"RSS Doesn't Speak for All Hindus" I Vikram Sampath I Gyanvapi, Mathura, Hindutva I Barkha Dutt

you didn't need an ASI survey there especially at vishwanath Mand to tell you that the remains were of because the visual manifestation of it is quite obvious the naked eye I mean you can keep contesting in the face of every evidence now what evidence is enough do we want orze to come out of his stor and tell us that yes indeed I demolished this when will you agree is India Today a Hindu first PO for uh him or even the S parar to say just three is enough and the rest are not important I mean no one's made them the V of the entire three are Kashi Mata and the ca would have had um a very powerful statement to make if for example you opened your doors to the amedas of Pakistan but why I mean uh this because they're actually A persecuted minority and that's what the ca is about I mean they they voted to be in that country Barka it may be a Hindu rra where the Hindus don't even control their own places of worship or have educational institutions to run of their own so what sort of a Hindu [Music] vicam your uh latest book looks at something that dominates our headlines literally every day every week certainly uh the gyanvapi case and once again we find ourselves in the midst of a debate legal cultural theological over whether a temple once stood where a mosque stands this debate has emerged just a few months after the pran pratishta ceremony in in aoda what is at the heart of this conversation for you Mara a great pleasure to be on your show always and I think it's these conversations uh which always are so enriching uh one may agree to disagree on several things but it's a it's great to have a civil conversation and it's great to have you back with us after a gap thank you thank you so much uh I think the heart of this issue is not whether there was a temple or not I mean you didn't need an ASI survey there especially at vishan Mand to tell you that the remains were of because the visual manifestation of it is quite obvious the naked eye you just have to go there and see from gate four if you enter and that was exactly or's uh design too that you know if he wanted he could have demolished the entire Temple there and built a grand edifice of a mosque but purposely The Remains were left to be there the shikar were removed and in its place the three gmbs placed so that every day The Devout Hindus would see that and there would be a sense of humiliation and insult which one would feel that one of your most sacred spots the one of the 12 jti lingas uh is in this pitiable condition uh now we have buted that visual what is visually uh you know uh evident with a lot of historic archaeological archaeological data with the ASI survey report uh so I think and it's not something that has G gaed momentum now now the the place has always been contested as my book waiting for Shiva shows where the Hindus never gave up over Thousand Years uh we had about three or four major waves of iconoclasm of the breakage of the temple and the daty uh but despite that shrines kept resurfacing in the immediate vicinity of the previous generation of the temple uh and right from 1810 bloody riots have rocked Varanasi to reclaim this place and this was Far Beyond you know even the current times uh the British courts are replat with uh records of the two parties fighting constantly over every inch of land and even for silly things like a people tree uh the branch of this belongs to us you should not construct a a toilet there the house constructed in the vicinity so it was never free from Reclamation uh you know attempts by the Hindus and even post Independence there have been two suits which I document in this book is a civil suit of 1991 which was filed by adhi vishweshwar as the you know person who is the living entity according to the law a minor so the next friend a lawyer files a case on his behalf and that uh suit has been pending in the courts for 22 long years after stay orders after stay orders and that in December 2023 the uh courts uh have ordered for a FASTT track uh disposal by in 6 months so by June 2024 that needs to be disposed of alongside there's another suit which was filed in 2021 by five Hindu women uh wanting you know to wor Rew worship the shingar Gori which is on the western walls and your book points out that these prayers did happen till the 1990s 1993 which was when the V which got reopened yes now uh that was there was continuous worship happening there in the cellar of the mosque and also on the outer precincts of the mosque the shingar Gori it was the mulam Singh yadav government which unequivocal I mean without even giving a government order or a notice got the entire Place barricaded 365 days of the year this Puja was going on but that was stopped uh and only once One Day in the year the women were allowed to do worship of shingar gri so this case got revived only with these women going and filing a petition that this infringes on their fundamental right to worship the reason I framed this as a contestation is because it is a contestation despite the sort of obvious visual unlike aodha at Gan Lai there is actually you know one entire wall where you can see a very clearly sort of the marks of a temple but it is still a contest you know a contested narrative for example uh the ASI report talks about shivlings the Muslim group say thatu you know you you you you've seen this that this is a wuzu this is you know you are you are looking for shivlings or you are seeing shivlings where shivlings never existed so to that extent there is a contest station I mean you can keep contesting in the face of every evidence now what evidence is enough do we want orze to come out of his St and tell us that yes indeed I demolish this when will you agree in aodha it was constantly said there is no evidence there is no evidence here there are 800 pages of an ASI survey report the shivling in the wuana came out not in the ASI report because the Supreme Court had sealed the wuana uh that was The Advocate commissioner survey and there to in the book I quote extensively how The Advocate commissioner when he he goes to the place with both the parties Representatives uh the anjuman inia Majid committee members try their best to avoid the team from going to the wuana there's a lot of altercation U women members are abused so badly uh all these are recorded by The Advocate commissioner in a affid which is filed in the court uh and despite that these people managed to go there so obviously the committee knew that there was something important in the wuana there were also excuses that there are fish in the pond and if you remove the water fish will die unfortunately for them The Advocates are Janes Harish Shankar Jane and Vishnu Shankar Jane they said we are more sensitive about vegetarianism and lives of other beings so we'll have some oxygen cylinders put there the fish will survive and so the when the water levels came down the the structure which evidently looks like a shivling uh appeared and then you saw it being drilled on the top uh and you know disparaged as a fountain by the other side so I think somewhere it was known that there is a sacred object there and despite that if people are washing their dirty feet and you know um rinsing their mouths and so on before prayers obviously there is disregard for another person's sensitivity and Faith so contestation will keep happening till the time there is no sensitivity and empathy for what another you know your own compatriot