Swamy offer to surrender Hindu temples sites to Muslims

Its not very often that we hear Hindutva leaders talk of Ram Mandir, and when we hear them, we realise that the elections are near. Of the lot that comprises firebrand leaders from Hindutva stable, Subramanian Swamy has a place of his own and a following that rivals any other. Swamy is the only Hindutva politician who doesn’t shy away from talking of ‘40,000’ temple sites seized by Muslims in Bharat and presently in use as Masjids. He has also published the list of about 2000 of the Masjids built on temple sites in the website of Virat Hindu Sangam, an organisation he founded to support his crusade for Hindutva.

This is significant in the turn of events, as the movement to rebuild Ram Mandir in Ayodhya came to standstill soon after Bharatiya Janata Party found fortune and favour in other issues like development. The Hindutva leaders confined Ram Mandir to a small paragraph in its manifesto and wannabe Hindu Popes in Nagpur found it better to keep all talks of Ram Mandir a procedural formality. There is none to talk about temples, forget any efforts to reclaim them.

However in 2015, Swamy published the details of such Hindu temple sites in his VHS India website. But along with, he also put forward what he described as Lord Krishna offer to Muslims. Swamy declared that Hindus were willing to surrender rights to 39997 temple sites presently with Muslims, if Muslims return Kashi, Mathura and Ayodhya to Hindus.

To understand the fallacy of this offer from Dr. Swamy, we have to understand the concept of Hindu temples, its Deity and Ownership.

Tantric rituals associated with temple consecration details the Prana Prathishta that is essential as per Sanatana Dharma. Once Prana Prathishta is done, the Deity is a living being at the temple site, and this Deity manifests at the temple site for eternity. What we should understand that, with Prana Prathishta the entire temple complex and site becomes abode of our Gods so consecrated. It remains so irrespective of stoppage of prayers or even when the temple is used to offer Namaz as is the case in many temple sites across Bharat. This concept of Prana Pratishta and associated rituals was in a way lost in North India due to repeated waves of Islamic invasion. However the fact remains that Prana Prathishta was an integral part of temple consecration before Islamic invasion. Even the thought of foregoing Right of worship in Hindu temples thus goes against the basic tenets of our religion and civilization ethos.

Secondly, we should know who owns the temple sites. Hindu temples is actually the abode of the God that resides there and the owner of a temple site is the Presiding Deity of the temple. This is an established concept in law, answered in affirmative by the Privy Council and later by the Indian Judiciary.

Now we come to the Lord Krishna Offer Original and its Kaliyug version put forward by Dr. Swamy.

Lord Krishna demanded to Duryodhana that Pandavas be given five villages to avoid war. But Lord SriKrishna didn’t act on his own and without consulting the Pandavas. Actually, Sri Krishna made the offer to Duryodhan after the Pandavas who are the rightful owners accepted the same and tasked Lord Krishna to propose the same to Kauravas.

The Kaliyug version of Lord Krishna offer has Dr. Swamy offering to Muslims what he doesn’t own or have any authority upon because the ownership of the temple sites rest with the Presiding Deity of the temple. Swamy even though being a Legal Eagle is proposing to alienating the temple sites, when clearly he has no rights to do so.

Swamy so learned in our Constitution and our laws, has got our epics wrong when he compares his Offer with that of Srikrishna, the wisest of all men in Dwapara Yuga. Swamy offer of Hindus contenting with 3 temples is more a defeatist proportion, as it surrenders the Hindu right over the rest of the temple sites.

Also if we refer history, we can get glimpses of the heroic resistance to invading Muslim armies by brave Dharmic warriors. These temple sites which Swamy wants to alienate are the mute witnesses to the foremost acts of bravery and valor in world history. We owe our brave ancestors a commitment not to give away the abode of ours Gods for which they gave up their lives.

Those who participated in the Ramjanmabhumi agitation still remember the slogans shouted throughout Bharat- “Ayodhya is just the beginning, Kashi and Mathura will be next”. Nearly 33 years since start of Ramjanmabhumi movment, Ram Lalla still is in a tent in Ayodhya and leaders who supposedly fought for Ram Mandir now live in palatial bungalows in Lutyens zone, many with Z security.

And it is this situation that should alarm a Dharmic Hindu. The present Hindutva organisations and leaders are incapable of defending or reclaiming what belongs to Sanatana Dharma. Neither are they fulfilling their duty of protecting it, they are instead indulging in the treachery of alienating our Gods and their Abodes.

With due respects to Swamy and his efforts to defend Hindu religious rights, it has to be made clear that no individual or organisation or any entity that exists, has the right to alienate the shared Heritage of our Dharmik civilisation.

One comment

  1. You have perhaps misread him. He said that his offer was like Lord Krishna’s offer–peace in return for five villages. Lord Krishna knew that it would not be accepted, and in the end Duryodhana got defeated and lost Hastinapura. I think we should understand Swamy’s words in that context.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *