Mr Modi also knows whose life is more consequential and whose life is not worth too much, whose life contributes to the economy and whose not so much. Unlike leaders of the past, Modi is serious about eradicating poverty but to terminate poverty he first had to recognise the poor. Or more importantly, isolate the rich from the poor so his plans for them could be better targeted. Just like direct cash transfer and linking everything with Aadhaar, Vande Bharat trains were a step in the right direction. Rich now are driven to travel via these special trains on which the poor are not allowed. But he is smart, he didn't want to hurt their egos and lose their vote. So he did not openly say 'You are not allowed on these trains'; he simply priced their tickets such that they would never enter his Vande Bharats. And with it, his plan was in action. One by one trains started smashing into each other. There was technology to stop collisions - Kavach was present as Railway Minister Ashwini Vaishnav mentioned in his now-viral reel. But Vaishnav is aware of when to switch it off to save power and contribute to Modi's larger goal of population control. Kavach for Vande Bharat trains is not given in the minister's hands. It is controlled directly via Mr Modi's able hands. And that is why, except for a minor scratch to the shiny mouth of Vande Bharat, they have never had to face any blow. Efficiency is in his blood. There is nothing that he does that is short of greatness.

Leaders of the past came with their baggage of family and were at best emotional fools. None of them cared about the population explosion leaving briefly the tenure of Indira Gandhi but she was more direct and people saw through her population control measures. Modi has learnt from her mistakes. Mr Modi does not believe in trumpeting his plans or successes. Narendra Modi is a silent doer. He believes more in actions than words. And if you pay attention, you will see what all he has achieved which he rarely talks about. If you are mourning over 30 deaths, know that India's population is more than 1,458,412,491 as of now. Modi knows best, what needs to be done, when to talk to the press, when not to. Mr Modi sets his own agenda and talks on his own terms.

It's just that, we are not capable of seeing his designs. Rest assured, we are in great hands.

#NarendraModi #satire #kumbhMela #UttarPradesh #religion #trains #deaths

Ayodhya Temple As Of Today. Courtesy: Newslaundry.com

I was just on a call with my distant neighbour who after the regular round of questions asked me if I had received the Ram-Mandir-Rice (akshata). For those who haven’t and don’t know about what’s going on, people associated with BJP-RSS have been going door-to-door and distributing some posters related to the new temple in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh along with some colourful uncooked-unbroken-rice in tiny plastic pack (hardly 20 gram).

Akshata basically consists of uncooked un-broken pieces of rice which is mixed with turmeric. It is sometimes used to bless bride and groom during weddings. Akshata is also sprinkled during other auspicious ceremonies. When Akshata is offered to a deity, it is believed to be the finest offering that a devotee can make. Akshata is believed to be equal to offering clothes, jewelry, food, or any other offering. Akshata is usually thrown over the head of the devotees during pujas and during functions like marriage and other auspicious events. 

The akshata attract the subtle frequencies of five principal deity namely Shiv, Shakti, Shri Ram, Shri Krishna and Shri Ganesh. Akshata is the central point of puja plate. If the rice grains used for preparing Akshatas are broken then their capacity to attract the principles of higher deities is automatically reduced. When the akshtas are offered to a deity the energy of the deity is transferred in it and favourable vibrations are generated in akshatas.  — Hinduism StackExchange

There is a lot that’s wrong in the above description but since all this is a matter of faith, let’s go ahead with it. Or just ask any Hindu person around you what ‘Akshata’ is. If the above description is right then how come RSS-BJP members have akshata even before the inauguration of the temple?

Returning back to my phone call.

I answered in the affirmative. I was then told to add some more grains to this 20-gram ‘akshata’ and prepare some sweet dish out of this mixture and have it. I was also told to take two to three grains from the 20-gram packet and wrap them in a piece of paper after writing ‘Shri Ram’ thrice over it and to keep this paper in my cupboard/locker.

Where is all this coming from? Who tells them? And even if someone does, how come people believe in this nonsense?

