Petty - thy name is human.

It is the human mind that is frail and petty. In more ways than one. And the instance where this trait comes through in the most blatant fashion is in the realm of religion. A book I am reading these days has brought out several truths. Reading the book has not just informed me about the religion, but rather has gone on to show how words of God or words inspired by God have been distorted, misinterpreted and generally manipulated to suit human political and societal needs of the time.

For example, before the Hijrah, the calendar system for Muslims was grossly manipulated, given the fact that one could build a calendar based on the lunar cycle or the solar cycle. As a result, the leaders of the time would set the holy months of no fighting and violence, to coincide exactly with their political needs. Another example, is that the very basis of jihadi literature, arises from a terrible misinterpretation and ‘taking out of context’ of a certain verse in the Qur’an, again for human gain! The gist of the verse, which again is specific mainly to the nomadic tribal times of the first revelations of the Qur’an says that it allows a Muslim to retaliate, if need be violently to incursions by followers of other religions, who hurt them just because they are Muslim. This, in turn is being twisted to mean that all current acts of terror are retaliations for some acts against Muslims, somewhere, again conveniently directed to and associated with religion!

I was talking to a friend the other day, and the topic veered towards, Hinduism. I remarked how the history of Hinduism has been tolerant and peaceful in comparison to Islam and Christianity, both of which have had rather violent periods in history – be it the fights between Shias, Sunnis, and before that, the violent opposition of Prophet Muhammad and the Qur’anic revelations, or the Crusades in Christianity, or even the very Crucifixion of Christ! My friend then remarked that Hinduism also had its faults – and brought up the caste system, and how the scriptures mandated the 4 Varnas and the subsequent discrimination in society.

Yes, the scriptures – Vedas, do mention the 4 Varnas – Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudras as 4 classes based on type – or role of livelihood in society. They mention it in periphery, not talking about a mainstay as such. They say that a class is decided based on a person’s skill set, and not by birth! They also say that it is possible for one to be able to move from class to class based on his skill sets, again. There is a line in the Rg Veda that says, “I am a bard, my father is a physician and my mother’s job is to grind corn”. Malleability of castes, inter-caste families, and so on are all interpretations that emanate from this one line! Not the crooked way in which the caste system exists today – as a political weapon, an upgrade voucher to First Class for people who perhaps already have the ability to travel First Class, a terrible tool that undermines meritocracy in Indian society.

The instances are plenty! Religion was a means to unify people along one cause – to find a higher purpose, and to prevent fighting and strife amongst humanity, as a whole. One God communicated to people of various regions in the language and a manner that suited them best, all the while, keeping the gist of the message the same. But unfortunately, the real truth has been obscured somewhere over the years – making even God an object of abject manipulation!

Ayodhyaaaaaaaaaaaaah

18 years ago, a mosque was felled. Several hundred years before that, apparently a temple was felled to make way for the said mosque. And the debate on who wronged who is what is being fought out in courts. And the verdict apparently is to come out today. Honestly, after all these years, no one really bothers about what comes up there, since whether it is a temple or a mosque, neither of these structures is going to assist in developing Ayodhya! The whole case seems like a piece of mockery. Why? We're actually debating who that piece of land belongs to - Babar or Lord Ram!

The history in a nutshell is this - Once upon a time, and archaeological remains apparently substantiate this fact, there existed a temple at the disputed site at Ayodhya (this is a point that the verdict will prove). Then one fine day someone during Babar's regime (whether it was Babar himself or someone else will be proven in the verdict) decided to build a mosque in that exact same place. When the British were ruling India, in 1885, the first suit was filed, when Mahant Raghubar Das wanted to build a raised platform here, and this was dismissed by the Brits saying you can't argue something from so long ago! The we got busy trying to get independence and then in 1949, once the ghosts of the Raj had started vanishing, some people decided to again rake up this old issue, only this time, breaking the seals and installing idols of Ram in the mosque. Then again, we got busy with underdevelopment, protectionism, terrible economic policies, grappling with debt etc etc, till one day in 1992, just after the reforms that opened India to the world, a bunch of Hindu fanatics, who perhaps had no other agenda to get their 2 minutes of fame went ahead and demolished the Babri Mosque. What followed was a period of 6 months every Indian would be better off forgetting, since it just highlighted the level of intolerance an Indian was capable of, all in the name of something as subjective and personal as religion!

So, now, after all these years, while glaring issues like bringing to final justice, the 26/11 accused terrorist Ajmal Kasab and trying to salvage India's pride at the Commonwealth Games continue to exist, we are too busy burdening the courts with this property dispute! And all this years and years after each of these said entities staked their claim on this property. If someone were able to talk to God, and were to ask Lord Ram whether, as the King of the World, (He had performed the Ashwamedh Yagna to mark himself as an emperor, who ruled the world), was seriously interested in those 67.7 acres of land, in all probability, He'd give a resounding NO! Likewise, Babar might not have cared as much for these 67.7 acres. He was one who gave up his life to save his son by arranging a direct barter with God. Do you think he could not have gotten those 67.7 acres free, from God?

When both the supposedly wronged entities don't bother, I wonder why the descendants of each of these religions bother so much. Why did someone, in the intoxication of supremacy raze a temple and why some others intoxicated by fanaticism raze this mosque? Again, when Muslims weave the garlands that are made for Ram's idol in that temple, why do others who don't stay anywhere close to Ayodhya decide to take to arms and weapons and hold a whole country to ransom? At the end of the day, when the going gets tough, every available God's help is most opportune. Then why the distinction? People have chosen to stay off the roads, traffic is thin, men in khaki swarm the streets. And everyone trembles at the mention of the terms Ayodhya and Babri Masjid. They are scared of repercussions akin to those that plagued a whole year after the demolition! In fact the riots of 1992, the serial bomb blasts of 1993, why, even Godhra as late as 2002, are said to be after effects of the demolition.

But in some ways, one needs a closure to this issue. On one hand, a Hindu can argue asking why he cannot have the right to have a temple at the birthplace of his beloved God. But then, one can ask, why that exact spot? Is the spot decidedly THE place where Lord Ram was born? He can argue again, asking why high-handed Muslims had to demolish a temple in the first place and say that he wants to be compensated for this. A Muslim can argue that in present days, when every Indian is allowed to have his place of worship, how could his place of worship be desecrated? And that he wants it to be reinstated. If a mosque were to come up again, Hindus, who have always maintained that they are the only majority that has never ever had its way will feel wronged again. They would feel that an age-old wrong has still not been righted. If a temple were to come up, then just like it happened in Shah Bano case, people would read the verdict with eyes tinted in a shade of 'vote-bank democracy'. Then again, no one really wants such a religious structure there. Let us have a simple empty prayer hall, where Hindus and Muslims pray together. Or let us have a unique structure with Ram's idols and a Tabut in them and have both religions pray to both symbols! At the place that has been the birthplace of communal tension, let us sow the seeds of communal harmony!