The manner in which theology is being invoked in Ram temple’s consecration in Ayodhya and the deep association of the Indian state with it has been demonstrated by the participation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other key constitutional functionaries. Such participation has made politics theologically oriented. Dr B.R. Ambedkar’s remarks from 1928, stating that in India “politics is nothing but theology in action, should remind us that this goes against the constitution and constitutional morality.
Ambedkar’s words resonate in the context of the consecration ceremony and the ritual ridden politics flowing from it. Ambedkar made that statement in his submission before the Indian Statutory Commission on May 29, 1928 concerning the safeguards for the protection of the interests of Depressed Classes as a minority on behalf of Bahishkrita Hitakarini Sabha.
It is illuminating to note that he, while making those remarks with anguish, put forth profound observations on secularism. He said “If representative government is so weak when operating among European peoples, where the secularisation of politics has gone far further, how much weaker must it be in India where politics is nothing but theology in action.” He linked the quality of strength of representative government with the secularisation of politics in Europe and expressed his hopelessness regarding the future of representative government in India where politics was not rooted in secular values.
Also read: Indian Civilisation Is Being Disrobed in the City of Ram
Those articulations are making the citizenry sensitive to the present day developments engineered by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders controlling the state apparatus and pursuing politics bereft of secular attributes with open and aggressive push in favour of majoritarianism and polarisation process. Ambedkar also said that “It is this theology against which the Depressed classes must seek to be protected.” Indeed such politics anchored in theology is bound to weaken the government and the unmistakable signs in this regard are visible in a sinister form.
No wonder that India is seen as country of particular concern on the status of religious freedom. It has also been described as an elected autocracy. Such concerns can be explained in terms of spread of sectarianism and bigotry and the forces emerging out of such developments are now openly espousing the cause of fanaticism. Such sinister phenomenon is bound to get multiplied with theology remaining at the centre of politics and demonstrated vigorously all over the country on the occasion of the consecration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya.
Gandhi’s stand against theocratic state
That India was never conceived on theological grounds was affirmed by none other than Mahatma Gandhi on November 28, 1947 during a prayer meeting in Delhi. He did so when some leaders entertained the idea, during the early phase of our independence, for mobilising money from government treasury for reconstruction of the Somnath temple in Gujarat. Noting that the government formed after independence was for all Indians regardless of their faiths, Gandhi asserted, “It is a secular government, that is, it is not a theocratic government, rather, it does not belong to any particular religion.”
Based on that reasoning he asked Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel if government funds were being used for restoration of the temple. Patel informed Gandhi that “it would be gross adharma if either the Junagadh government or the Union government gives money for the renovation of the Somnath temple”. Patel then forcefully took a stand that “so long as he was alive…. not a single pie could be taken out from the treasury of Junagadh for the renovation of the Somnath temple.” Eventually Patel mobilised money from the public for restoration of Somnath temple and it was a clear vindication of the secular nature of the Indian state.
Also read: What Happens in Ayodhya Doesn’t Stay in Ayodhya
Secular state and representative government
Because such secular nature was upheld by the leadership of that time, politics that accompanied it remained largely secular and eschewed theology. Sadly, secularism today is badly compromised and theology has taken centre stage. The active involvement of the state and of the ruling leaders occupying constitutional positions constitute an unmistakable assault on the secularism held to be the basic structure of the constitution by the Supreme Court.
When the Somnath temple was consecrated, then President of India, Rajendra Prasad, accepted the invitation and sought Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s views. Nehru suggested that there was no problem if the president visited the shrines but persuasively argued against him participating in any special event connected with their consecrations. He argued that participation in those special events had other implications and thus requested him to avoid them.
Nehru was not alone in taking such a stand. Even C. Rajagopalachari and S. Radhakrishnan requested President Prasad to stay away from that event. All these points are there in several writings of Nehru. But Prasad participated in his individual capacity. There were leaders like Nehru, Rajagopalachari and Radhakrishnan who took a stand in tune with the constitutional vision of India devoid of any theology.
The contrary can be observed in the case of the Ram temple. The present day government’s stand is rooted in theology and the politics shaped by it is putting India’s secular credentials at stake. It has, in fact, put in reverse gear the secularisation of politics.
This dangerous process need to be stemmed to salvage politics from the clutches of those giving primacy to theology. There is an urgent necessity yet again to fast track politics on secular values. That would constitute a real tribute to Gandhi, Nehru and Ambedkar.
S. N. Sahu served as Officer on Special Duty to President of India K R Narayanan
