In recent years, the bells of religion have been ringing loudly in public life, perhaps more than ever before. Contentious religious issues are reverberating in the hallowed precincts of legislatures and courtrooms, besides television studios and social media platforms. The voices are disconcertingly shriller. Religion is no longer as personal as it once was, confined to homes and temples. It is spilling into politics and business. Persons in saffron robes and other religious attire are making their presence felt in legislatures, political platforms and boardrooms.
Issues that were once latent are now bursting into national discourse. Many socially assertive and politically conscious citizens of post-liberalisation India are challenging both temple traditions and the authority of the so-called custodians of religion. Women, particularly the younger ones, are questioning the rationale behind denying them entry into certain temples. The murmurs of dissent of the past are now amplified by ubiquitous mainstream and social media. Women armed with court orders are trying to dismantle the entry barriers.
The Supreme Court is going to decide on a PIL filed by the Indian Young Lawyers’ Association (IYLA) seeking entry of women into Sabarimala temple. It is going to test the supremacy of the Constitution vis-à-vis religious customs and practices. Dalits have been fighting against their being banned from temples for several years. The government had enacted laws but has not been successful in eradicating the practice.
Managements of places of worship have been opposing any reform or change in the system. Women who had access to dargahs in the past are now being denied entry. Temple managements are regressive, completely out of sync with modern and progressive traditions. On top of it, religious leaders, sadhus, maulvis and bishops are queering the pitch. One Shankaracharya had said that rape of women would increase if they are allowed entry into a particular temple.
The question is why are governments — of different political persuasions — ambivalent about enforcing the law of the land in religious matters? The popular explanation is “compulsions of vote-bank politics”. Political parties, directly or indirectly, have cultivated religious leaders who command lakhs of ardent devotees. Many have dabbled in politics, issuing advisories, directives, endorsements and fatwas on political choices and preferences. The politicians returned the favour, deepening the cosy relationship.
With state support, religion and spirituality made an easy transition into business. Religious gurus like Baba Ramdev and Sri Sri Ravishankar not only amassed wealth but also used it to build business empires. While Baba Ramdev built a Rs 2,000-crore traditional medicine behemoth, Sri Sri Ravishankar organised a multi-crore extravaganza in Delhi, both with state support and patronage. The sheer size and scale of their operations would go against their avowed values and preaching.
The new-age gurus have role models in temples, which have become the richest religious entities. And the temple management boards have over the years become hubs of myriad vested interests. Politicians, businesspersons, and members of local elite vie to exercise some influence over these boards. For instance, the powerful Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam’s board of trustees is constituted by the government.
There have been allegations of mismanagement of temples and misappropriation of wealth by the boards of some of the wealthiest temples and other places of worship. The legal framework and state supervision have often failed to check it due to political and other vested interests. These deeply-entrenched vested interests find common cause with members who also hold regressive views and resist reform by citing tradition.
The interests of wealthy new-age gurus with business and political aspirations converge with the vested interests of political and business leaders and local elite. Corruption is endemic to such arrangements. When many fiery religious leaders with obscurantist views join the above unholy alliance, the ensuing tussle between awakened citizens, the Constitution and religion will only aggravate the situation.
The answer lies in acknowledging that Hinduism survived and was strengthened due to reforms initiated during the freedom struggle. Instead of resisting and opposing reform and change, religious leaders should welcome them. It is their onerous responsibility to convince and persuade their followers to be open-minded. Secondly, temples should desist from amassing wealth, which would make them vulnerable to external pressures.
It would also reduce the need for government regulation and political interference. Lastly, to the extent possible, religion should return to its core spiritual values and traditions, including simplicity, non-violence, kindness, self-restraint, and open-mindedness. In this modern era, religion has a new relevance and it will serve its purpose if it retreats into the homes and hearts of devotees.