feels and thinks about so in 1991 India's lawmakers um and this was BJP was in opposition then it was a narasimhar ra government decided in its wisdom to pass a law to Halt these contestations with the exception of aoda I'm talking about the places of worship act right now I know um bases you're writing and around this book the conversations you've been having that you believe that this law should not exist but let's first talk about this law what does this law say this law says that as of Independence 1947 you know you have to find a cut off date and it sets the cut off date is the independence of India allowing an exception only for aodha that a place of worship should remain as is or as it was the day India turned independent correct I'm imagining I was not yet even a reporter in 1991 I was still in college but I'm imagining the logic of this was as Mohan bhagwat the RSS Chief said that you can't go looking for a shieling under every mosque this there has to be an end to this somehow what do you say why should they be end uh and regarding the law to because history is dynamic it's not history doesn't halt I mean you're a historian right it keeps evolving so if you if we invoking history for uh reasons of social justice social reform you can also invoke the same history for retributive justice uh no sane democracy across the world uh will prohibit someone to legally and peacefully reclaim what is law ful yours or your ancestors uh now even this law now I'm not a lawyer but from whatever I've heard of several you know legal experts talking about this law uh the the place of worship act has several loopholes according to them um and as I would like to preface that I'm not a legal expert here so one section of the law I think section three says uh act it has only about seven uh sections the third section says that uh this only belongs to religious denominations so which means intra religious denominations is what is meant which means a Sunni mosque cannot become a you know Shia mosque or a vnav temple cannot become a sha Temple but there's no inter religious uh you know conversion which is prohibited by this law but SE more detailly in SE the section four I think sub Clause one and two if one looks at it it very clearly says that uh in those Heritage sites uh and monuments which is defined by The Monuments Act is anything 100 years or above the law law does not apply there this act places of worship act does not apply on Heritage monuments so all that is needed to be proved by anybody is uh 100 years is the cut off if it is over 100 years the places of worship act does not uh you know uh come into force in those areas and that is exactly the reason why the ASI surveys or excavations are constantly contested by the voies of the Masjid side because the minute you do that you determine the age of the structure and once the age is beyond 100 the places of worship act does not act on it okay I am neither a lawyer nor I would like to add one more thing to this Barka uh the religious character that you said yes as of 15th August 1947 specifically if I come to the Gan wapi case in 1936 just before independence there was a very important suit which I cover in the book called The de Muhammad versus the state and it was a non-representative suit in that the Hindus were not made a party to it and so the findings were not binding on the Hindu Community but still it was between the mus five Muslim men common men who took the British government to court saying you know you're not allowing us to spread out in the entire compound and do our Alva namas prayers during Raman and the British government uh in its affidavit says that this is not even a mosque this is not a wak property there are no records with the government to show that it is a registered W property and interestingly both the British government the Secretary of State and also the judge who finally adjudicated it in 37 states that there has been continuous worship by the Hindus in this site and secondly it's not a wak property and the judge also goes on to say that According to Islamic law itself uh you know performing prayers at the site uh usurped from somebody else without the consent of the other party is not permitted According to Islamic law so both by property rights as well as by Islamic jurist Prudence this is not a mosque as of pre-independence and this uh the the Muslim side obviously lost the case in 37 they contested it in the alahabad high court in 42 and the alahabad high court in 1942 and there's a British Court they also struck this down with penalty to the plaintiffs so uh the religious character as of 1947 was already in dispute particularly with the I understand what you're saying that you're saying actually the places of worship act even though you're against the law does not apply here because they were already Hindu prayers that were taking place here from the 1930s and then through till 1993 is the point that your book makes now I am neither a loyer nor a historian so I asked some of these questions as a very as a generalist as a lay person true which is why the book has been written exactly now the aodha verdict that came from the Supreme Court intriguingly mentions the places of worship act right and in fact in its judgment it says that the places of worship Act is necessary to I'm paraphrasing here but to preserve the sort of secular polity of India that's the word secular is used in the same supreme court judgment that has been healed for for delivering now the ram Mand or enabling rather the ram Mander um in aoda my question to you is a common sensical one mhm there has to be some cut off or there doesn't have to be any cut off at which point we say that okay we can't go Excavating every place of worship maybe these are the who is we here Bara the country I meant the country not we Bara and Yeah Yeah country the country doesn't want rupture we would agree on that the country doesn't want division aodha was preceded yes by turmoil right by Violence by loss of life uh you don't want social divisions you want a socially cohesive Society I I got your point so I think what you're trying to say is see the aodha verdict what was it eventually that you know the entire place because it is so sacred to the Hindus and as is attested by their scriptural evidences archaeology and so many other evidences historical evidences for thousands of years this entire place needs to be given to the Hindu side and a much bigger site is given to the Muslim site to build their mosque now that solution need not have taken 70 years it need not have taken uh so many so much of riots and so much of Bloodshed loss of life as you rightly point point out a similar model can be well uh you know adopted for all of this for a very simple reason that theologically a temple and a mosque are very different structures now a temple uh is not just a structure but the Hindu belief is that there is a pran pratia or an in where you invoke the Divine in the form of an idol and that Idol is a living being and the courts also agree to that you know it can represent itself Ram laa vajah in this case also ADI vishweshwar as the main plaintiff so it's a living person who is there and that's why the kind of ified yeah and every day pu right from waking him up or her up and then putting them to bed and everything is done through the day uh and unless we've seen ganpati vison Dura Puja vison till you do a viiv vison of the DAT the belief is that that D is living there living there it is still there just by cutting off its