SNEHA SENGUPTA (CORRESPONDENT)
Every year, the world comes together on the 18th of April to celebrate World Heritage Day. Heritage, as we all know, is an integral part of our identity. It acts as a passage, connecting us to our ancestors, shaping our historical roots. Heritage, however, may also play the role of a double-edged sword, threatening our present with the promises of the past. Let us consider one of the most controversial cases in the country as a study in point, The Ayodhya Debate.
The Ayodhya Debate, variably known as the Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir controversy dates back to the mid-19th century. If we look at the structure itself, the Babri Masjid was built by Mughal commander Mir Baqi, under the rulership of Babur. It shall thus, seem like any other Mughal architectural marvel which stood witness to centuries of change and decay. But this particular structure went on to cause one of the biggest communal riots independent India has witnessed. The clashes between the two groups started way back during the colonial times, which was eventually dealt with by permitting Muslims to worship within the mosque, which was built in the inner courtyard, while the Hindus were allowed to worship in the outer courtyard. The British ruling appears to have persisted, but decades later,
when India became independent, the issue was flamed up again with the placing of the idols inside the mosque. The gates were then locked down, and there started India’s longest legal battle.
On the eve of 6th December 1992, Ayodhya witnessed harrowing destruction in the name of religion. The Babri Masjid was razed to the ground by thousands of karsevaks, part of the Rath Yatra led by then BJP president, LK Advani. The demolition led to an outbreak of communal violence all across the country, and several hundred were killed. This proved to be a landmark event in the entire narrative of the debate. Following the riots, there were a series of legal suits filed variously by the parties involved- Ram Lala Virajman, Sunni Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhada. However, the memory of the incident played out differently to each of the groups. For the Muslims, the Babri Masjid was a place where they would offer their prayers and it also served as a testament to the beautiful Indo-Islamic architecture of the time. The Hindus, on the other hand, saw the structure as a tool of infringement on their political power and religious identity.
So how did a supposedly ‘Heritage Site’ turn into a means of identity politics? Flashback to the days of the Congress government, the issue of Ram Janmabhoomi was turned into a motive for vote-bank politics. The right-wing extremists also extended their support to the cause and used it to their advantage. It soon became a matter of polarisation of the religious views, and a method of securing power by means of othering. The government also seemed to be lacking a firm approach while dealing with those guilty of perpetuating hate crimes in the name of protecting their heritage and culture. This further strengthens the question that, can politics really be kept away from heritage?
Right from the time of the first petition, the judicial trajectory of this disputed monument seemed to be under threat. The Archaeological Survey of India which played a huge role in determining the fate of the Babri Masjid, went on to submit an exhaustive document that scrutinized the underlying foundations of the mosque. It was then decided (after a series of court hearings) by the five-member jury that the entire disputed area is to be handed over to the Hindus since the theory that Lord Ram was born there cannot be questioned. Therefore, the narrative that should have focused mainly on the historicity of the facts involved, instead fed upon the religious sentiments of the people to curb another series of communal riots, especially with a backdrop of religious polarisation.
Coming back to the issue at hand, how do we determine when heritage steps over into the domain of politics? At face value, every monument and artefact presents the layered history of its existence. As in the case of Babri Masjid, it demonstrated diverse eras of occupation which added different dimensions to its historical character. Unraveling all these different layers and preserving the real identity of the heritage site is the utmost duty of first, the Archaeological Survey of India and second, the citizens.
Let us now talk about the ASI and the extent of its involvement in shaping the narrative of this discourse. In an article published by the Economic & Political Weekly, Supriya Verma and Jaya Menon, two of the most prominent archaeologists in the country uncover the truth behind the excavation at the Masjid. They bring out the bureaucratic nature of the ASI and unflinchingly point towards the faulty report. So what do we do when the ‘Protectors’ of our heritage become its ‘Sellers’? The point here is to not offer any solutions but to be more sensitive towards the destructive labeling that is done to our heritage sites. The idea of ‘saffronizing’ our heritage, regardless of its socio-religious background is a practice that should be denounced countrywide. Otherwise, heritage remains at a greater risk of threat by the selfish motives of mankind.
Wanton destruction of heritage is not a rare sight these days, considering the
self-conscious nature of man, who ostensibly builds his identity around the complexities of his past legacies. As heritage acquires an increasingly omnipotent presence around the world, it becomes inextricably linked to the various aspects of one’s life. To detach oneself from their heritage becomes a matter of great concern. Politics, therefore, share a symbiotic relationship with heritage, where the two are forced to thrive on each other’s existence. However, in order to avoid the impending perils of this dangerously tied up pair, one needs to exercise caution. Now the responsibility lies on us, to separate the two with a rational and humane approach, to avoid further occurrences of similar Masjid-Mandir debates.
REFERENCES :
- Kumar, Anshuman (2019). The Economic Times [online]. Available at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/ayodhya-
case-a-brief-history-of-indias-longest-running-property-
dispute/articleshow/71988076.cms?from=mdr - Weigold, Auriol (2019). FutureDirections International [online].
Available at:
http://www.futuredirections.org.au/publication/the-ayodhya-dispute-
resolution/ - Verma, Supriya; Menon, Jaya (2010). Jstor [online]. Available at:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25764216 - Krishnan, Murali (2019). DW [online]. Available at:
https://www.dw.com/en/the-bitter-history-of-the-ayodhya-dispute/a-
51178899
The Views expressed in this article are personal to the author(s). They do not, in any way, express the views of Youth Forum or its members.
