countrymen.” He was the one who promoted the translation of Hindu scriptures Ramayan and Mahabharat in to Persian.

Surely Mr. Rao, neither has read Azad or read about him nor knows his contributions to making of Modern India. While today, the ideological formation to which Mr. Rao seems to be pledging his commitment is critical of all that happened during Nehru era, it was during this period when as education minister Azad was shepherding the formations of IITs, Academies of Science, Lalit kala Academies. It was during this period that the efforts to promote Indian composite culture were undertaken through various steps.

The other stalwarts who are under the hammer have been outstanding scholars and giants in their own field of education. Humayun Kabir, Nurul Hasan, Dr.Zakir Husssain gave matchless ideas and practical contributions in different fields of education. One can say that contrary to the accusations, India could match up to the Computer era, software and associate things, due to creation of large manpower in these areas mainly due to these foundations which were laid down particularly in the field of education during this period.

The charge that these ‘Muslim’ education ministers white washed the bloody Islamic rule is a blind repetition of the offshoot of communal historiography introduced by British. While Kings were ruling for power and wealth, their courts had Hindus and Muslim both officers. The jaundiced vision sees this as a bloody Islamic rule but as a matter of fact the syncretic culture and traditions developed precisely this period. It was during this period that Bhakti Traidtion with Kabir, Tukaram, Namdeo, Tulsidas flourished. It was during this period that humane values of Sufi saints reached far and wide. It was during this period that poets like Rahim and Raskhan produced their classic literature n praise of Hindu Gods.

We also need to remind ourselves that large number of Muslims participated in the freedom Movement. Two scholars Shamsul Islam and Nasir Ahmad have come out with books on the myriad such freedom fighters, to recall just a few names. Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Zakir Hussain, Syed Mohammad Sharfuddin Kadri, Bakht Khan, Muzzafar Ahmad, Mohammad Abdir Rahman,, Abbas Ali, Asaf Ali, Yusuf Mehrali, Maulana Mazahrul Hague.

These are just a few of the names. The movement, led by Gandhi, definitely laid the foundations where composite Indian culture and respect for all religions, others’ religion was paramount and this is what created Indian fraternity, one of the values which finds its place in the preamble of Indian Constitution.

This blaming of Education ministers who were Muslims is an add-on to the process of Islamophobia in India. So for there have been many actions of Muslim kings which are selectively presented as being bloody, now the post Independent History, where glorious contributions have been made by Muslim leaders are being used to further deepen the divisive process. We need to pay respects to builders of modern India, irrespective of their religion.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
June 29,2020

In Minneapolis, US an African American, George Floyd lost his life as the white policeman, Derek Chauvin, caught hold of him and put his knee on his neck. This is a technique developed by Israel police. For nine long minutes the knee of the while policeman was on the neck of George, who kept shouting, I can’t breathe.

Following this gruesome murder America erupted with protests, ‘Black lives matter’. The protestors were not just African Americans but also a large section of whites. Within US one police Chief apologized for the act of this. In a touching gesture of apology the police force came on its knees. This had reverberations in different parts of the World.

The act was the outcome of the remnants of the racial hatred against blacks by the whites. It is the hatred and the perceptions which are the roots of such acts of violence. What was also touching that the state of democracy in US is so deep that even the police apologized, the nation, whites and blacks, stood up as a sensitive collective against this violence.

US is not the only country where the brutal acts of violence torment the marginalized sections of society. In India there is a list of dalits, minorities and adivasis who are regularly subjected to such acts. But the reaction is very different. We have witnessed the case of Tabrez Ansari, who was tied to the pole by the mob and beaten ruthlessly. When he was taken to police station, police took enough time to take him to hospital and Tabrez died.

Mohsin Sheikh, a Pune techie was murdered by Hindu Rashtra Sena mob, the day Modi came to power in 2014. Afrazul was killed by Shambhulal Regar, videotaped the act released on social media. Regar believed that Muslims are indulging in love Jihad, so deserve such a fate. Mohammad Akhlaq is one among many names who were mob lynched on the issue of beef cow. The list can fill pages after pages.