head or throwing it off somewhere the energy field doesn't go away as per Hindu belief now compare that to a mosque so that's why the Hindu belief is once a Hindu temple always a Hindu temple till the time it is immersed out of that place the D is power now in the case of a temple irrespective of what is yes possibly built yeah where a temple once stood yes will always be a temple yes and that is atted and and Decades of Faith let's say of another religion matter doesn't alter doesn't alter it doesn't which is what I mean in this book I document very uh you know it's it's with a lot of pthos that Naran bhut the famous you know Pandit of the 16th century who got the grand vishan Temple constructed during akbar's reign with the help of Raja toal in his book called three stali in which there's a significant portion on Kashi and its greatness and vishweshwar he gives a message to The Devout which is very uh you know it's very evocative he tells them don't lose your heart even if Mahadev has uh left the place because of the acts of the Dadi rajas or the evil Muslim kings uh it doesn't matter that place is already imbued with the Divinity of our God so quietly you can go you can do your Nya karmas and pujas do a circum ulation if there's no Soldier looking go and put some water on the ground the ground itself is sacred and have the hope in your heart that one day your God will come back to that place so that template remained and he ensured that that grand Temple and that God came back through his agency now you contrast this with a mosque where even in Islamic countries Saudi or UAE or anywhere else routinely mosqu are transported or translocated from one place to the other for as mundane activities as laying laying a railway line or widening a road because there is no question of pran pratia there it is just a congregational space where people congregate for prayers so that place of worship is very different from the Hindu idea but there are sacred places in Islam makina that is different I mean uh gan or babri Masjid was not is not equivalent to one of the most sacred uh you know spaces of even Indian Muslims they are also symbols of the of uh you know barbarians and Invaders who broken down structures and built things there so if the same model of aodha where you get a larger space and build a bigger mosque uh at a different place uh you give it out to because the other side holds this so deeply to their hearts not now but for centuries uh so the secular uh you know whatever Harmony and Brotherhood that owners I think it's a two-way street right uh it's always a always needs to be so where is this uh obstinacy to say I will not give up it is an ego battle which is egged on by politicians it is egged on by you know vested interest leftist historians in the case of aodha as we saw where even though the uh you know Muslim side was consiliary then saying this is it was called Majid janaman not Bab what is janaman who janaman why do you call it even in the British courts exactly so M Janan the Muslim side was consiliary and would like would have liked to give it up and Dr KK Muhammad mentions this in his autobiography as to how uh the side was constantly egged on saying don't give up we will manufacture the evidence which is what the leftist historians do so the antidote to these claims is archaeology and that is why any fabricated history can be busted by archeological evidence which is why archeological surveys are contested opposed tooth and nail because there the truth comes out now you've said a lot of things left ring politicians barbarism of of of you know mugal like oron Zab and there's a lot to ask there but on this idea of reconciliation between two communities between the Hindus and the Muslims which I know you have argued is the preferred path to resolution instead of the courts is that correct totally and why why do you believe that that is the path instead of the Court see it's ideal situation I mean even if two if a couple is going for a divorce people would sit out of out of court settlement Kar cor because you know there's so much of Muk that will come out in courts there's a lot of ranker hatred enmity both sides are calling each other names we saw that even in this case so immediately after the shivling vuka thing that happened you had the nupur Sharma episode you had all that happened across the country uh Canal's uh you know tragic murder so much of uh Strife So Co s and the contestations and the way the media uh your fraternity plays it up is also something that is uh very problematic so if a mediated settlement would be the ideal situation and they're keeping politicians courts all these people away maybe the DH gurus of both sides historians uh Scholars who know the facts if they take an initiative and ensure that there is a resolution of several sides uh then that makes it more uh and I really to your other point I don't believe in what Dr moan bhagat said that you know so that was going to be my question hold on for a second and we'll come to moan bhagat G's comments you speak about reconciliation and I you speak about possible reconciliation between communities thought leaders religious leaders Scholars historians leave the lawyers and the politicians out of it yes okay I kind of agree yeah but there's a catch if there is a open-ending open-ended dispute over every place of potential dispute over every place of worship then that reconciliation becomes very difficult but if for example two communities come together and say these are the most sacred places to to us let's look at only these and then no further then I think that there is a Reconciliation possible and in that context M bhagat saying that we can't go looking for a shivling under every mosque becomes pertinent now you disagree with that if you disagree with it how how is any model of reconciliation going to be bu I'll explain so uh for for uh him or even the S parar to say just three is enough and the rest are not important I mean no one's made them the VY of the entire three are Kashi Mata and a yeah so give us this and we'll keep quiet they're not the voy of the entire Hindu uh Community the RSS or S par BJP whoever they just maybe one of the many representatives uh now and quite coincident these three temples are in utar Pradesh so it's a very North India Centric narrative uh suppose in Kerala there is some Temple which is very very sacred to the people there in the Hindu tradition there are K devatas right I mean my family Dy and so a group of people have a k devata which is very sacred for them and that their place is gone so are you going to deny them that legal peaceful right to even go to the courts to claim it back no one's going on Rampages and violence and mobs but someone user your home and I bar you from even going to the court and taking uh the legal steps to take things back back uh that becomes a little problematic and particularly if there is continuous worship there or there is a plethora of archaeological and historical evidence in the wake of all of that to deny a community uh who decides which are the three I mean these three may be very sacred but they may be others which are graded hierarchy so my solution my solution which I've been talking about in several places which may or may not work is first the Hindu side needs to do a lot of work uh I mean uh the last attempt was made by DR sitaram go who in his book Hindu temples what happened to them in two volumes with between him dhamal G and Arun Shi and others they put this together and