I have seen so many religious celebrations in my life. Never once am I aware of ‘akshata’ being used as this. In fact, unlike what that description claims, ‘akshata’ from the floor is just swept away like any other dirt. Few do collect it separately. At my place, since we have a river in the vicinity, they throw this rice in the water the next morning. I don’t know what people in cities do.

***

Let’s talk about this new temple now, shall we?

The temple will be inaugurated on Jan 22, 2024. The temple is not complete yet. By most estimates it would take at least two more years for its completion. Why so much hurry then? There’s a general election this year. By all predictions, RSS-BJP is going to sweep that election. Temple inauguration and these foot soldiers going door-to-door is merely to ensure it.

There have been many instances of people close to RSS-BJP profiting from temple construction. For one such example, read this:

It’s a prime property of 890 sq meters, a piece of land where the grand Ram temple complex will soon come up. Until February this year, it belonged to a mahant, Devendra Prasadacharya. On February 20, one Deep Narayan bought the land — gata number 135 — from the mahant for Rs 20 lakh.

Narayan is the nephew of Rishikesh Upadhyaya, the Bharatiya Janata Party leader who is the mayor of Ayodhya. Land records accessed by Newslaundry show that three months later, on May 11, Narayan sold the property to the Ram Janmabhoomi Trust, set up by the Narendra Modi government to oversee the temple’s construction, for Rs 2.5 crore.   — Ayodhya: Whose Land Is It Anyway?

Forget questioning people in power over this loot, none in big media even bothered to report on this. I would be surprised if you wondered why.

I would not mention people, mostly poor, whose houses were demolished to make space for a grand home to lord Ram. By now I have completely understood how there is no value to a poor man’s life and livelihood. For instance, the government of Madhya Pradesh demolished the house of a Muslim person for spitting on a Hindu religious procession. He was jailed too. But in court it was found that no such incident had taken place. Police had made two people (police’s “witnesses” ) sign on blank papers. They denied seeing any such spitting incident in court. But did any of us ask what of that poor man’s demolished house now? No. Again, the media didn’t see it worth covering. It would puncture the popular narrative now, won’t it?

The domed structure was a 464-year-old mosque believed to have been constructed by or at the instruction of the Mughal emperor Babur. Babri Masjid, the lone structure of significance to Muslims in the area, stood surrounded by holy buildings built by Hindus later — Manas Bhawan, Sita Rasoi and Ram Katha Kunj Sagar. The mosque had existed for centuries and Muslims offered namaz there. Soon after independence, in December 1949, Hindus discreetly installed an idol of the deity Ram Lalla under the central dome, persisting with their claim that the plot on which Babri Masjid stood was the birthplace of the Hindu god Rama.

The conundrum had begun. Who should get the land title, Hindus or Muslims? The case travelled for years through the judicial labyrinth until finally, on November 9 this year, the Supreme Court gave away the title to Hindus.

It took the five judges who decided the case to travel back in time to 300 BC to explain why the land “probably” belonged to Hindus. The court categorically said towards the beginning of its 1,045-page judgement: “The court does not decide title on the basis of faith or belief but on the basis of evidence…The law must stand apart from political contestations over history, ideology and religion.’’ Yet, it ended up doing just that. It went on to rule that Hindus had a stronger claim to the title because of their belief.  — Ayodhya verdict: A conundrum of fact, fiction and faith

The idol of Ram was placed inside the mosque in 1949 — which VHP and Sangh claimed had miraculously appeared that night; but it is not this idol that the new temple will have. The Temple trust had arranged a fashion show of probable idols and chose one from the lot (Voting on Lord Ram Lalla’s idol today, temple trust to select best among three designs). Turns out, the new temple trust does not believe in miracles. Some scientific temperament there. Good for them.