Recently a young dalit boy was shot dead for the crime of entering a temple. In Una four dalits were stripped above waste and beaten mercilessly. Commenting on this act the Union Minister Ramvilas Paswan commented that it is a minor incident. Again the list of atrocities against dalits is long enough. The question is what Paswan is saying is the typical response to such gruesome murders and tortures. In US loss of one black life, created the democratic and humane response. In India there is a general silence in response to these atrocities. Some times after a good lapse of time, the Prime Minister will utter, ‘Mother Bharati has lost a son’. Most of the time victim is blamed. Some social groups raise their voice in some fora but by and large the deafening silence from the country is the norm.

India is regarded as the largest democracy. Democracy is the rule of law, and the ground on which the injustices are opposed. In America though the present President is insensitive person, but its institutions and processes of democratic articulations are strong. The institutions have deepened their roots and though prejudices may be guiding the actions of some of the officers like the killer of George, there are also police officers who can tell their President to shut up if he has nothing meaningful to say on the issue. The prejudices against Blacks may be prevalent and deep in character, still there are large average sections of society, who on the principles of ‘Black lives matter’. There are large sections of vocal population who can protest the violation of basic norms of democracy and humanism.

In India by contrast there are multiple reasons as to why the lives of Tabrez Ansari, Mohammad Akhlaq, Una dalit victims and their likes don’t matter. Though we claim that we are a democracy, insensitivity to injustices is on the rise. The strong propaganda against the people from margins has become so vicious during last few decades that any violence against them has become sort of a new normal. The large populace, though disturbed by such brutalities, is also fed the strong dose of biases against the victims. The communal forces have a great command over effective section of media and large section of social media, which generates Hate against these disadvantaged groups, thereby the response is muted, if at all.

As such also the process of deepening of our democracy has been weak. Democracy is a dynamic process; it’s not a fixed entity. Decades ago workers and dalits could protest for their rights. Now even if peasants make strong protests, dominant media presents it as blocking of traffic! How the roots of democracy are eroded and are visible in the form where the criticism of the ruling dispensation is labelled as anti National..

Our institutions have been eroded over a period of time, and these institutions coming to the rescue of the marginalized sections have been now become unthinkable. The outreach of communal, divisive ideology, the ideology which looks down on minorities, dalits and Adivasis has risen by leaps and bounds.

The democracy in India is gradually being turned in to a hollow shell, the rule of law being converted in to rule of an ideology, which does not have faith in Indian Constitution, which looks down upon pluralism and diversity of this country, which is more concerned for the privileges of the upper caste, rich and affluent. The crux of the matter is the weak nature of democracy, which was on way to become strong, but from decades of 1980s, as emotive issues took over, the strength of democracy started dwindling, and that’s when the murders of the types of George Floyd, become passé. One does complement the deeper roots of American democracy and its ability to protect the democratic institutions, which is not the case in India, where protests of the type, which were witnessed after George Floyd’s murder may be unthinkable, at least in the present times. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
February 10,2020

Noam Chomsky is one of the leading peace workers in the world. In the wake of America’s attack on Vietnam, he brought out his classic formulation, ‘manufacturing consent’. The phrase explains the state manipulating public opinion to have the public approve of it policies—in this case, the attack of the American state on Vietnam, which was then struggling to free itself from French colonial rule.

In India, we are witness to manufactured hate against religious minorities. This hatred serves to enhance polarisation in society, which undermines India’s democracy and Constitution and promotes support for a Hindu nation. Hate is being manufactured through multiple mechanisms. For example, it manifests in violence against religious minorities. Some recent ghastly expressions of this manufactured hate was the massive communal violence witnessed in Mumbai (1992-93), Gujarat (2002), Kandhamal (2008) and Muzaffarnagar (2013). Its other manifestation was in the form of lynching of those accused of having killed a cow or consumed beef. A parallel phenomenon is the brutal flogging, often to death, of Dalits who deal with animal carcasses or leather.