they called it it was not even the tip of the iceberg the the list that they put and that came to close to 2,000 such structures which were uh clearly there is evidence of a existing pre-existing Temple which is now substituted with a mosque uh so these 2,000 they had said and it's not even the tip of the iberg there could be many more so if the Hindu side is really serious it should first draw out a catalog and a list of which are the places which are as I said priority wise which is very sacred which is important there's been continuous worship there's a plethora of evidence our ancestors did not give up on it there's been Strife struggle Reclamation attempts for thousands of years and those become most important so that number could be anything there various numbers floating 2,000 of sitaram G some people say 20,000 40,000 now even if I go to the Muslim side and I say want all the temples back it's obvious they ask can you give us a list of the temples we don't have that currently uh you know on the Hindu side so the F the side asking for it needs to do the hard Dirty Work of research engage with historians with archaeologists to draw up this list prioritize your thing and then take this to the other side and say look uh in the larger interests of uh National Unity Brotherhood these are the things we want back and return probably will give you some other space where you can build another and that if it if it happens outside of Courts uh then that will be uh the best of options otherwise in each case where there is overwhelming and staggering evidence there should be a freedom uh for the Hindu side to start filing cases but that'll then you know even a great great grandchildren will be fighting cases and Asi surveys will be happening even uh you know three generations after but if that is what it comes to and there is no conciliatory uh efforts by particularly the side not wanting to give up anything then this is the only option so a lot a lot to ask there let's start with um historians who are not on the same page as you in terms of how they most of them are not in terms of how they frame why temples were destroyed right they're not questioning that let's say temples were destroyed but they are making the argument that often times this was political not theological just hear me out I'm not a historian so I'm just going to read out things that I've been reading um that this was political that this was often an assertion of power that this is what you did when you you you targeted a royal Temple because you were making a statement of power so it was a political move now you have historians like um Richard Eaton and this is an interview he's given just recently to the Diplomat and I'm just going to read out a passage to you because I want to understand this so he doesn't dispute that temples were desecrated in fact he says the desecration of such temples was the no noral means of detaching a defeated enemy from the most prominent manifestation of his former Sovereign Authority thereby rendering him politically impotent similarly Under The Sultans and the muls any Temple was considered liable for desecration if it Patron rebelled after having earlier submitted to State Authority he goes on to say this practice and its accompanying ideology happens to have considerable historical depth Hindu rajas since at least the 7th century and Muslim Sovereign since the late 12th century routinely looted redefined or destroyed temples patronized by enemy Kings of State Rebels dynasties that engaged in this practice include the palavas of kipur the badami chalukyas the palas of Bengal the kotas of Kashmir and there's a long list it ends with the tulas of vigin nagar now I read this to you to ask again a common sensical question we speak so much of the muls who destroyed temples Richard Eon is making the argument that Hindus also destroyed temples this was a statement of political power both Hindus and Muslims at different points in history have done this you would say what well uh when the bamian Buddhas were broken now you know not in the distant past we were all it was in our lifetimes we saw it in on live television which Hindu Raja or the Buddhist stupa was there so I think this denial that there is in the in the heart of it a very theological construct of uh you know being against basti that uh you can we can couch it in as much sophistry of words and word salads but that will not change the fact uh that world over this is a this is a common whether it's heya sopia whether it is bhan Buddhas uh from there to our own temples here this is a common template everywhere and that is the fundamentals of one particular world view which says it's only our view which is good and anybody else who doesn't subscribe we'll break their uh places of worship examples example I will talk about that now in that uh you see uh in particularly the Hindu rajas and um when they would attack another um Kingdom another Hindu king the most sacred or most sacran uh items of the other person not only Dees but also scholars in their Court would be taken away and taken back to their Kingdom and a larger temple built for that you have the vapi ganapati that was taken away and reestablished in a much bigger Temple there the while it is right to say that the Royal Temple as a site of you know political influence you want to break it of the uh opponent but the Dy was never you know uh in an iconoclastic manner broken to smithin and put on the steps of Majid so that the faithful trod on it and go every day and the religion of the kafir comes down here the D would be taken back to your capital and a bigger Temple so you're saying the impulse was different but the outcome was the same the outcome was not the same because the temple got translocated to a different place in a different manner they uh you know did a resurge of the original Dy in that place took it back and did a rean pratia of that in there the see a grander edifice it was not to show disrespect to the Dy and as I said when litaa of Kashmir when he goes on his dig vija campaign all over the country the Kota you mentioned uh abhinav Gupta all these different uh you know um bhuti vakati all these Scholars from can from various parts they were all taken back to Kashmir and made the navaratnas in his court so that the you know the court also becomes a symbol of uh intellectual Capital so my enemy uh deities my enemy's scholarship all that I need to own and I'll give it a bigger place of uh you know Eminence in my court that is very different from breaking it completely and on that uh putting something of your own and having the idol trodden now even Mahmud gazni so was it for re else was it for wealth that these temples were destroyed that's another argument that is made that a lot of historians including I think Professor romila taper says uh Muhammad gazni did not demolish snat for theological reasons but for wealth but you go to the Contemporary Chronicles whether it is farishta whether it is Minaj alboni who say when he goes to snat all the uh you know the priests come running to him and say you are a luta you want wealth I'll give you as much wealth take it and go away and he's supposed to have laughed and said if I do that I'll be remembered as a Trader of Idols I want my legacy to be as a bikan or a breaker of Idols so he rejects the money and breaks the shivling which is broke you know pounded to pieces and taken back to gazni uh to the Masjid so contemporary records are saying that and wealth may be there at that time