Away from all this noise, I keep wondering, what if there was no mosque in Ayodhya, how would they then choose Ram’s place of birth? Before the British started spreading the rumour of the mosque being that place, so many temples to Ram in Ayodhya claimed that theirs was the spot at which their lord was born. In this context, it is a good time to rewind and remember how Hinduism as a religion was born under British rule as a reaction to Islam. What we today refer to as Hinduism was historically called or known as Brahmanvaad/Brahmanism/vedic-brahmanism etc. No one identified as Hindu before the British started holding provincial elections or census. How do you for instance digest the fact that the Vedas, the books that Hindus use to bolster their claim to state how old their religion is, does not mention Ram or for that matter any god that is worshiped today?

While temples are highly regarded today in Hinduism, our own old religious books disrespect them and write of them in poor light. Vishnu Smriti for instance “says that Vedic recitation should not be carried out ‘in a temple, in a cemetery, at a crossroads, or on a road.’ Placing a temple next to a cemetery is telling. Ritual specialists associated with temples were called devalaka. They were despised by the authors of Dharmashastras. The devalaka is listed among those who should not be invited to an ancestral offering (shraddha), Manu listing them between physicians and butchers.”

From my own limited reading, I have understood this much: Before Aryans migrated to what we today refer to as India, there were already people here. Harappans for one example. And they had their own beliefs and gods (don’t know how they viewed them and what they called them). For instance, Nataraja (who we today view as a form of Shiva) is imported from Harappans. Vedas were written by Aryans. These were the books that informed us about Brahman and their importance. Basically, those who wrote these books were Brahmans and they were superior in all kinds, had all rights and could not receive any punishment as per these books. They were, as per these books, mediators between god and people. Which god? The ones mentioned in the books they had written. They tried to enrol indigenous people into their religion but could not find great success. Another point to note here is how all these Vedic rituals involved large-scale offerings to gods which were impossible for common folk to undertake. All rituals required Brahman's help in invoking gods. These gods could not be prayed to on your own like we are familiar today. Side note: Vedas and early books mention meat eating including beef. In fact, brahmans themselves were extreme beef eaters. I’m not saying it, Ambedkar did. He wrote a detailed paper on this bit of history using Vedas and other scriptures. So in essence, it is not even Ambedkar saying Hindus were beef-eaters but Hindu books themselves. But then the question arises, why did we abandon beef-eating? The answer in all likelihood lies in Buddhism. There was a time when Buddhism and Jainism spread far and wide in India. People started enrolling in hordes. Many kingdoms in the north adopted Buddhism and in the south, they embraced Jainism. This left Brahmans staring at an existential crisis. Their whole thesis relied on them being superior to others in the caste pyramid but what would happen when no one remained under the bottom part of the pyramid? And so began the writing of Puranas and the invention of the very many gods. While some were invented from thin air, many were local gods prayed to by non-aryan locals who were given Vedic makeovers. And so gradually vedic gods whom local people refused to adopt were abandoned in favor of Puranic gods. It is these gods that we continue to pray today. People hated large rituals and yagnyaas where mass slaughter of animals used to take place and in reaction were flocking to Buddhism. To counter this, it seems Brahmans themselves abandoned eating beef. And went a step further by creating stories of bovine’s divinity. What was once the food of Brahman was now converted into a divine entity. It was a method employed to survive. And temples which were once decried bad were now embraced wholeheartedly because by now Buddhists had started to build large structures of their own.

This is the only explanation that answers why Hindus have so many gods, how two people who pray to two separate gods and who on varied occasions are even unaware of each other's gods could still claim to be part of a single religious entity.

This is also why caste is always defended in myriad ways since it is at the heart of the Hindu religion’s existence. Only for the sake of caste was this religion created or put more sordidly, to protect the superior position of Brahmans or upper caste over everyone else.

***

The four shankaracharyas have said that they will not attend the inauguration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya on January 22.

The shankaracharyas head the four Hindu mathas (monasteries) — in Dwarka (Gujarat), Joshimath (Uttarakhand), Puri (Odisha), and Sringeri (Karnataka) — that are believed to have been founded by the eighth-century religious scholar and philosopher Adi Shankara.

