Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   
 
 
«« Back
The Brahminical stranglehold

The Brahminical stranglehold

Author: Swapan Dasgupta
Publication: Rediff on Net
Date: November 22, 2004

Maybe we have become too inured by predictable images of a dharna.  Maybe our measure of outrage has become unnecessarily conditioned by  explosive images of Falujah and Palestine. Or maybe the battering ram  of aggressive rationalism has pulverised our faith in institutions  that personify faith and tradition.

Whatever the reality, the sight of a glum-faced BJP top brass  trooping out of Rashtrapati Bhavan on Friday night and sitting  impassively on a dais in Patel Chowk on Saturday failed to convey the  magnitude of the occasion. To the uninitiated, they could well have  been demanding the inclusion of Maithili into the 8th Schedule or  pressing for compensation to the victims of Bihar's rampaging gangs.

The issue is not the choreography of dignified protest in a made-in- media society. The real issue, to my mind, is the bewildering lack of  mass outrage to a cynical assault on one of India's premier Hindu  institutions.

Let us accept grim reality for whatever it is worth. The  Shankaracharya of Kanchi, a powerful symbol of the sanatan dharma,  was arrested on the night of Diwali and charged with murder. He was  produced in court the next day, dubbed an 'undeserving criminal' by  the public prosecutor and remanded in police custody. He was allowed  no special privileges and lodged in an ordinary jail. When he  returned to court three days later, he was mocked for his aversion to  rahukalam and for his unwillingness to sign documents.

As devotees recoiled in horror, police sources fed a hungry media  with 'evidence' of his mendacity. He was accused of facilitating cash  payments to supari killers, of being in telephonic contact with goons  and even of plotting an escape by helicopter to Nepal. The Junior  Shankaracharya was said to have demanded a CBI probe and, with hints  of a monastic coup, it was said that his brother had turned approver.

It now transpires that very little of these grave charges can be  substantiated. In fact, the police have not even submitted their  preliminary evidence to court. You would have imagined that the  authorities would have proceeded against a person as revered as the  Shankaracharya on the strength of watertight evidence. But no, they  arrested him and humiliated him on the basis of suspicion.

The reasons lie in the vagaries of Dravidian politics, particularly  the competitive inclination to invoke anti-Brahmin sentiment. Let us  not forget that the DMK had threatened an agitation against the state  government if it did not proceed against the Kanchi seer.

Karunanidhi was, in effect, daring the Brahmin Jayalalithaa to take  action against the Brahmin Shankaracharya. For him, this was just  another handle to beat Jayalalithaa with. By ensuring the  Shankaracharya was booked, regardless of the evidence, Jayalalithaa  has at least ensured that Karunanidhi can no longer charge her of  having a Brahminical bias.

The question is: Why was the Shankaracharyua allowed to become a  political football between two Dravidian parties who are bound by an  ideological aversion to the Hindu faith? The anti-Hindus, in Tamil  Nadu at least, have proceeded on the assumption that there is no  worthwhile Hindu sentiment. A Hindu nation, divided along caste,  regional and denominational lines, it is believed, will stomach any  indignity. This is a belief that binds all the secularist parties.

Judging from the muted response to the arrest, the secularists may  well be right. There is disquiet that the Shankaracharya was treated  shabbily and there is pain that a premier Hindu institution has been  brought into disrepute. But equally, there is astonishing passivity.  The Shankaracharya of Puri may claim that the assault on his Kanchi  counterpart is a 'blow to the existence and ideology of Hindus,' but  the average Hindu still believes this is an overstatement. Hindus  have ceased to react as Hindus.

Yet, Hindus have not ceased to believe and conduct themselves as  Hindus in their private lives. It is just that they have gradually  abdicated the public space to secularists and organised minorities.  It is an abdication that has happened by default. The claimants to  the Hindu public space have erroneously focussed on the traditional  institutions of the faith. Unfortunately, these institutions, like  the Kanchi Math, have become identified with a narrow Brahminical  order.

This may be unfair to Sri Jayendra Saraswati who has consciously  taken the Kanchi Math out of the orbit of pure spiritualism and  involved it in social and philanthropic ventures. He created  philanthropic institutions, campaigned for Dalit rights, championed  the Ayodhya cause and resisted conversions. Yet, the public image of  Brahminical exclusivity has persisted.

In being wedded to orthodoxy, neither the present Shankaracharyas nor  their institutions have had the temperament to be defenders of the  faith. The Maths and their groupies have come across as socially  aloof, insufferably arrogant and casteist. Their Hinduism has not  been inclusive. This explains why there was no spontaneous explosion  of fury at the arrest of the Shankaracharya.

The popular energies of Hinduism have traditionally vested in the  little traditions, epitomised by the many stand-alone Maths, the  numerous gurus and the many living Gods. It is these sects, headed by  the charismatic individuals who we see on the likes of Astha channel  and God TV, who are keeping popular Hinduism alive. Their Hinduism is  vibrant, inclusive and imbued with some social vision. To be  effective, Hindu politics has to connect with this evangelical Hindu  energy.

This should have been obvious to every BJP leader who was present at  last Saturday's dharna in Delhi. Throughout the morning and  afternoon, there were barely 1,500 people at the venue. The mood  changed with the arrival of the charismatic preacher Asaram Bapu. On  hearing on television that he was at the venue, there was a rush of  his devotees to the dharna. The crowds swelled considerably and the  BJP leaders requested him to return the next day too.

The Ayodhya movement was one of the few moments when Hindu  nationalism and Hindu religious energy converged. The convergence  also happened because of the broadening of the social bases of Hindu  nationalism to incorporate the backward castes, Dalits and adivasis.

Today, after six years of seeking respectability from the India's  secularised elites, the BJP appears to have glossed over the social  constituency that made its great leap forward possible. Just consider  this small but crucial detail: of the seven-member BJP delegation  that went to meet the President last Friday, five were Brahmins. The  tragedy is that this imbalance didn't even strike the leadership.

Unless Hindu politics can break out of this Brahminical stranglehold,  the cynical assault on Hindu institutions cannot be checked.
 


Back                          Top

«« Back
 
 
 
  Search Articles
 
  Special Annoucements