Ayodhya 2.0: Faces of the agitation

CRUX Hindu identity, cultural links and religiosity form the axis on which the Ram temple movement now spins

NEW DELHI: On October 22, 1990, Rajiv Tuli, then a final-year student of Bcom (Hons) at Delhi University, left for Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh. His mother sent him off with a tilak on his forehead and the family braced for the prospect of not seeing their son again.

Tuli, then 20, was one of kar sevaks (volunteers) who dreamt of demolishing the disputed 16th century Babri Masjid and building a temple to Lord Ram on the site they believe marks the birthplace of the Hindu deity.

“We were aware of the dangers, there was a hostile government [led by Mulayam Singh Yadav] ruling Uttar Pradesh and we knew anything could happen. But we knew we had to go, no fear or government could stop us,” Tuli said.

On October 30 and November 2, 1990, 16 people were killed in clashes as police opened fire in Ayodhya. Two years later, a mob of kar sevaks succeeded in razing the mosque. That was exactly 26 years ago on December 6, 1992.

Now a senior Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) functionary, Tuli, who runs a manufacturing business, is one of the faces behind a renewed Ram temple movement – part of an army of professionals who believe the cause is key to asserting their Hindu identity.

If Tuli’s reasons for joining the Ram temple campaign were fostered by his family’s connection with the RSS, one young lawyer who is now part of a team that is fighting a legal battle for the temple in a court of law grew up in a family that he says were supporters of the Congress.

The lawyer, who wants to remain anonymous, says it was a rebuke from a teacher at a premier institute in Mumbai that sent him on the journey to reclaim Lord Ram’s birthplace.

“I remember sitting in the cyber lab and watching the interview of one of the lawyers supporting the temple when one of my teachers passed by and abused me, my caste, and my reli- gion. That is when I realised that while it is important to build the temple in Ayodhya because it is the birthplace of Lord Ram, it is even more important to build it there to prove a point and rub salt on the wounds of these Hinduhating liberals,” he says.

Hindu identity, cultural connections and religiosity form the axis on which the Ram temple movement now spins.

Members of the RSS and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad claim that the campaign in its current avatar has more young people from a cross-section of society, most of whose families were not linked to Hindu organisations.

These people find a cultural connection with the movement, says Rajya Sabha member Rakesh Sinha, who likens the Ram temple movement to the freedom struggle.

“The youth has accepted that this is the birthplace of Lord Ram and Babar was an aggressor. There are scientific studies and reports from the Archeological Survey of India to prove that there was a temple at the site where a mosque later came up,” he says.

Historian Shireen Moosvi says she is sceptical about these records. She says the ASI report that is often quoted by the RSS functionaries has been “torn to shreds” by academics over “discrepancies.”

In 2003, ASI told the Allahabad high court that there was evidence of a temple having existed under a mosque. “That building was an example of upcoming Mughal architecture, it had nothing to do with a temple. All this is being done to misuse religion for political purposes,” she said.

For Indian Institute of Technology-delhi alumnus Bharat Sharma, not having a temple at the site believed to be birthplace of Ram is yet another example of the “suppression” of the Hindu identity. He says the anger stems partly from the limits imposed on Hindu festivities and traditions.

“There is anger over issues such as the cracker ban on Diwali, Jallikattu [bull-taming sport in Tamil Nadu], the tamper-