(Adi Shankara is one of the most important figures in Hinduism)

‘Can’t go against our Dharma Shastra’: Shankaracharyas to not attend Ram temple inauguration — ‘We cannot remain silent now and must say that it is a bad idea to inaugurate an incomplete temple and install the idol of the god there’

“The temple belongs to the Ramanand sect, and not to the Sanyasis, not to Shaiva or Shakta.” —  Champat Rai, general secretary of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust

So does Ram belong to Hinduism? Does Shankaracharyas belong to Hinduism? Is the answer to both of these questions the same? Then, what is Champat Rai saying above? Why is he hinting that this new temple does not belong to all Hindus? If he is out-of-line (that seems to be the only argument which could keep both Ram and Shankaracharya in Hinduism) then why have Hindus not been outraged, why have they not asked for Champat Rai’s removal? It’s not like Hindus are a tolerant lot — that’s not the image Modi-years have presented. Didn’t the same lot that took down Babri Masjid murder the original pujari of Ramjanmbhoomi Temple who destroyed VHP, RSS, and Advani’s arguments and condemned the Rath Yatra which killed thousands?

Let me repeat myself. It has now become impossible to project Hindus as peaceful lot. Or Hinduism as the religion of peace, harmony or love. Modi years have ensured that much. Modi years have done to Hinduism what ISIS/Taliban did to Islam. Mind you, Muslims could wash off taints of Taliban/ISIS from them but how will Hindus wash off RSS and Modi who are defended and bolstered by ordinary masses day in and day out. Unlike Taliban, RSS-BJP-Modi are not fringes. They are as mainstream as anything could be. Voted twice. The first vote was despite Gujarat 2002 and Babri Masjid demolition or because of these very facts. And so this is our reality now. We have to live with it. There is no running away from this taint anymore.

***

If you have reached here, do consider reading the below piece.

Shining example: What Golden Temple can teach Hindutva warriors using Ayodhya to whip up hatred: The shrine in Amritsar offers a lesson in how opposing narratives can coexist in harmony.

#Politics #Religion #Hinduism #NarendraModi #India

The long-awaited, more than twenty years, Ayodhya Judgement is here. Before we dwell on the same, ever wondered why people go to the courts? Why they spend on lawyers, on their travels to court? After all, all they do is present arguments from each side which they could do before a sarpanch in a village or that old man in Khaap panchayat or a mutual friend — just anyone but the judge in a court. Why walk to a court? What is it that you expect from a court that you do not expect from other avenues. Why do we say we have to respect the decisions of the court? After all, the people giving verdicts are people like us too. They go through similar lives as we do. They breathe the same air, drink the same water, eat the same food. Why then do we expect them to deliver judgements on our problems and also respect their pronouncements? Is it because we believe that they are impartial, that they rely on facts and facts alone and not on emotions and beliefs and pressures of the society? That they will listen to all sides and then make their judgements based on all that they have heard? Understanding why we head to courts is very important. There are reasons why we do it. One of that reason is trust, to believe that justice would be done come whatever and whoever. That is why even a person belonging to a minority or lower caste goes to a judge belonging to the majority religion or upper-caste without any inhibition. They all go expecting a just verdict. In that count, the courts should not only provide justice but it should also be seen and felt that justice was being done.

