Ideology

Dinner can be a fraught exercise in an era that elevates offence to an art form. Yet Parveen Ahmed, whose family has lived in Banaras for generations, is an accomplished hostess who lays the table with the cultural sophistication of a seasoned Banarasi.

“We have a few pure vegetarian Gujarati friends,” she says. “When they come, we lay the vegetarian table separately. Bakri Eid pe nahin ayenge – and I have no problem at all. Why should I torture them with a table full of kebabs? If pork is served on a table, I wouldn't want to eat there either, so I totally understand. But during Ramzaan itni iftaari aati hai doston se ke ‘dua karna, dua karna’ – mazhab ki poori izzat karte hain woh – aur hum bhi.” (But during Ramzan, we receive so many wonderful iftaaris (foods to break the holy fast) from our friends, asking to be included in our prayers! They truly respect our religion – just as we do theirs) 

The table is a test of the Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb that Banaras used to be known for – one that put a composite blend of Hindu-Muslim traditions at its core. Under the Hindutva paradigm, its vision of shared, harmonious daily life has been discredited as a foolish, romanticised, “pseudo-secular” fantasy that never actually existed.

To survive in this diverse city then, what is at stake, is trust.

Prof Rana P.B. Singh, (formerly IIT-BHU), a cultural landscapes expert and contributing member, International Council on Monuments and Sites ICOMOS that protects cultural heritage sites globally, concedes that his table experiences with Muslim friends rest on the very trust that this tehzeeb provides. “When we eat dinner, I have full faith ki unhone alag se banaya hai – woh khuda ke naam pe kasam khaate hain. I trust them.”

Yet he has a harder, more realistic take on the Ganga-Jamuni discourse. “No scholar will say ‘Ganga-Jamuni sanskriti’.  Anecdotally keh sakte hain thodi si …,” he dismisses. 

“Jab ’78 mein riots hue, 1000 ki sankhya mein log maare gaye Hindu aur Musalmaan. Pehle aap samajh ke dekhiye phir idealism aur secularism ki baat kariye.” (When the riots broke out in ‘78, a thousand people – both Hindus and Muslims – were killed. First understand these realities. Only then you can talk about idealism and secularism.)

He has a valid point. Yet if Ganga-Jamuni is a cotton candy notion full of fluff that sweeps the realistic and unpleasant parts under the carpet and puts on a smiley game face muttering ‘duas’ and ‘tauba-taubas’ – today's state-promoted notions are no better.

Over the last 12 years, the needle has moved from the alleged “pseudo-secular” Ganga-Jamuni discourse to the equally unrealistic Eternal Wound discourse that has Hindus eternally cast as injured souls of a thousand-year victimhood that never seems to end, despite the paradox of 80 years of freedom, majority and economic self-sufficiency. 

Given artificial sustenance, the discourse has stretched on like a hypochondriac with an indulgent doctor. Yet, much depends on this sustenance. Crucial developments have to fall in place. 

A key chess piece is the Kashi Vishwanath Corridor (KVC) in Hinduism’s holiest city. (Read this: The sacred geography they bulldozed)

Along with other key pieces, the moves on the board aim to provide the balm of glory to this Eternal Wound discourse by ushering in a transformational management exercise – the Vaticanisation of the Hindu faith. 

This has been a stated intention even before the Ayodhya Ram Temple was built. 

In 2021, the then Vishwa Hindu Parishad chief declared that “The Ram Janmabhoomi teerth kshetra (sacred site) in Ayodhya would be developed on the lines of the Vatican City, the headquarters of the Catholic Church and Mecca, Islam’s holiest site.” As he attacked Christian missionaries for “uprooting Hindu dharma”, he went on to add that this Hindu Vatican would “become a symbol of Hindutva”. 

Mission Vatican: Hindutva’s envy of the ‘Big Church’

If the IT Cell has not headlined Vaticanisation, perhaps it is because people higher up the chain recognise – the incongruity is a self-goal.

Considering the BJP government’s visceral antipathy to Islam and Christianity as religions of invaders and colonisers, and its systematic attempts to delegitimise their voices, there is a rich paradox in the fact that it wants to be just like them!

Yet even if left carefully understated, the chess moves are clear. Two key concepts emerge. The first is the concept of the ‘Big Church’. 

The ideology of Hindutva is built around the envy of this single ‘Big Church’ concept (Mecca/Vatican) from which power flows downwards. Hindutva’s own organisations emulate the single structure, the rule-based clarity and the mass obedience of the Abrahamic religions. 

The second concept was first conceptualised by the man they love to hate – Mohammed Ali Jinnah.