|
Sacrilege versus
Sanctuary
Document
| |
Going beyond
the domain of remembrance of events of June 1984 and to focus on
the issue of sacrilege of religious places of ethnic minorities,
Dal Khalsa organised a conference in
Amritsar
inviting Sikh, Kashmiri, Christian and Manipuri leaders. This
document was the status paper read on the occasion. |
|
 The position of
minorities in
India is
peculiar and precarious. With persecution as state policy for
minorities, they are forced to invent newer strategies to protect
their existence and identity. The Indian state has attacked
religious shrines at the slightest pretext and under a well-thought
of plan. It is time to join the New Sanctuary movement worldwide
and work towards building opinion for the Right to Sanctuary for
political activists.
Tolerance has
not been a part of the religious domain of Brahman-India.
Multiculturalism has never been given a thought as a policy in
Indian public and political life.
Monotheism has
been the hallmark of the rulers of
India. “If you
are not with me you are against me” is the policy practiced without
remorse and regret. If a Dalit happens to listen to the religious
doctrine of the uppercaste Brahman, then mercury was to be put into
his ears so that he loses that sense and never dares to repeat his
“mistake” again. Such has been the policy. Intolerance personified.
| |
The Right to
Sanctuary has a unique place in the Sikh religion. The Gurus of
the Sikhs have clearly prepared the Sikhs to fight any
anti-people system –first by thought and then by the arms to
defend one’s rights, as and when the need arises. |
|
The Jain and
Buddhist faiths were able to breakaway from the shackles of
religious domination, but unfortunately were ultimately subsumed by
the hegemonistic Brahmans, so much so that Jainism is not perceived
as a separate religion. Buddhism was able to retain a semblance of
identity because of the exported form of Buddhism adopted by the
Tibetans, Japanese and other regions of the Far-east.
 Over the
centuries, the mindset of the rulers of
India has not
changed. In the name of secularism, Indian political parties of all
hues and shades, follow a clear anti-minority and anti-minority
religion policy. There is no difference between precept and
practice. The precept is monotheism and the practice is intolerance
of the minorities and subjugation and annihilation of religious
ethos of minorities.
The attack on a
Gurdwara, Masjid or Church is perceived and handled differently than
the attack on a
Temple. The
political rulers, the bureaucracy and the security forces have been
briefed accordingly and they behave and act without questioning such
diktats.
The attacks on
the Sikhs have followed a plan. The Indian state has not been able
to digest the concept of Shabad Guru. This unique institution has
been shouldering various attacks. From the last five decades, the
state has sponsored and nurtured numerous schismatic cults (like the
neo-Nirankaris and the Sauda Dera in Sirsa) to undermine this
concept of the Sikh religion. In June 1984, there was an attack on
Harmandar Sahib. Recently, the minority status of the Sikhs has
been questioned in courts. On the ground, Sikhs are likely to
actually become a minority in their own homeland
Punjab.
| |
If the destruction of the Bahmiyan Buddhas by the Taliban is
vandalism and a crime then how would one label the demolition of
the Babri Masjid by the neo-Hindu leadership of India in January
1992? |
|
Similar has been
the case of Muslims. They too have suffered official excesses and
their religious places have been attacked -the Babri Masjid in 1992,
Hazratbal mosque in 1993 and Charar-e-Sharif in 1995 The Indian
state, media and judiciary has made unnecessary forays into Muslim
personal law and other Muslim traditions, which the rulers perceived
as not matching with Indianism.
The Right to
Sanctuary has a unique place in the Sikh religion. The Gurus of the
Sikhs have clearly prepared the Sikhs to fight the anti-people
system –first by thought and then by the arms to defend one’s
rights, as and when the need arises. The Sixth Guru of the Sikhs,
Guru Hargobind Sahib tutored his followers to bring the best
weaponry and horses as offerings at the highest temporal seat of the
Sikh nation, the Akal Takht Sahib.
 Even those
wedded to democracy and peaceful resolution of conflicts, resort to
weapons of all kinds when the need is felt. As for minorities, the
fact remains that in situations where the opponent starts perceiving
you as an enemy and treats you as such, when the state fails to
engage in dialogue to resolve legitimate demands and when the state
consistently pursues anti-people policies, then any people and more
so minorities are left with no choice but to fight back and launch a
resistance movement.
Communities and
ethnic peoples and nations which are small in number tend to rally
around places where they feel more comfortable. The Right to
sanctuary was a right to be safe from arrest in the sanctuary of a
church or temple and was recognized by English law from the fourth
to the seventeenth century. Under this law, a person running away
from law had to right to take refuge in a place of worship. As late
as 1987, the
United States
had declared “sanctuary cities” for migrants from the civil wars in
Central
America.
The United
Nations should initiate a study for the Right to Sanctuary for
political activists who face persecution from the state. This right
should also recognize the safety of the Sanctuary in case of a
war-like situation.
The Indian state
has attacked us all, undermining our pride and honour, killing and
incarcerating thousands, but the irony of it all is that “India
is a great secular nation” and Sikhs and Muslims are “terrorists”.
If the
destruction of the Bahmiyan Buddhas by the Taliban is vandalism and
a crime then how would one label the demolition of the Babri Masjid
by the neo-Hindu leadership of
India in January
1992? How does India propose to explain the deliberate and
pre-meditated destruction of the Sikh Reference Library in June 1984
during the attack on Harmandar Sahib by the Indian Armed Forces?
Why was June 2-3 chosen as the target dates for an operation whose
planning and training had been meticulously carried out for nearly a
year at the Chakrata airbase near Dehradun? Why was the Hazratbal
mosque set on fire? Why are the individual and collective attacks
on Christians and Dalits continuing unabated in various parts of the
country? To expect the Indian state to answer these questions and
learn a lesson or two is expecting the moon.
One of the
primary needs today is to stop sacrilege of religious places. Let
all minorities come on one platform and enforce the state to enact a
law to protect religious shrines.
4
June,
2008
|
Read Also