Before heading straight to the Ayodhya verdict, do you remember that on 6 December 1992 a Mosque, an Islamic religious place called Babri Masjid was demolished by a crowd (they like to call themselves ‘kar-sevaks’)? You probably do but more like a GQ question that Amitabh Bachchan might ask in KBC, not like a fact that was so primordial for this case. In fact, the whole case and the popular conversation started from that demolition (although the first case was filed as far back as in 1855). Some also believe that multiple bomb blasts, religious riots etc were spiralled from this event as well. But forget that speculation (?). Do you know that in the violence that followed after this demolition some 2000 plus people lost their lives? Add to it the 900 from the Mumbai riots. Ah, the figures you might say. How many of us care to imagine that many bodies, brutally twisted, some even raped (again brutally) and worse? How many of us can imagine the things their families must have gone through? Actually, no. The good people who came with swords and fireballs were kind in most of the situations to burn the entire families. Even they had some heart you see. Don’t worry, I won’t go into minor details of the rape of pregnant women or people being burnt alive. Let us now move on. Wait, wait, wait. Do you remember the multiple cases of Muslim youth who would be picked up by different law enforcement agencies over terrorism charges, some even lifted straight from colleges and put into jail only to be released by courts. Now and then courts do deliver justice you see. That’s probably why minorities still go to them. But do you also know that they were released after spending twenty-five years in jail? Some after seventeen or eleven. Try to imagine if you can. How must that have felt like — for those in jail and to their families? “Why do these Mullahs and saabs pick guns? Look at other religions, how they live peacefully!” Sure sure there are also Hindus who had to rot in jail and then released after years in prisons with “not guilty” verdict. But have you tried to write the number of such cases side by side with the percentage of the population of both sides and also check under what pretext and suspicions and on the basis they were lifted from their homes or workplaces or colleges? You would see how both do not add up and clearly, there is a difference. Anyway, let us go to the verdict now. Shall we?

The Supreme Court delivered not just a unanimous judgement but also anonymous one (that’s a first I believe). The judgement itself is 1045 pages long. Warning: I have not read it myself. Nor have the people who wrote opinion pieces on the judgement day or the day after, probably even the ones who are giving gyaan on TV even today. Court mentioned few things which we all now know was part of that judgement, which is that the central place was once stood the masjid up until December 6, 1992, is now given to the Ram Mandir party, a temple is to be built there for which a trust is to be established (court said this), Masjid party is to be allocated 5-acre land (who will allocate and when is not known) in Ayodhya but this would nowhere be close to the disputed site (court did not use this specific line but given they have reserved around 67 acres for the temple, it is all but evident). That is the verdict. For a moment, close your eyes, try to be impartial, forget your religion and gods. Can you do it? Try. Think of the facts from demolition to this verdict. Is this the decision you will arrive at? Remember why courts exist and why people go to courts? Factor all that in. Do not let yourself be under any pressure — courts aren’t supposed to deliver any judgement under any influence or pressure. You are to say ‘meow’ in such a case. Judges recuse themselves in such scenarios where they are under pressure (think of all judges who recused in Bhima-Koregaon case) or if there is a conflict of interest (Justice Mishra apparently thinks otherwise). Let us see what other things did the court say. First, it said the placing of the idol of Ram Lalla in 1949 was illegal and amounts to desecration of the mosque. Second, the demolition of the mosque in 1992 was a negation of rule of law. I know what is scratching some readers’ mind? What about Babur? That Muslim ruler who destroyed a Hindu temple? Well, the court said who built it was insignificant and then it also refused to entertain the proposition that Mosque was built by demolishing the ancient Hindu temple or on ruins of Hindu temple. Here’s how Indian Express folks summed it in their podcast,

“Court does not say in as many words that it was a temple. In fact, they only say in one instance that underlying structure could have been a temple… with inscriptions in Devanagiri script… but categorically refuse to say whether the temple was destroyed to build Babri Masjid or built on ruins. They say the ASI evidence (which Hindu party used to claim Masjid was built on temple) is inconclusive.”

By the way, Parliament had passed a law in 1991 to protect and honour the religious character of places of worship as they obtained on August 15, 1947 — The day India, more precisely the Democratic Republic of India, came into being, the very day independent India was born.

You have more information now. Close your eyes again, be a devil’s advocate and imagine. Try. Does the final verdict make sense now? Remember your math classes on logic where ‘a’ lead to ‘b’ and ‘b’ lead to ‘c’ and therefore ‘a’ lead to ‘c’? And if anything contradicted then the whole final proof would fall off? Well, looks like none of the judges attended those classes. How else does saying placing of idols as illegal, saying demolition of mosque as illegal along with categorically declining to believe Masjid was built on temple sum up to arrive at a decision where you vindicate (as said by Advani, one of the men who led the kar sevaks to demolish the mosque in 1992) those who demolished that structure (the act that you call illegal)? They demanded to build a temple on that site and now you have given them the legal permission to do so despite saying what they did was wrong. This is like handing over the rape victim to her rapist after proving the rape charges and using strong words to describe how bad the act of raping was. Sorry to make such a comparison. Dear judges, if you are reading, stop writing that contempt notice. I already apologize but really?

