On 6 December 1992, when top BJP leaders expressed panic over the collapsing Babri edifice, I was one of the few to perceive that the Hindu movement was in deep trouble because those riding to the pinnacle of public esteem for espousing a centuries-old civilizational contest had no genuine desire to see it to fruition. Most political analysts then failed to realize that this de-legitimisation of the Hindu cause at a critical moment of crystallization was a disastrous betrayal.
The immediate aftermath was the defeat of the BJP in elections to three out of four states in which its governments were dismissed (Rajasthan was retained by a hairsbreadth). But the long-term effects were far more deleterious. As the BJP pulled its wits together and went on to form the government at the Centre some years later, it began to cynically believe that Hindu sentiment was an exploitable commodity.
Six years in power took the party’s comfort levels to such heights that it ceased to relate to the Hindu masses altogether, and even the shock defeat of May 2004 could not shake it out of its somnolence. The moral failure to defend the Kanchi Shankaracharya from State-sponsored harassment aimed at destroying the sanctity and prestige of the Matham and Hindu Dharma Gurus is the direct consequence of this derisive attitude towards Hindu society.
Far from recognizing the nature of the threat to our civilizational moorings, the BJP joined the bandwagon of those who (unmindful of the lessons of Partition) support the political agenda of minorities and express anger when told there is a legitimate political agenda of the Hindu community which constitutes the nation’s native and core population. In power, it ignored the Kashmiri Pandits, cross-border terrorism that went to the extent of an attack on Parliament, demographic invasions and ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh. Even less contentious issues such as a ban on cow slaughter and the return of temples to the community were treated with contempt.
But the worst sin, to my mind, is that an influential clique in the party has internalized the hostile evangelical critique of Hindu dharma and joined hands with a coterie of super-rich, denationalized, secular-modern semi-believers, who seek to distance themselves from the demands of traditional dharma and its obligations towards caste, community, temples, mathams, gurus, acharyas, et al. And to overcome the guilt of this shameful desertion, this class expresses irritation at all aspects of Hindu ritual and belief that do not conform to the standard practices of monotheistic religions and ridicules the traditional upholders of dharma as out-of-date peddlers of obscurantism.
Thus, the tragedy at Kanchi is rationalized as something the Shankaracharya “brought upon himself” by getting involved in matters of public concern. This vicious view is being zealously propagated by self-proclaimed bhaktas in order to silence the reproach of those who still want to pick up the gauntlet. They fear appearing retrogressive by standing up for Hindu dharma and Hindu sensibilities, and hence angrily deny the legitimacy of gurus and swamis of traditional mathams, who are the acknowledged custodians of dharma and dharmins (followers), as they embody the tradition and give voice to its sanctity and power.
Unless countered, the anti-traditional class may carry the day by default, as it is determined to create a dangerous schism in Hindu dharma by carving out a niche within which it can call the shots. Already one can discern the outlines of a dharma of the privileged city-based elite of India, as opposed to the dharma of Bharat with its traditional gods, gurus, rituals, humble belief systems and mighty philosophical quests. This class condemns the myriad living traditions making up the rich tapestry of dharma as “superstition,” and seeks an “authorized” version of Hindu tradition that synchronizes with monotheistic faiths.
The creation of a dharma of the city-based elite as distinct from the dharma of the village/forest, the invention of a canon in place of a unified diversity, the imposition of religious hierarchy where none exists, can rupture the unparalleled unity and continuity of millennia. The danger is real because powerful secular impulses inspire this alienation. The emerging ethos denies respect to rural, folk, local and even regional sub-cultures, and tries to encapsulate the Indic civilizational ocean in a goldfish bowl.
Yet, there was a time when reputed Indologists expressed awe at the fabulous unity and continuity of Indic dharma, and marvelled at the clear linkages between rural and urban culture. At the popular level where ordinary Hindus live, whether in villages, forests, hills or mountains, dharma means a special relationship with specific deities who play a tangible role in the lives of the people. Recognized widely as Ishta Deva, Kula Deva, Grama Devata, these gods live in the everyday lives of their sincere believers, providing comfort, security, and succour in times of adversity. These foundational gods of the Hindu tradition were carried to the towns and cities through the ages, as witnessed in the worship of holy trees and plants, sacred symbols like the earthen pot and trishul, and unification with the major gods of the classical pantheon.
Yet it is the foundational gods who link the people with the land and culture. Hence, it was only natural that Swami Jayendra Saraswati made it a point to validate these gods before his people. On 24 March 2005, fisher folk from Devanampatti in Cuddalore district went to Kalavai to seek the Shankaracharya’s blessings before resuming fishing after the tsunami. Swamiji gave them a month’s food stocks as prasadam, and ensured that all had a checkup at the Matham’s Free Medical Centre before returning to sea (HinduVoice.net).
Notwithstanding the horrible humiliation of his person and the venerable Matham at the hands of a former actress, the Shankaracharya performed his duties as spiritual preceptor with effortless grace. He advised the devotees: “In every family, there is a kula daivam and an ishta daivam they pray to. In the same way, by praying to whatever deity is beloved to your mind, obtain well-being – I bless you.” A far cry from the “Worship My God or Else” Mafiosi-style religiosity that is battering the land with the intensity of the night tide.
This is India’s true dharma: our great dharma gurus, even when belonging to specific Sampradayas, were genuinely non-denominational, non-sectarian in propagating the fundamentals of the faith. This is why the people could anchor their faith in them as living embodiments of a living dharma. This is why the people intuitively trust them more than the so-called Revolutionary Leaders, and flock to them for blessings and guidance before launching any propitious activity. These simple earthy folk with their rock-solid faith in God and Guru constitute the bedrock of Indian culture and tradition.
The great philosophical heights attained by Hindu spirituality spring from this simple matrix; not apart from it, nor in opposition to it. That is why the Shankaracharya, an expert on the Vedas and other shastras, has made it his duty to ensure that the roots that nurture the Indic civilization do not themselves wither for lack of nourishment. Gurus like the Shankaracharya are both the root and the tree: our silence over attempts to chop him down will cost the entire Hindu community dearly and send wrong signals to hostile forces.
The Pioneer, 5 April 2005