but over you know 800 years when orze demolished snat where was The Wealth there so and the other thing about the rebels uh you know in or's time itself the Mas aliri the and other contemporary accounts say there were so many Sufi Rebels who hid in mosques during or Z's time now orze caught the Sufi Rebel out and hanged him uh but he didn't demolish the mosque uh so this logic that only to crush rebellions temples were uh this you know broken the same should have been applied to uh Muslim Rebels who were hiding in mosques so obviously there is a difference I don't know where I read this Say by Girish Sahan and he argued that when it comes to this debate this larger debate both leftwing and right-wing historians are very extreme and rigid and somewhat blinded in the conversation yeah the leftwing wants to frame everything as political and not recognize the element of theology in it and the right-wing wants to frame all of it as theological and not recognize that at the heart of it there would have been an element of power play would you say that that's a fair argument we are caught in this extreme bind where actually for a consensus to emerge and look for India to to to to move towards its aspirations of of of you know of being a great yeah Global power right I I do believe that our diversity is a key key component of that inde soft power would we agree that of course of course so how do we keep the harmony without some consensus a wider social consensus right so that's dictat by Supreme Court every time exactly so uh I think the model that was there which was the aodha judgment is a great model to follow so that's why what I suggested was you come up with a list of names of uh temples which uh it should be like a full and final settlement maybe for good uh Truth and Reconciliation Commission so to say uh where uh you know largest cross-section of uh both communities are spoken to dham gurus are spoken to I mean in the last time in aodha you had people like Shri Shri Rish Shankar who spoke to I think 50 imams and brought several of them on board uh so I think those kind of you know healing touch and a moderation is required to ensure that the country doesn't go up in uh you know Flames every time uh but at the same time Bara the this uh the constant subtle threats that are placed we by the Muslim Community and some of their Ries I tell you I mean we were always told uh the minute you remove article 370 Kashmir will go in Flames uh we were told uh I mean CAA can be passed by the by an act of parliament but there will be brutal Street veto to ensure that uh this is not implemented whereas it no way affects the the Muslims ofia think don't you think just as an aside that the ca would have had um a very powerful statement to make if for example you opened your doors to the amadas of Pakistan but why I mean uh this because they're actually A persecuted minority and that's what the ca is about no I mean they they voted to be in that country Barka uh but for the Hindus the Jans the siks the Buddhists and the Christians uh they they just there by an accident of history and they don't have any particularly the you know indic communities they have no other country to go to the ahmedia can also migrate to 52 other OIC countries if they have so concerned about their Muslim Brethren nobody talks about the ugar Muslims in uh China who are being persecuted in China Islam is called like a mental disease and you know MOS are being brought down on a daily DayDay basis the extermination of the wigers is is yes is horrific but we don't want to be China we don't want to be that but then nobody's you know putting China to shame which it's a different country it's a dictatorship we don't want to Aspire to become China but uh for the ahas first of all they voted to go there uh you know during the uh 1947 time the 46 uh you know referendum was that and now if they I mean I do believe that partition was such a cataclysmic event that that a lot of people didn't even realize at that time that it was going to be permanent yeah we we siding we've G dire but okay we have my larger Point here was this subtle threat we saw uh politicians we saw uh so many groups saying you remove article 370 you know there'll be civil war what's happening yesterday we had the Prime Minister go there for the first time and kashmiris have come out in large numbers to greet him and there's been no instances of violence Stone pelting by and large and so on so this subtle threat that the country will go up in Flames that doesn't give you a license to continue with things so sometimes uh I think one needs to take hard decisions and take everyone along and ensure that everyone signs up to it let's argue this for one moment from the perspective of I was going to say the Muslim Community but I don't even know what the Muslim Community is because there is such there's no monolith and I don't believe the Muslim Muslim personal law board or you know just like you said the RSS is the only custodians of Hindu sentiment there are a lot of these groups don't represent Muslim sentiment so I use these words with care but how do we prevent this debate this historical um what should I call it retributive justice okay uh from becoming a contemporary dog westling against Muslims at large right India's Muslims are not answerable for or Z exactly correct we agree totally we should not make them answerable for orang Z conversely uh India's Muslims should not identify themselves with valiz or Z have you ever met a Muslim who identifies with or Z a lot of people who still go to his Mazar and offer uh prayers there politicians or even common people I come from Karnataka and I think uh on the uh birthday of the holy prophet uh you had uh lots of uh you know uh standies and uh Taos that said orze zindabad and then there was tipu Sultan and these were common people not politicians and tipu Sultan's uh sword which was taken around in a procession and on the sword is written that I want this sword to be drenched with the blood of the kafir now you want to idolize that and valorize that and then expect that you know the 80% majority is also going to give you the epithets of and one truth multiple so let's all sign up to this club rule uh and say you have your path I have my path and so recently in the Bangalore launch of this book uh we had a very nice uh discussion where tanir Ahmed former JDS spokesperson he said this that what happens to the 20 % uh you know Muslim Community where will they uh stand in the midst of this uh you know what is majoritarian uh claims and so on So my answer to him very respectfully was this that uh we talk of an Indian Islam version right we say Indian Islam is very different and so on so can the Indian mus on just as I said the Hindu Community needs to do certain work uh can the Muslim side also say that in Indian Islam the Lexicon is changed and words like kafir kuf all these things are completely banned there is no place for that in a plural you know multi-religious Society like India and that's how you will get the love and affection of the majority and vice versa as I said it's a two-way street you have the darum diand just last week or a few days back talking of the grand project of a Gaz hind where by 2047 we'll make it an Islamic caliphate if such talk and there are loonies I mean darum is not a loony you know Fringe it's a major it was a main reason which voted for Pakistan and got uh that you know country in 1947 so if they are still subscribing to this view uh that this is an