A popular maxim from the English court says that “Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.” And dear lords, the Ayodhya Judgement for all its televised glory, does not provide a feeling of justice being done. Now some might say I’m disrespecting the verdict. Actually, I’m not. I have all the respect for our courts which they hardly deserve (Read Loya death and as recent as Mishra’s Reliance judgement — they call it Land Acquisition judgement — and conflict of interest charges — I would suggest people who’re interested to read to pick Arun Shourie’s wonderful book on fallacies of judiciary — “Anita Gets Bail”). I just refuse to accept this judgement blindly. I cannot accept something that does not fit into logic. Some judgements do not make sense to experts of the law but this one fails to make sense even to a layman like myself. A judgement should answer the questions and not raise more questions then what were present in the beginning when they began to deliberate.

That was long, wasn’t it?

Now forget all that. For a moment, think that everyone accepted this judgement including myself, what are the implications of this judgement? After all, we all know that our courts deliver judgements also by taking references from old judgements. One of the trivial and extraordinary features of this judgement is its basis on faith and belief. Now, this might blow some people’s mind. Remember what the court said about Masjid on top of temple argument? Well, the reason it gave to handover primary land to Hindu party was faith and belief; that Hindus for ages have believed that Ram was born there (they say in Ayodhya. Why then the Mosque be not built at its original site and temple be built anywhere else in Ayodhya like Masjid is now being told to? Unanswered.) The primary part of the judgement is based not on facts. Ram Mandir gets to be built, a grand one thanks to this judgement which was based on belief and faith. Not facts. Imagine this judgement had arrived before Child marriage and Sati were widely practised. Won’t people be able to argue taking reference of this judgement that Hindus have been believing in child marriages and Sati for ages so they be allowed to continue their practice; after all, it is their belief and faith? This judgement opens so much because we in India believe (and have faith) on so many weird stuff.

So this judgement in the long-run has not brought the closure but opened so much in so many ways that we are looking at something that no one currently can fathom. On top of it, to my mind, our court has lost further credibility, belief and faith in its functioning and authority as an apostle of justice. Pray tell us, if you do not belong to the majority who hold the reigns of power in almost every sphere, would you go to courts now? With what hope? Side fact: Judges now get plump government jobs the moment they retire from their judgeship. I’m not making that up.

All said and done, maintain peace. Have faith in the system. In courts, in executive, in the police, army and of course, in our dear politicians. Or so you are told to by the very people who once climbed on the chariot, who went on the stage or arranged the grand rath-yatra — all that culminated in the demolition of Babri Masjid. The very people are now asking you, the victims of their acts, to maintain peace. Maintain peace you must though, however, agitated and disappointed you are, maintain peace you should for your life hangs on it, for they are also in power now. The police and army — the gunmen in all different colours — move on their directions now. And thanks to Aadhaar, they now know where you stay, who are you talking to, what are you talking and where are you buying your things from. Maintain peace, what else can you do anyway!

P.S. Few hours after the judgement was out, I wrote this on Social Media,

True & brave judgement would have been that which rebuked both parties, discomforted them both and given orders to build a secular structure probably a mammoth university that focused on studying theology, art and of course science. This isn’t a progressive judgement. That’s all. This judgement is not taking us forward. This judgement, to my mind at least, does not inspire confidence or respect in judiciary nor Indian secularism. Now keep calm, and get back to your work. Let those who fight over religion and religious structures quarrel – you find your peace. And ask your govt for things that will take your life forward. Ask them for hospitals, schools and universities, better roads and livable environment.

Not that I expected judges will do something so radical but I wished. But what I was pretty sure the judges will do was to come out with a judgement that I may agree or not, but the one that made logical sense. This one at least to me makes no sense. #india #politics #courts #hindu #muslim #religion #justice