Pratap Bhanu Mehta On Ram Temple Inauguration And "Sheer Spectacle Of The Event" (image: twitter.com/BJP4India)
As Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated Ram Temple today, an event treated and constructed with much historical significance, the observations of Pratap Bhanu Mehta, one of India”s top commentators on Political affairs, demands attention. In his column on The Indian Express titled “January 22: What it means and what it doesn”t – between the dhwaja and the dharma” Mehta shares what are the implications of Ram Temple event and how it communicates as a political reality.
He writes in the beginning that the inauguration event has no precedence in history. “The pran pratishtha following the foundation stone of Ayodhya, marks the consecration of Hinduism as a political relgion pure and simple,” he claims. Besides, it also marks moment where Hinduism stops to be “religious”. The event, the spectacle conveys the statement – Hindus assertion of collective power, their regaining of historical agency, overcoming of their deep sense of insecurity, and a depiction their unity. “It is a terrifying spectacle on any proper measure of democracy,” he adds.
Even though parties has opposing views concerning the grand ceremony, no one can distance from declaring their allegiance to Ram. Bhanu Mehta mentions how Ram”s role has been shifted to “a litmus test for national loyalty”. He even stresses the ceremony more as a “spectacle” than a worship. It stems from deep insecurities and needs, he says, and more than passion around Ram, it fed on our pride. “We no longer take pride in genuine achievement; generating pride is considered the achievement”.
Following, Mehta talks about Dharma Dhwajii, a pejorative term for those who make a show of their worship but lack real faith. Dharma Dhwajii is the overwhelming power of this moment, and in such circumstance, even expressing doubts about this pran prathishtha ceremony seems more like a futile attempt.
He then points to vagueness over the dharma these dhwaja intent to portray. Mehta foresees that the content of the new Ramrajya which it going to intensify will be the logic of the 1930s – “To create an ethno-nationalist state with its cult of power and violence, its worship of purity and concentration of power”. He then adds that that project never ended well and cited the devastating wars in Europe, and the partition of India as examples.
The partition at present is internal – “more intimate and close” – running inside families, Mehta observes. Worshipping idols, a central facet of Hinduism has acquired the character of collective narcissism. The idols are mega showpieces, he says. “We are consecrating our own collective narcissism in the image of God.” Towards the end of the column, Mehta says Ram always carries a sense of sadness around himself, similarly, in this triumph associated with ceremony, it accompanies a pain which cannot even be expressed.
