Why doesn’t my heart exult at the Rama temple?
As a teen growing up in a relatively orthodox and religious family my favourite deity was Rama at the little temple near our apartment in Wadala in Mumbai. The vigraham (stone statue) was beautiful and I said many a prayer to that deity. And I loved being in that presence.
Like my mother, I too wrote hundreds of “Sriramajayam” in a notebook.
And yet I feel no joy at the coming Rama temple in Ayodhya. While thousands, millions even, believe that it is a fulfillment of a burning desire – whether manufactured or not by forces that have little to do with religion – for me it is a steady erosion of all that I hold precious about Hindu faith.
When the mosque was felled I was depressed. Yes, it angers me that possibly a temple was destroyed to build the mosque – barbarians is what we call them. I thought men and women in the 20th century can learn and be better. Men and women who had all been the traveller who saw the colossal ruins of the works of Ozymandias. The Hindu faith I practiced had no room for destroying a mosque to build a temple. I wrote then in December 1992 that like Lara in Dr Zhivago I too need a song and that song is gone. A song of tolerance and wide eyed quest – amidst all the murky chaos of a trackless history with many ugly sides to it, this was the brightest spot in my faith. I was proud to be a Hindu – that song kept me uplifted.
A Naipaul will dismiss that song as a wimpy, world renouncing one. Born of the “Hindu calm”; the Hindu calm that was responsible for India unable to stand up to her successive invaders. R K Narayan’s creation of life in Malgudi, Naipaul argues convincingly, is ultimately a religious work, projecting the Hindu, advaitic view and attitude. In his novel “Mr Sampath”, the protagonist Srinivas reluctantly steps out of his world of studying Upanisads to open up a weekly newspaper and “while he thundered against the municipal or social shortcomings a voice went on asking: Life and the world and all this is passing – why bother about anything? The perfect and the imperfect are all the same. Why really bother?”
Vedantic metaphysics of the passing show of the world did not show how men and women should also engage vigorously in action every day. Like the Christian faith which holds that there is no faith without works. One of the examples that the German philosopher Immanuel Kant offers by way of one’s duties is the duty to realise one’s talents. As a student of ethics I was puzzled by this – is this a duty? To my Hindu mind it seemed strange. But, for the Christian it is not an option. Work, above all, is the way to love the Lord.
In fact, Krishna admonishes the non doer: maa te sango’stvakarmaNi – don’t attach yourself to non-doing, says the Geeta in its most famous verse karmanyevaadhikaaraste. Your duty is only to act and just because you have no right over the fruits of your action, that does not mean you renounce action. Between renunciation and doing, Krishna clearly says that doing is better.
Yet, the appeal of the outlier won – one who remains like a lotus petal, untouched by the surroundings. Non doing, non feeling even: sukhadukha-samekrtva laabhaalaabhau jayaajayau…The sthithaprajna feels no elation or dejection – whether in gain or loss in victory or defeat.
While sthithaprajna was too lofty an ideal to achieve, it spilled into everyday life resulting in the “Hindu calm” that sometimes translated into fatalism, doubt, and sheer lethargy.
But the Hindu revivalism with its energy and non-acceptance of status quo brought fresh winds, injecting new blood into India’s quiet veins. If a temple was razed to build a mosque, that mosque shall be razed to build a temple – this became terribly important for millions.
The fact that there is no grand temple in Rama’s birthplace is not a serious religious problem really – for who says we can only worship Rama at his birthplace in Ayodhya? For most part, it is a political issue.
As our politicians put out sound-bytes about the inauguration, they brazenly speak of the economic development of Ayodhya and the entire region! Is that what all this is about? Or even part of its justification or value? Clearly they are unable to say what exactly its value is beyond appeasement of a certain constituency. What words would pass the bar in a secular polity like ours for an act like this?
Mr. Modi, while inaugurating the temple, said “it is a symbol of modern Indian culture”. I can’t even begin to make sense of that. I can’t discern anything beyond the shallow in his declaration that “This temple will inspire the coming generations about faith, reverence and resolve”
A faith that needs a temples built after so much conflict and anguish is hardly faith. Faith is stronger than this. Faith needs nothing outside it.
The Virasaiva mystic Basavanna sang of sthavara and jangama:
will make temples for Siva.
What shall I,
a poor man,
My legs are pillars,
the body the shrine,
the head a cupola
Listen, O lord of the meeting rivers,
things standing shall fall,
but the moving ever shall stay.
Translation by AK Ramanujan.