unfinished project uh that by 2047 we want to achieve this so obviously uh there's a lot of work to be done on both sides uh and for the longest time I think there was a lot of moodling there was a lot of uh you know denialism of many of these things today people are standing back and say hey look uh I think we are not going to be an aggressor we're not going to be violent but at the same time uh relationships are two-way streets you'll also have to walk more than halfway we'll also walk more than halfway and meet each other in peace I want to understand what that halfway walk might look like but I have another again um maybe slightly ignorant question there is this um talking about there's this talk about retribute of Justice a civilizational history yes a civilizational Awakening an identity that has been um rediscovered as it were or channeled both before and after the Mand moment in aodha but this in history is also a contested narrative not the aodha part but the the part about who were the conquerors mhm and there is a lot of referencing including in your book in your writings to the muls yeah but were they the only conquerors who are the others no I'm asking I'm asking you a question that were they because this is I know enough to or have read enough to know that this remains a hotly debated subject in history correct there is there are theories now debated all the time about the you know the Arians right for examp a debunk Theory I know I'm saying we grew up it was a concocted theory which was we grew up we grew up reading in school that today that theory is being rubbished in Indian public discourse but I am not just public discourse but scientific genetic studies archaeological studies and iCal you know discourses as well okay so therefore my question to you is before the muls yeah because before the muls see the how you look at those who came in from the outside the kushans and others who came in we uh I mean my other good friend Dr Shashi tar always says they became us and so on the kushans they adopted Buddhism they I mean kanishka was a great patron of so many uh you know faiths within this country uh but did the mugal also uh actually become us Professor AAR Ali in his work on Administration in the moual courts says that the heights of mugal rule even under orze only about 7% of the positions were reserved for Indian Muslims uh almost 57 to 60% were for Persians Iris and Tanis the heart was beating only for the timid Clan they always Associated themselves as IDs we are descendants of Timur and chenis Khan uh and uh you may have by by accident you have you die here you get interned here uh I mean the toms are made here but then the um why do you need Persian as a court Lang there's always that aspiration the high class uh you know aspiration even for a tipu sultan down south in myour uh the aspiration was he was sending emissaries to the cff uh in Constantinople and then saying you know the Ottoman cffs and so on saying uh give me validity to be an Islamic ruler so you were looking for validation externally if you've already become us uh why do you need to do that why only 7% Indian Muslims were given uh positions of power and administration they were actually looked down upon so the actual Indian Muslims of today they should realize that their ancestors were actually discriminated and victimized by the so-called rulers the mugal and others whom some of them probably think too highly of uh they were not given a fair chance they were looked down as dirty and you know dark skinned uh always as ation was to be of Persian blood fair skin good color High CL Court culture and so on so that difference needs to be made why during the mugal rule there was not a single place of learning no universities built uh nothing for public welfare I mean the Taj Mahal was built at the height of a massive uh you know uh famine in the whole of Dean uh and despite that large amounts of taxes were levied uh from the people of that region to build this structure not today if there was a petition because there has been there was a petition challenging let me finish my thought so in we caliz you know Churchill saying at the heights of you know the second world war you have Bengal famine and three million people died uh at that time and he's a villain rightly so uh which is how we frame him in our discourse uh but during the construction of the Taj Mahal and the famine in Dean the whole of from Maharashtra downwards 8 million people are said to have died at that time so what does that make of Shah Jahan the Taj Mahal may be a beautiful structure uh and nobody saying let's break it down or whatever but I'm saying uh we forget that and I think popular culture has valorized them so much you the minute you think of uh the mugal rulers you know hik rosan and praj kapor and all these people come to mind and you look at them as someone who who spoke our language they probably did not speak language but I think all I'm saying is in terms of excesses and cruelty I'm sure that in the nature of rajas yeah kingship a kingship was about excess and you know certain degree of authoritarian cruelty right true across Fates and when when you know we talk of B I mean when we talk of churches excesses and we all the East India Company the British Empire none of us then feel that the Christians of India are going to get offended by stating these truth bombs even Shashi taru asks for reparations and he says that these are not I mean you can't get anything back uh the Brit UK considering its economic you know condition they're not going to be able to give us anything not even the kohinur which we keep asking for every second day uh but it is moral reparations where you at least state it and say sorry we'll move forward here the minute you say we'll talk about orze or Gori gazi the social fabric will get spiled I'm not saying any of moral reparations I saying what or did does not equal India's Muslims in my independent country that's say that's same elements like you but then the larger historical discourse or the political discourse particularly after Independence the large nerian consensus has not been that so see there is no nerian consensus anymore thankfully right but there isn't necessarily also a consensus but there are vestiges of the Nan consensus still who rule the rules uh because they rule the rules in Academia in media uh in Lely popular culture too because it's tough to I mean the entire uh you know uh Marxist this one is to infiltrate uh the mind and have a Counter hegemonic Culture uh where through the popular culture media academics you establish you may not have political power but still as that film system so that is uh what it is all about okay uh let's because we need masses of time for some of these debates that we're having let's move on to a question that's often asked these days by the those who are on the left of the spectrum who you have referred to uh is India theocracy now this is a question that has that is now being debated in Western media right which doesn't have the granularity of understanding of a lot of what's going on but the question is raised I think theocracy just by its technical definition India is not but is India Today a Hindu first poity look uh I think first of all it's totally outside the scope of this book that we were talking I will theonis because you said that there should be a two-way walk towards a consensus so these questions become important the nature of the state and the rights of the citizen become gerine to the book the