Yet another form of this was seen when Shambhulal Regar, indoctrinated by the propaganda of Hindu nationalists, burned alive Afrazul Khan and shot the video of the heinous act. For his brutality, he was praised by many. Regar was incited into the act by the propaganda around love jihad. Lately, we have the same phenomenon of manufactured hate taking on even more dastardly proportions as youth related to Hindu nationalist organisations have been caught using pistols, while police authorities look on.

Anurag Thakur, a BJP minster in the central government recently incited a crowd in Delhi to complete his chant of what should happen to ‘traitors of the country...” with a “they should be shot”. Just two days later, a youth brought a pistol to the site of a protest at Jamia Millia Islamia university and shouted “take Azaadi!” and fired it. One bullet hit a student of Jamia. This happened on 30 January, the day Nathuram Godse had shot Mahatma Gandhi in 1948. A few days later, another youth fired near the site of protests against the CAA and NRC at Shaheen Bagh. Soon after, he said that in India, “only Hindus will rule”.

What is very obvious is that the shootings by those associated with Hindu nationalist organisations are the culmination of a long campaign of spreading hate against religious minorities in India in general and against Muslims in particular. The present phase is the outcome of a long and sustained hate campaign, the beginning of which lies in nationalism in the name of religion; Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism. This sectarian nationalism picked up the communal view of history and the communal historiography which the British introduced in order to pursue their ‘divide and rule’ policy.

In India what became part of “social common sense” was that Muslim kings had destroyed Hindu temples, that Islam was spread by force, and that it is a foreign religion, and so on. Campaigns, such as the one for a temple dedicated to the Hindu god Rama to be built at the site where the Babri masjid once stood, further deepened the idea of a Muslim as a “temple-destroyer”. Aurangzeb, Tipu Sultan and other Muslim kings were tarnished as the ones who spread Islam by force in the subcontinent. The tragic Partition, which was primarily due to British policies, and was well-supported by communal streams also, was entirely attributed to Muslims. The Kashmir conflict, which is the outcome of regional, ethnic and other historical issues, coupled with the American policy of supporting Pakistan’s ambitions of regional hegemony, (which also fostered the birth of Al-Qaeda), was also attributed to the Muslims.

With recurring incidents of communal violence, these falsehoods went on going deeper into the social thinking. Violence itself led to ghettoisation of Muslims and further broke inter-community social bonds. On the one hand, a ghettoised community is cut off from others and on the other hand the victims come to be presented as culprits. The percolation of this hate through word-of-mouth propaganda, media and re-writing of school curricula, had a strong impact on social attitudes towards the minorities.

In the last couple of decades, the process of manufacturing hate has been intensified by the social media platforms which are being cleverly used by the communal forces. Swati Chaturvedi’s book, I Am a Troll: Inside the Secret World of the BJP’s Digital Army, tells us how the BJP used social media to spread hate. Whatapp University became the source of understanding for large sections of society and hate for the ‘Other’, went up by leaps and bounds. To add on to this process, the phenomenon of fake news was shrewdly deployed to intensify divisiveness.

Currently, the Shaheen Bagh movement is a big uniting force for the country; but it is being demonised as a gathering of ‘anti-nationals’. Another BJP leader has said that these protesters will indulge in crimes like rape. This has intensified the prevalent hate.

While there is a general dominance of hate, the likes of Shambhulal Regar and the Jamia shooter do get taken in by the incitement and act out the violence that is constantly hinted at. The deeper issue involved is the prevalence of hate, misconceptions and biases, which have become the part of social thinking.

These misconceptions are undoing the amity between different religious communities which was built during the freedom movement. They are undoing the fraternity which emerged with the process of India as a nation in the making. The processes which brought these communities together broadly drew from Gandhi, Bhagat Singh and Ambedkar. It is these values which need to be rooted again in the society. The communal forces have resorted to false propaganda against the minorities, and that needs to be undone with sincerity.

Combating those foundational misconceptions which create hatred is a massive task which needs to be taken up by the social organisations and political parties which have faith in the Indian Constitution and values of freedom movement. It needs to be done right away as a priority issue in with a focus on cultivating Indian fraternity yet again.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.