larger debate book triggers so I mean I'm not a spokesperson either of the government or you think no so I'm what I'm saying is just out of like you said common sens from outs system what we looking at in terms of any of the policies or the welf measures in the last 10 years I think Mr Mod's government has been more socialist than some of the uh left you know oriented governments so in all these toilets that get built Ora mudra this that has there is there any documented other than rhetorical you know uh gaslighting that keeps happening is there any uh documented fact to show that the government policies make a discrimination against a community saying we'll give gas cylinders to everyone except Muslim women I don't think so so where is this Hindu first where is the the Hindu temples are still in government control so much for a Hindu rashtra theocracy uh we the Hindus are the only Community which doesn't have the right to control their own temples their educational institutions want State Control to go and yes of course I mean I come from explain that explain that I come from Karnataka where in the recent budget the government gave away 300 crores to the wak uh boards 200 crores to the Christian uh you know institutions and 10% tax on Hindu temples having more than 1 CR uh you know revenues uh the revenues from a non-hindu can come on a board of a trust of a Hindu temple the converse cannot happen I can't become a trustee of jam Jama Majid here in Delhi uh so uh and they can run madrasas Christian Schools but V patalas and gurukuls are languishing in utter squala nobody is uh you know funding them so to even propagate your own religion there are no uh you know uh means that are done uh so Hindu temples being completely under government control the money coming it coming from it used for secular uh you know works like uh Road widening or anything uh you have in Tamil Nadu uh you know so many temples under straight control the the pujari and arakas are saying we don't even have money for daily puas and worship uh they're getting some 100 rupees a month salary uh living in utter poverty whereas you know you're giving HUD subsidies you're giving extra in Bengal you have extra this thing for mananas and so on so where is the even uh ground here the wak board is the third largest possessor of land in India after the defense and the railways 75% of Delhi that we we having this interview on is on wak land the Delhi high court is on wak property uh the central Vista is wak mukes amman's house is also on wak and the W you're being serious ser that it is seriously so and the W Act of 95 which the same Nimar ra who brought in the places of worship also brought uh if if someone um you know puts a notice saying you you are on my encroached work land uh I can give you a notice and within 30 days you need to evacuate the place and if you don't uh you don't get the opportunity to try your case in a civil court there's a w tribunal which is where you need to uh you know present your case and you know how the outcome of that would turn out to be so where is the even playing Ground Barka where uh and even this government I mean uh they've made no attempts to take away because every party every group wants control over the temples uh whether it's tirupati shiradi all these you know big temples now ra um you know aodha where in two months 50 lakh people have gone there imagine the amount of money that's coming there so every government every party every control temples it should be left to the community to do that I mean what what do the community mean what is the Muslim what is the G prand committee doing uh who are the people who are handling that or who who's handling the JAMA Masjid who's this anjuman intam committee who is doing uh who's managing the Gan wapi mosque similarly a group of Hindus devout people in that this thing they will form their own why can't you trust the Hindu Community to do that there you'll say oh there'll be corruption there'll be Mis admin maladministration why can't the same uh you know fears be thought of uh for the other you know religions and oh till the time there is reform and cast is not eliminated we will not give up that's again a very specious argument because do you put the same logic saying till you know polygamy and all the other you know Halala this that talak is gone we will not give you the control of the mosques so when similar thing is not there for other communities let's make an evil even playing Ground so in this so-called Hindu rashtra the theocracy as the Western media calls it this is the state of the Hindus and as I said we are at a different if you and I had been having this conversation in 2012 mhm we would be having a different conversation no we be or we' be back be having the same conversation with perceptions and realities can be different a lot of the smoke screen is created by again your fraternity of the media so so is this a Hindu so do you see India as a Hindu rashtra today it may be a Hindu rra where the Hindus don't even control their own places of worship or have educational institutions to run of their own so what sort of Hindu R is so that in end what you're arguing is either give Hindus the same rights as other religious minorities over land Property Management of educational institutions or take take away those rights from the other groups yeah make it even if it's a secular in which if you call yourself the state and the church are separate the state has no business running temples so therefore the idea you can call it nvan consensus but the old idea that religious minorities by virtue of being minorities can have some special institutional protections you disagree with I disagree why should anybody have anything special every person is equal in the eyes of the law and that's secularism government should have no business in the running of anything to do with religion what does the word secularism mean to you today what does that word mean to you you used it what does it mean to you no so B so people who say the Prime Minister should not have gone to the pratista pran pratista or participate in Hindu temple activities his government other governments are using the money from the Hindu temples for a lot of secular work in return if the least the government can do 1% of that give back or he himself or the some head of state or somebody else participates in that what wrong is that if you want a complete divorce between the two uh church and state as it is in the west uh you know then government steps out just as you know Mr vajpai had said government has no business running businesses government has no business running temples to I know you don't speak for political party but can this debate around or can this idea that you have that both communities meet each other Midway a path of Peace can this exist divorced from the larger political conversations and to that extent it becomes relevant that the BJP while having constructed a superbly successful political movement the ram Mander movement took the BJP initially from the 2 to the 80 and now you know the BJP is most likely looking at a sort of historic third term for the Prime Minister but it is equally true that the BJP at this moment does not have a Muslim member representative in the Loa now why do I State this I'm asking you whether these social conversations can be divorced from political conversations if you're an Indian Muslim today and you feel that neither do I have a stake in the BJP nor does the BJP have a stake in me so both ways again I think that path of dialogue is needed there is this consensus this path of Peace you imagine possible without politics also moving that's I think my question I would as I said I don't know what the BJP does uh maybe you should ask them I think you asked Shad punal also about this and I saw his answer to this so I wouldn't want to restate that uh that'll be like I'm scoring one brownie point over you about why there's no muslim member or for the BJ answer I'm not asking I'm not actually asking why there's no I'm asking can you separate the politics from the social conversation politics comes in everything as our famous leader of the opposition said it's in my trous also so so it's there everywhere you can't divorce it but in these discussions to start with let them not be the first movers uh you know who will let Civil Society Sor elements uh religious leaders uh think thought leaders let them take the initiative and start this dialogue at some point without politics without uh politicians nothing moves in this country so they will invariably come in uh they'll also need to sign up to the uh you know final template because though I think Shri had almost uh got a mediation signed it finally went only to the courts but see sh is a very interesting model because you know I remember interviewing him just before the Rand consecration ceremony was to happen and he spoke at length about these mediatory efforts and you and while he he he he sort of completely Embraces his faith in his belief you never sense from him that there's an exclusionary attitude towards any other Faith right and that is what I imagine that you use the language of Faith to build Bridges yes right and that should be on both sides and I think deated liberals you know the mistake I even say we made the mistake that we made was to not recognize that the language of faith is so important in our country and if you don't speak that language you can't communicate yes so let me end by asking you a what does that word secularism mean to you today it's a corroded political slogan is there another word you'd prefer to use question one and two you said in the beginning of this conversation looking at the Yan bapi case that your book is about your new book is your latest book is about that communities have to meet each other halfway what might that model look like yeah so secularism I think is a much used abused everyone uses it and abuses it for their purpose as we know uh and the Hindi you know equivalent of that is DH uh in a country which can't be DH uh you know Dharma is a part of our life the Supreme Court Moto is so is Supreme Court supposed to not have that as Justice Joseph I think had spoken about that you know Dharma or Dharma is not equated to religion it is uh you know righteous and the you know virtuous way of life so I think a redefinition of these things from an Indian context we I think blindly doing the neru adopted something from the west and without even indigenizing it or thinking that this is the model of modernity and rationality uh and this rupture from the past where everything in the past is supposed to be not accepted so for Neu uh I think somat he would have given it away to the ASI and made a fossilized Museum but not a living tradition uh which is why his constant commiss with drad or k munshi saying I'm so scared of this Hindu revivalism what will the West think of our government our secular credentials I mean you don't have to please anybody you be self assured in what you have and know I think that shift has happened now and this is beyond political parties now if someone still thinks the Awakening we're seeing today in India is these uh all you know bucks and they're all you know subscribing to some leader or a political party they missing the woods uh you know completely because there is a uh ground up you know change in the way India see uh sees its own identity today and the youth particularly uh I think even nja in her interview to you uh you know spoke about this that this is palpable and someone needs to really be living in a AC cuu land to not uh notice this and adapt their lexic their politics uh everything communication communication skills around this you continue to deride this as you know regressive rightwing SII and this and that bigoted politics it's not going to it's very well I don't want to advise opponents to uh course correct it's good they keep making mistakes so that they continue to lose but then uh this is the change in India which is inexorable now and the the the Catalyst for that may have been the BJP or Mr Modi and so on but now it's gone I think even Beyond him uh you know the it's become such a larger scheme in during the aodha thing common people I saw you know resident communi doing Puja uh you know people doing you know Hanuman Chalisa thing in their homes uh they had nothing to do with vhp RSS bangal anything so that Faith you can't deride that and say this is all bigoted you know backlash and your other question how they'll come Midway I think as I said one this one I mean the Hindu side also needs to uh you know uh put its act together bring this uh you know document a lot of historians need to sit and dirty their hands uh for everything they can't be a book like this like Kashi that I wrote but at least the main uh places and it could be any number I don't want to stop it at three it could be 50 it could be 100 it could be 500 I don't know uh whatever that number comes I don't want to pred decide that and then as I said the other side also the Muslim side needs to introspect and say these type of things don't if you constantly say uh don't equate us to orze and tippu and all these people then you also please don't valorize them don't have processions in honor of them don't go to their mazars they're just there as facts of History that's it they're not your Heroes uh and they're not your icons to look up to uh that you aspire to become someone like them and uh words like kafir kufur Etc let the Muslim Community uh their leaders religious leaders uh you know debate and say that in India we will not accept that but whether that will go at the fundamental roots of the tenets of their faith that is another issue for them to debate but let's have this churn and discussion on both sides and then only this meeting ground Midway can happen for the longest time this denialism this mly codling has happened I think today India that is bhat is finally standing and saying thus far and no further viam saath it is always a pleasure and an interesting U conversation a lot to learn from a lot to think about congratulations on the book Thank you and uh I hope everybody picks up a copy whether they agree or disagree with your essential arguments because I think that's what the civilizational argumentative Spirit uh is of us as a people thank you so much for thank you always a pleasure to talk to [Music] [Applause] [Music] you oh

Channel: Mojo Story

Views: 191,478

Keywords: gyanvapi mosque, gyanvapi issue, gyanvapi judgement, kashi vishwanath, kashi temple, gyanvapi masjid, supreme court judgement, rss, mohan bhagwat, caa, nrc, citizenship amendment act, hindu rashtra, vikram sampath, ram mandir, ram mandir ayodhya, namaz, gujarat namaz, mughals, barkha dutt, waiting for shiva, narendra modi, rahul gandhi, shakti, ayodhya, mathura, varanasi, hindus muslims, gujarat, ramzan, ucc, places of worship act, ASI, asi survey, uniform civil code, babri masjid

Id: sCzS-igax_0

Length: 61min 57sec (3717 seconds)

Published: Mon Mar 18 2024